Laterality in Maternal Cradling and Infant Positional Biases: Implications for the Development and Evolution of Hand Preferences in Nonhuman Primates

Handedness and brain asymmetries in nonhuman primates

A majority of humans are right-handed and exhibit left hemisphere specialization for the comprehension and production of language. To what extent population-level behavioral and brain asymmetries are unique to humans remains a topic of interest across a wide range of scientific disciplines. In this chapter, we present current findings on the expression of population-level behavioral and brain asymmetries in nonhuman primates. We further present data on the association between communication functions, and especially gestures and individual variation in neuroanatomic asymmetries in nonhuman primates, with an emphasis on data from chimpanzees and baboons. The collective data are interpreted within the context of different theories on the evolution of language lateralization.

Handedness as a major determinant of lateral bias in human functional cradling

Studies examining infant cradling have almost uniformly concluded with a general human left-side bias for cradling, indicating that people prefer to hold an infant to the left of their body. Explanations for the notion of the left-side cradling bias have traditionally been searched for in a variety of factors, for example, in terms of maternal heartbeat, genetic factors, in the form of an ear asymmetry where auditory information is perceived faster through the left ear, as a result of a right hemispheric functional specialization for perception of emotions and faces, and in identifying a motor bias of the infant, such as the tendency of newborn infants to lie with the face to the right when placed supine. Interestingly, handedness is generally considered an inadequate explanation for the lateralized cradling bias, despite it being an intuitively plausible one. In this brief review, I put forward the cradler's handedness as the most convincing and elegant determinant of the cradling bias. This explanation is consistent with a developmental cascades' framework where the cradling bias can be understood as the result of a multitude of factors across a range of levels and systems.

Mainly Visual Aspects of Emotional Laterality in Cognitively Developed and Highly Social Mammals-A Systematic Review

Several studies have shown that emotions are asymmetrically represented in the human brain and have proposed three main models (the 'right hemisphere hypothesis', the 'approach-withdrawal hypothesis' and the 'valence hypothesis') that give different accounts of this emotional laterality. Furthermore, in recent years, many investigations have suggested that a similar emotional laterality may also exist in different animal taxa. However, results of a previous systematic review of emotional laterality in non-human primates have shown that some of these studies might be criticized from the methodological point of view and support only in part the hypothesis of a continuum in emotional laterality across vertebrates. The aim of the present review therefore consisted in trying to expand this survey to other cognitively developed and highly social mammals, focusing attention on mainly visual aspects of emotional laterality, in studies conducted on the animal categories of horses, elephants, dolphins and whales. The 35 studies included in the review took into account three aspects of mainly visual emotional laterality, namely: (a) visual asymmetries for positive/familiar vs. negative/novel stimuli; (b) lateral position preference in mother-offspring or other affiliative interactions; (c) lateral position preference in antagonistic interactions. In agreement with data obtained from human studies that have evaluated comprehension or expression of emotions at the facial or vocal level, these results suggest that a general but graded right-hemisphere prevalence in the processing of emotions can be found at the visual level in cognitively developed non-primate social mammals. Some methodological problems and some implications of these results for human psychopathology are briefly discussed.

Neuroanatomical asymmetries in nonhuman primates in the homologs to Broca's and Wernicke's areas: a mini-review

Population-level lateralization in structure and function is a fundamental measure of the human nervous system. To what extent nonhuman primates exhibit similar patterns of asymmetry remains a topic of considerable scientific interest. In this mini-review, a brief summary of findings on brain asymmetries in nonhuman primates in brain regions considered to the homolog's to Broca's and Wernicke's area are presented. Limitations of existing and directions for future studies are discussed in the context of facilitating comparative investigations in primates.

Hemispheric asymmetries for emotions in non-human primates: A systematic review

A systematic review of investigations evaluating hemispheric asymmetries for emotions in primates was undertaken to individuate the most consistent lines of research allowing to check the hypothesis of a continuum in emotional lateralization across vertebrates. We reviewed studies on the lateralization of emotional expression (N = 31) and perception (N = 32) and of markers of emotional activation (N = 9), trying to distinguish those which had given respectively more consistent or more conflicting outcomes. Furthermore, we tried to identify the most strongly supported model of emotional lateralization. The most consistent results were obtained in studies investigating asymmetries in emotional expression at the facial level and in the perception of emotional facial expressions, whereas the most disappointing data were obtained in investigations evaluating possible neurophysiological markers of lateralized emotional activation. These results supported more the hypothesis of a continuity between humans and non-human primates than the more general hypothesis of a continuum between humans and all vertebrates. Furthermore, results supported more the 'right hemisphere' than the 'valence' model of emotional lateralization.

