BRAIN LATERALIZATION AND HANDEDNESS

Degree of Handedness and Lateralization of Facial Recognition

in College Students: Is there a Relationship?

Personal experience would suggest that the accurate recognition of emotion in facial

expressions is dependent upon simultaneous assessment of several facial features, including the

shape and orientation of the corners of the mouth, position of eyebrows, and shape of the eyes.

However, under natural circumstances, the same emotion is expressed on both sides of the face

about equally; hence, emotion could be determined just as effectively, and perhaps more quickly,

by examining only one side of the face. Research on cerebral lateralization of facial recognition

has shown that most people are biased toward using cues on the left side of the face to assess

emotion (Levy, Heller, Banich & Burton, 1983). The strength of this “left bias” in assigning

emotion has been used as a measure of the degree of cerebral lateralization for facial recognition

(Levy, et al., 1983; Bourne, 2008).

As a viewer looks directly at a face, an imaginary line drawn down the midline of the

face would separate the viewer’s visual field into left and right sides, each having its own optical

pathway to carry information about the face to the contralateral side of the viewer’s brain. In this

way, information on the left side of the face is processed most directly on the right side of the

viewer’s brain, and vice versa, with slight overlap in the processing of visual information from

the midline of the face (Myers, 2009). Because the right side of the brain is generally better at

recognizing facial expressions than the left side of the brain (Myers, 2009), even allowing for

normal communication between the two sides of the brain via the corpus callosum, we might

expect that decisions regarding the emotional content of a facial expression would be biased

toward features on the left side of the subject’s face, with less attention paid to the features on

the right side of the face.

BRAIN LATERALIZATION AND HANDEDNESS
2

In a previous study (Levy, Heller, Banich, & Burton, 1983), emotionally asymmetrical

chimeric face stimuli were created by taking two photographs of each of nine actors. In one

photo, the actor appeared happy and smiled broadly. In the other, he or she showed no emotion.

Both pictures were cut vertically through the exact midline and reassembled as chimeric images

with one half of each face displaying happiness while the other half showed no emotion. Each

chimeric face was then presented along with (above or below) its own mirror image. When

asked to decide which faces were happier in each pair, participants chose faces with happiness on

the left significantly more often than faces with happiness on the right. Interestingly, this effect

was more pronounced in right-handed males than right-handed females, and the effect in left-

handed participants depended on the way the pictures were presented. That is, left-handers

showed no bias toward left-side features when pictures were displayed as a slide show on a large

screen, while right-handed participants showed a left bias regardless of the style of presentation.

These results support the idea that in general, people give more emphasis to the left side of the

face when assessing another person’s emotion, even when both sides of the brain receive

complete, equal access to all visual information. Further, the influence of presentation style on

left bias for left-handed, but not right-handed individuals suggests a relationship between

lateralization of facial recognition and handedness.

While handedness is often measured as a dichotomous variable by self-report of preferred

writing hand, it can be defined with greater sensitivity as a continuous variable by self-report of

the preferred hand for multiple activities (Oldfield, 1971, as cited in Bourne, 2008). Using a

modified version of Oldfield’s handedness scale and a chimeric choice test for left bias, Bourne

(2008) examined the relationship between the degree of laterality for facial recognition and

strength of handedness in right-handed individuals, and reported a significant correlation for

males, but not for females.

BRAIN LATERALIZATION AND HANDEDNESS
3

One unrealistic aspect of the Levy et al. (1983) study and Bourne’s (2008) study is the

forced decision that participants were asked to make between two faces that were obvious mirror

images of one another. This is not a decision that human beings typically make when assessing

emotion, and the opportunity for direct comparison with an exact mirror image might artificially

inflate the strength of the observed leftward bias. One goal of the present research was to

determine whether left bias is detectable when assessing emotion without mirror-image

comparison stimuli.

A second goal of the present research was to use this modified chimeric task to further

test Bourne’s (2008) hypothesis that functional lateralizations for facial recognition and

handedness are related, such that asymetry in facial recogition can be predicted by the degree and

direction of handedness, and that these patterns are gender-specific. Participants independently

viewed drawings of chimeric faces and their mirror images one at a time, in random order, and

rated the happiness of each face on a likert-type scale. Each participant also completed a

handedness survey. We predicted that asymmetrical faces with more happiness cues on the left

side would be given higher happiness ratings than their mirror images, and that the strength of

the leftward bias would be positively correlated with the strength of right-handedness in males,

but not in females.