The Intricate Web of Asymmetric Processing of Social Stimuli in Humans

Although the population-level preference for the use of the right hand is the clearest example of behavioral lateralization, it represents only the best-known instance of a variety of functional asymmetries observable in humans. What is interesting is that many of such asymmetries emerge during the processing of social stimuli, as often occurs in the case of human bodies, faces and voices. In the present paper, after reviewing previous literature about human functional asymmetries for social and emotional stimuli, we suggest some possible links among them and stress the necessity of a comprehensive account (in both ontogenetic and phylogenetic terms) for these not yet fully explained phenomena. In particular, we propose that the advantages of lateralization for emotion processing should be considered in light of previous suggestions that (i) functional hemispheric specialization enhances cognitive capacity and efficiency, and (ii) the alignment (at the population level) of the direction of behavioral asymmetries emerges, under social pressures, as an evolutionary stable strategy.

Social touch in the age of computational ethology: Embracing as a multidimensional and complex behaviour

Social affective touch is an important aspect of close relationships in humans. It has been also observed in many non-human primate species. Despite the high relevance of behaviours like embraces for personal wellbeing and mental health, they remain vastly under-investigated in psychology. This may be because psychology often relies on a limited repertoire of behavioural measurements such as error rates and reaction time measurements. These are, however, insufficient to capture the multidimensional complexity of highly interactive dyadic behaviours like embraces. Based on recent advances in computational ethology in animal models, the rapidly emerging field of human computational ethology utilizes an accessible repertoire of machine learning methods to track and quantify complex natural behaviours. We highlight how such techniques can be utilized to investigate social touch and which preliminary conditions, motor aspects and higher-level interactions need to be considered. Ultimately, integration of computational ethology with mobile neuroscience techniques such as ultraportable EEG systems will allow for an ecologically valid investigation of social affective touch in humans that will advance psychological research of emotions.

Maternal cradling bias: A marker of the nature of the mother-infant relationship

The tendency of mothers to cradle their infant on their left side was first demonstrated by Salk back in 1960, but has been the subject of renewed interest in recent years. In this paper, I examine the different aspects of this tendency, making a short detour to explore this behavioral bias in other mammals and in nonhuman primates. The left cradling bias has been investigated not only in mothers, but also in fathers, children and students, as well as in different cultures. Moreover, the origins and causes of this behavior have been explored by examining its links to hemispheric specialization and to other motor asymmetries in mothers and infants. In recent years, researchers have also explored divergent patterns of cradling in groups of mothers exhibiting stress, anxiety, or depressive symptoms during pregnancy and after delivery, as well as in children with atypical development (e.g., autism spectrum disorder). The findings reported in the past 20 years open up promising avenues for anticipating potential difficulties in the relationship between mother and child, for given that a left cradling bias has been found in about 75% of the samples tested, cradling patterns could constitute natural behavioral markers of the socio-emotional harmony between cradler and cradled.

Maternal cradling bias in baboons: The first environmental factor affecting early infant handedness development?

The most emblematic behavioral manifestation of human brain asymmetries is handedness. While the precise mechanisms behind the development of handedness are still widely debated, empirical evidences highlight that besides genetic factors, environmental factors may play a crucial role. As one of these factors, maternal cradling behavior may play a key role in the emergence of early handedness in the offspring. In the present study we followed 41 Papio anubis infants living in social groups with their mother for which direction (e.g., left- or right-arm) and degree of maternal cradling-side bias were available from a previous published study. We assessed hand preferences for an unimanual grasping task at three developmental stages: (A) 0-4, (B) 4-6, and (C) 9-10 months of age. We found that individual hand preferences for grasping exist as soon as the first months of age, with a population-level left-handedness predominance, being stable until 6 months; to wit the period during which juveniles are mainly carried by their mothers. More importantly, this early postnatal handedness is positively correlated with maternal cradling lateralization. Interestingly, hand preferences assessed later in the development, once juveniles are no longer carried (i.e., from 9 to 10 months of age), are less dependent from the maternal cradling bias and less consistent with the earlier developmental stages, especially in infants initially cradled on the right maternal side. Our findings suggest that the ontogenetic dynamics of the infant's hand preference and its changes might ultimately rely on the degree of infant dependence from the mother across development.

Human Lateralization, Maternal Effects and Neurodevelopmental Disorders

In humans, behavioral laterality and hemispheric asymmetries are part of a complex biobehavioral system in which genetic factors have been repeatedly proposed as developmental determinants of both phenomena. However, no model solely based on genetic factors has proven conclusive, pushing towards the inclusion of environmental and epigenetic factors into the system. Moreover, it should be pointed out that epigenetic modulation might also account for why certain genes are expressed differently in parents and offspring. Here, we suggest the existence of a sensitive period in early postnatal development, during which the exposure to postural and motor lateral biases, expressed in interactive sensorimotor coordination with the caregiver, canalizes hemispheric lateralization in the “typical” direction. Despite newborns and infants showing their own inherent asymmetries, the canalizing effect of the interactive context owes most to adult caregivers (usually the mother), whose infant-directed lateralized behavior might have been specifically selected for as a population-level trait, functional to confer fitness to offspring. In particular, the case of the left-cradling bias (LCB; i.e., the population-level predisposition of mothers to hold their infants on the left side) represents an instance of behavioral trait exhibiting heritability along the maternal line, although no genetic investigation has been carried out so far. Recent evidence, moreover, seems to suggest that the reduction of this asymmetry is related to several unfavorable conditions, including neurodevelopmental disorders. Future studies are warranted to understand whether and how genetic and epigenetic factors affect the lateralization of early mother-infant interaction and the proneness of the offspring to neurodevelopmental disorders.

Evolutionary motor biases and cognition in children with and without autism

Evolution has endowed vertebrates with a divided brain that allows for processing of critical survival behaviours in parallel. Most humans possess a standard functional brain organisation for these ancient sensory-motor behaviours, favouring the right hemisphere for fight-or-flight processes and the left hemisphere for performing structured motor sequences. However, a significant minority of the population possess an organisational phenotype that represents crowding of function in one hemisphere, or a reversal of the standard functional organisation. Using behavioural biases as a proxy for brain organisation, results indicate that reversed brain organisation phenotype increases in populations with autism and is associated with weaker cognitive abilities. Moreover, this study revealed that left-handedness, alone, is not associated with decreased cognitive ability or autism. Rather, left-handedness acts as a marker for decreased cognitive performance when paired with the reversed brain phenotype. The results contribute to comparative research suggesting that modern human abilities are supported by evolutionarily old, lateralised sensory-motor processes. Systematic, longitudinal investigations, capturing genetic measures and brain correlates, are essential to reveal how cognition emerges from these foundational processes. Importantly, strength and direction of biases can act as early markers of brain organisation and cognitive development, leading to promising, novel practices for diagnoses and interventions.

Neonatal nipple preference and maternal cradling laterality in wild Taihangshan macaques (Macaca mulatta tcheliensis)

Lateralized behavior is considered an observable phenotype of cerebral functional asymmetry and has been documented in many mammalian species. In the present study, we examined evidence of lateralization in neonatal nipple contact, maternal cradling, and the relationship between these two behaviors during the first 12 weeks of life in wild Taihangshan macaques (Macaca mulatta tcheliensis). The results showed that across our sample of nine mother-infant dyads: (1) Seven of nine neonates exhibited a significant left-side nipple preference during the first 12 weeks of life, whereas eight of nine mothers displayed a significant right-side cradling preference; (2) at the population level, there was a significant preference for left nipple contact by neonatal Taihangshan macaques and a significant right-hand maternal cradling preference; (3) at the population level, there was a nonsignificant negative correlation between neonatal nipple preference and maternal cradling bias; and (4) the strength of individual neonatal nipple preference and maternal cradling laterality were not correlated. We conclude that asymmetry in nipple contact of Taihangshan macaques occurs early in behavioral development. Given that infant Taihangshan macaques are able to nurse and cling unassisted to their mothers within a few days after birth, it appears that the infant rather than its mother is responsible for determining a nipple-side preference. Our results indicating a left-side nipple bias in 78% of wild neonatal Taihangshan macaques are most consistent with the heartbeat hypothesis.

Human-like maternal left-cradling bias in monkeys is altered by social pressure

About 66–72% of human mothers cradle their infants on their left side. Given that left-cradling exposes the baby’s face to the mother’s left visual field (i.e., mainly projected to her right hemisphere) and is altered by emotional states such as stress, maternal left-cradling was interpreted as reflecting right-hemispheric dominance for emotional processing. Whether this phenomenon is unique to human evolution is still in debate. In the present study we followed 44 olive baboon (Papio anubis) mothers and their infants in different social groups. We found that a maternal cradling bias exists and is predominantly towards the left in a similar proportion as in humans, but shifts toward a right bias in mothers living in high density groups. The sensitivity of left-cradling to social pressure highlights its potential links with the mother’s stress as reported in humans. Our finding clearly illustrates the phylogenetic continuity between humans and Old-World monkeys concerning this lateralization and its potential links with hemispheric specialization for emotions, inherited from a common ancestor 25–35 million years ago.