Method

Participants

The participants of this study were all students from Lafayette College. There were a total

of 177 participants, 106 females and 71 males. Of these students, 162 had positive handedness

scores (98 female, 64 male) and 14 had negative handedness scores (7 females, 7 males). One of

the female participants had a handedness score of zero. All of the participants were Psychology

110 students and were not compensated for their participation.

BRAIN LATERALIZATION AND HANDEDNESS
4

Materials

The Chimeric Faces Test was given on a computer and was the main instrument for

gathering data. This test showed 20 chimeric faces displaying different emotions. Participants

were asked to rate how happy or sad the faces looked on a scale of 1 to 10. The test then

generated the LFR by gathering how participants scored the facial emotions. The Handedness

Inventory was the other main instrument for gathering data. This asked participants to rate how

comfortable they felt using their left or right hand for certain tasks. Some sample tasks include:

writing, eating cereal with a spoon, opening a jar, and kicking. It was scored on a range of -3

(only comfortable with the left) to +3 (only comfortable with the right). The Handedness

Inventory then asked whether there were any physical handicaps that would affect handedness.

Finally, the data from the Handedness Inventory was put into an Excel spreadsheet to calculate

the Average Handedness Score.

Procedure

First, the participants were instructed to take the Chimeric Faces Test seated at

independent computers. This generated each student’s LFR score. Then, each person returned to

their class desk and filled out a Handedness Inventory, using only their knowledge of themselves

as a guide. Then, each participant went back to their computer and calculated their own Average

Handedness using Excel. Next, each student put their gender, LFR, and Handedness Average

into one Excel document for each class period, which then generated one scatter plot for that

class. The data handling involved included forming the LFR, which was done by the Chimeric

Faces Test, and finding the Average Handedness, which was calculated by finding the mean of

the class data collected in the Handedness Inventory.

Results
BRAIN LATERALIZATION AND HANDEDNESS
5

The study found none of our results to be significant because p>.05 in each correlation.

For the group as a whole, the correlation coefficient was r=-0.06 and p=.46, making the results

insignificant. (Figure 1) The results were also analyzed with respect to gender. In females, the

correlation coefficient was r=-0.01 and p=.90, again making the results insignificant. (Figure 2)

In males, the correlation coefficient was r=-0.11 and p=.36, making the results insignificant.

(Figure 3)

Discussion

The present research demonstrated for the first time that a general left bias in recognizing

facial expressions is detectable even when faces are viewed individually. Most participants gave

higher happiness ratings to asymmetrical facial expressions when more happiness cues were on

the left side of the face than when those same cues were on the right side, even though the faces

were exact mirror images and were therefore comprised of quantitatively identical cues

suggesting happiness and sadness. Contrary to expectations, slightly over half of the small

subset of left-handed participants (those who reported using primarily their left hand for a variety

of tasks) also gave higher happiness ratings to faces that were happier on the left side. No

correlation was observed between handedness, measured on a continuum from extreme left-

handedness to extreme right-handedness, and lateralization of facial recognition, as measured on

a continuum from extreme left bias to extreme right bias. Further, when analyzed separately for

each gender, degree of handedness was not correlated to degree of left bias in facial recognition

for either males or females.

For right-handers, a left-side bias in the assessment of chimeric emotional expressions

has been reported previously (Bourne, 2008; Levy et al., 1983), but with an important

methodological difference. The presentation of mirror-image pairs of faces, as in the

BRAIN LATERALIZATION AND HANDEDNESS
6

aforementioned studies, allows repeated scanning and comparison of both faces until a general

sense of which face is happier emerges. Under such conditions, and with sufficient testing, even

an extremely weak sense of a difference in happiness is likely to be revealed. In contrast,

independently rating the degree of happiness in a single chimeric face requires a more realistic

assessment of its emotional cues, without reference to any additional information, and is

therefore likely to be a more externally valid measure of the strength of any leftward bias.

Hence, although this measure might be less sensitive than choice tests, our data add depth and

validity to the phenomenon of leftward bias because the general bias was detected when faces

were presented individually and in random order, particularly for right-handers. The observed

lower proportion of left-handers showing a left bias in facial recognition is also consistent with

previous research.