Mother and offspring lateralized social behavior across mammalian species

Findings on nonprimate mammals place the issue of mother-infant lateralized relations in a broader context, demonstrating that humans are one of many species showing this feature. The remarkable interspecies consistency in the direction of lateralization points to a continuity between lateralized mother-infant interactions in primates and nonprimate mammals and suggests ancient evolutionary roots of human cradling bias. The results from species which, in contrast to primates, have no direct involvement of forelimbs in mother-infant spatial interactions clearly support the perceptual origin of this type of lateralization. A right hemisphere advantage for social functions relevant to mother-infant interactions is the most probable background for the left-sided biases in the behavior of mothers and infants. Recent findings suggest the contribution of lateralized mother-infant interactions to biological fitness. Mother and infant both can gain advantage from keeping the other on the left side.

The left cradling bias: An evolutionary facilitator of social cognition?

A robust left side cradling bias (LCB) in humans is argued to reflect an evolutionarily old left visual field bias and right hemisphere dominance for processing social stimuli. A left visual field bias for face processing, invoked via the LCB, is known to reflect a human population-level right cerebral hemisphere specialization for processing social stimuli. We explored the relationship between cradling side biases, hand dominance and socio-communicative abilities. Four and five year old typically-developing children (N = 98) participated in a battery of manual motor tasks interspersed by cradling trials comprising a(n): infant human doll, infant primate doll, proto-face pillow and no-face pillow. Mean social and communication ability scores were obtained via a survey completed by each child's key teacher. We found a population-level LCB for holding an infant human doll that was not influenced by hand dominance, sex, age or experience of having a younger sibling. Children demonstrating a LCB, did however, obtain a significantly higher mean social ability score compared with their right side cradling counterparts. Like the infant human doll, the proto-face pillow's schematic face symbol was sufficient to elicit a population-level LCB. By contrast, the infant primate doll elicited a population-level right side cradling bias, influenced by both hand dominance and sex. The findings suggest that the LCB is present and visible early in development and is likely therefore, to represent evolutionarily old domain-specific organization and function of the right cerebral hemisphere. Additionally, results suggest that a LCB requires minimal triggering but can be reversed in some situations, possibly in response to species-type or levels of novelty or stress as perceived by the viewer. Patterns of behavioral biases within the context of social stimuli and their associations with cognitive ability are important for understanding how socio-communication abilities emerge in developing children.

Asymmetries in mother-infant behaviour in Barbary macaques (Macaca sylvanus)

Asymmetries in the maternal behaviour and anatomy might play an important role in the development of primate manual lateralization. In particular, early life asymmetries in mother’s and infant’s behaviour have been suggested to be associated with the development of the hand preference of the offspring. The aim of this study was to investigate the presence of behavioural asymmetries in different behavioural categories of mother-infant dyads of zoo-living Barbary macaques (Macaca sylvanus). The study subjects were 14 Barbary macaques involved in seven mother-infant dyads housed in Parco Natura Viva, Italy. For the mothers, bouts of hand preference for maternal cradling and infant retrieval were collected. For the infants, we focused on nipple preference and hand preference for clinging on mother ventrum. Moreover, we collected bouts of hand preference for food reaching in both groups. No significant group-level bias was found for any of the behavioural categories in either mothers or infants. However, at the individual level, six out of seven mothers showed a significant cradling bias, three toward the right hand and three toward the left hand. Moreover, all infants showed a significant nipple preference, six toward the mother’s right nipple, one toward the left nipple. Furthermore, a significant correlation was found between the infant nipple preference and their hand preference for food reaching, suggesting that maternal environment rather than behaviour might affect the development of hand preference in Old World monkeys. Our findings seem partially to add to previous literature on perceptual lateralization in different species of non-primate mammals, reporting a lateral bias in mother-infant interactions. Given the incongruences between our study and previous research in great apes and humans, our results seem to suggest possible phylogenetic differences in the lateralization of mothers and infants within the Primates order.

Captive gorillas' manual laterality: The impact of gestures, manipulators and interaction specificity

Relationships between humans' manual laterality in non-communicative and communicative functions are still poorly understood. Recently, studies showed that chimpanzees' manual laterality is influenced by functional, interactional and individual factors and their mutual intertwinement. However, what about manual laterality in species living in stable social groups? We tackled this question by studying three groups of captive gorillas (N=35) and analysed their most frequent manual signals: three manipulators and 16 gesture types. Our multifactorial investigation showed that conspecific-directed gestures were overall more right-lateralized than conspecific-directed manipulators. Furthermore, it revealed a difference between conspecific- and human-directed gestural laterality for signallers living in one of the study groups. Our results support the hypothesis that gestural laterality is a relevant marker of language left-brain specialisation. We suggest that components of communication and of manipulation (not only of an object but also of a conspecific) do not share the same lateralised cerebral system in some primate species.