Levy et al. (1983) measured handedness by the response to a single question regarding

the hand most often used to write. They reported that left-handers, in general, displayed a

weaker left bias than right-handers and that the effect for left-handers was no longer statistically

significant when pairs of faces were presented on a large projection screen to several participants

simultaneously, even though left bias persisted in right-handers when tested under identical

conditions. This previously reported variability in left bias for left-handed individuals, together

with a recent report of a correlation between handedness and lateralization of facial recognition

for right-handed individuals (Bourne, 2008), formed the basis for our prediction that if both left-

and right-handed individuals were included, with hand preference being measured on a

continuum, a significant correlation might be observed, with extreme left-handedness being

associated with a right bias in facial recognition. Our data did not support this prediction. While

the proportion was not as great as that of right-handers, more than half of our small subset of

left-handed participants also showed a left bias, the strength of which was unrelated to their
BRAIN LATERALIZATION AND HANDEDNESS
7

degree of handedness. This suggests that Levy et al.’s results were due to increased overall

variability in left-handers’ facial recognition bias rather than some underlying relationship that

could not be observed using a dichotomous measure of handedness. Perhaps if our study

included only people who indicated that they were right-handed, our results might have been

more similar to those of Bourne (2008).

Previous research has also shown a gender difference in laterality of facial recognition,

with males exhibiting stronger lateralization of facial recognition (Bourne, 2008; Levy et al.

1983) and a stronger relationship between such laterality and the strength of handedness

(Bourne, 2008). Our data are not in agreement with these earlier reports. We observed no

relationship for males or females. Although the majority of right-handers showed a left bias in

recognizing faces, almost one third of right-handed females, and over one third of right-handed

males showed a right bias, so that no predictable relationship was discernable for either gender.

This might have been due to a difference in the way the faces were presented.

Bourne (2008) used photographs of actual faces to create her chimeric faces. In order to

assure the precise placement and consistent salience of emotional cues, we used simple line-

drawings of facial expressions. For example, a “smile” was represented by a line curving

upward from the middle of the mouth toward the upper cheek. The extent to which such

drawings over- or under-emphasize true emotional expressions is unknown, and may vary

greatly for different observers. For some, line-drawings may appear to exaggerate emotional

expression, resulting in more extreme ratings than would be observed if the chimeric faces had

been composed of actual photographs, causing an observable bias that does not occur in reality.

For others, photographs of actual smiles could provide more salient information about emotion
BRAIN LATERALIZATION AND HANDEDNESS
8

than a line drawing. This might explain some of the variability in our results. Further research

comparing the emotional salience of line drawings versus photographs would clarify this effect.

Another consideration for the interpretation of our results is the possibility that some

participants had previous knowledge of the experimental hypothesis. All participants were

students in an introductory psychology lab, so that all had access to the Bourne (2008) article in a

published textbook for the course. Although the article was preceded by written instructions not

to read it until after data collection, a student casually flipping through the text might have

missed those instructions. The easy availability of this information leaves open the possibility

that at least some participants might have seen small portions of the Bourne report prior to data

collection. In this case, even brief exposure to the idea of a left bias might have caused some

participants to overcompensate by trying to pay more attention to the right side of each face

while rating happiness, perhaps accounting for some of the observed right bias.

From an evolutionary perspective, if rapid assessment of emotion is important for

effective communication, it would seem beneficial to reduce the number of stimuli considered

when assessing emotion, and to use information that is most readily available to the areas of the

brain that are specialized for facial recognition. How and why this preference should be related

to gender or dominance in motor control is not completely clear. While our findings with

individually presented faces are in general agreement with the well-documented left bias in

recognizing facial emotions presented with their mirror images, we found no evidence that the

direction and strength of the bias are related to handedness when both are measured on a

continuum including opposite extremes, nor when males are analyzed alone. Hence, the

hypothesized relationships between facial recognition lateralization, handedness, and gender

require further investigation.

BRAIN LATERALIZATION AND HANDEDNESS
9

References

Myers, D. (2010). Psychology, 9. New York, NY: Worth Publishers.

Bourne, V. (2008). Examining the relationship between degree of handedness and degree of

cerebral lateralization for processing facial emotion. Neuropsychology, 22, 350-356.

Levy, J., Heller, W., Banich, M. T., & Burton, L. A. (1983). Asymmetry of perception in free

viewing of chimeric faces. Brain and Cognition, 2, 404-419.

Figure 1

This scatter plot graph shows correlation between LFR and Handedness Score for all 177

participants of both genders. There is a slightly negative trend, but it is important to note that

these results are not significant, because p=.46

BRAIN LATERALIZATION AND HANDEDNESS
10

Figure 2

This scatter plot graph shows correlation between LFR and Handedness Score for the 106 female

participants. There is a slightly negative trend, but it is important to note that these results are not

significant, because p=.90.

BRAIN LATERALIZATION AND HANDEDNESS
11

Figure 3

This scatter plot graph shows correlation between LFR and Handedness Score for the 71 male

participants. There is a slightly negative trend, but it is important to note that these results are not

significant, because p=.36.