Do bimanual coordination, tool use, and body posture contribute equally to hand preferences in bonobos?

Approximately 90% of the human population is right-handed. The emergence of this hand preference in humans is thought to be linked to the ability to execute complex tasks and habitual bipedalism. In order to test these hypotheses, the present study explored, for the first time, hand preference in relation to both body posture (seated and bipedal) and task complexity (bimanual coordination and two tool use tasks of different complexity) in bonobos (Pan paniscus). Few studies have explored the effects of both posture and task complexity on handedness, and investigations with bonobos are scarce, particularly studies on tool use. Our study aims to overcome such a gap by addressing two main questions: 1) Does a bipedal posture increase the strength of hand preference and/or create a directional bias to the use of the right hand? 2) Independent of body posture, does task complexity increase the strength of the hand preference and/or create a directional bias to the use of the right hand? Our results show that independent of body posture, the more complex the task, the more lateralization occurred. Moreover, subjects tended to be right-handed for tasks involving tool use. However, posture had no significant effect on hand preference in the tasks tested here. Therefore, for a given task, bonobos were not more lateralized in a bipedal posture than in a seated one. Task complexity might thus have contributed more than bipedal posture to the emergence of human lateralization and the preponderance of right-handedness, although a larger sample size and more data are needed to be conclusive.

Asymmetry in food handling behavior of a tree-dwelling rodent (Sciurus vulgaris)

Asymmetry in motor patterns is present in a wide variety of animals. Many lateralized behaviors seem to depend on brain asymmetry, as it is the case of different tasks associated to food handling by several bird and mammal species. Here, we analyzed asymmetry in handling behavior of pine cones by red squirrels (Sciurus vulgaris). Red squirrels devote most of their daily activity to feeding, thus this species constitutes an appropriate model for studying asymmetry in food processing. We aimed to explore 1) the potential lateralization in handling of pine cones by squirrels, 2) the dominant pattern for this behavior (left- vs. right-handed), and 3) whether this pattern varies among populations and depending on the pine tree species available. Results revealed that red squirrels handle pine cones in an asymmetrical way, and that direction of asymmetry varies among populations and seems to be determined more by local influences rather than by the pine tree species.

Perceptual asymmetries and handedness: a neglected link?

Healthy individuals tend to weigh in more the left than the right side of visual space in a variety of contexts, ranging from pseudoneglect to perceptual asymmetries for faces. Among the common explanations proposed for the attentional and perceptual advantages of the left visual field, a link with the prevalence of right-handedness in humans has never been suggested, although some evidence seems to converge in favor of a bias of spatial attention toward the region most likely coincident with another person's right hand during a face-to-face interaction. Such a bias might imply an increased efficiency in monitoring both communicative and aggressive acts, the right limb being more used than the left in both types of behavior. Although attentional and perceptual asymmetries could be linked to right-handedness at the level of phylogeny because of the evolutionarily advantage of directing attention toward the region where others' dominant hand usually operates, it is also legitimate to question whether, at the ontogenetic level, frequent exposure to right-handed individuals may foster leftward biases. These views are discussed in the light of extant literature, and a number of tests are proposed in order to assess our hypotheses.

Distinction between hand dominance and hand preference in primates: a behavioral investigation of manual dexterity in nonhuman primates (macaques) and human subjects

Background The present study aimed to determine and confront hand preference (hand chosen in priority to perform a manual dexterity task) and hand dominance (hand with best motor performance) in eight macaques (Macaca fascicularis) and in 20 human subjects (10 left-handers and 10 right-handers). Methods Four manual dexterity tests have been executed by the monkeys, over several weeks during learning and stable performance phases (in controlled body position): the modified Brinkman board, the reach and grasp drawer, the tube and the bimanual board tasks. Three behavioral tests, adapted versions from the monkeys tasks (modified Brinkman board, tube and bimanual board tasks), as well as a handedness questionnaire, have been conducted in human subjects. Results In monkeys, there was a large disparity across individuals and motor tasks. For hand dominance, two monkeys were rather right lateralized, three monkeys rather left lateralized, whereas in three monkeys, the different parameters measured were not consistent. For hand preference, none of the eight monkeys exhibited a homogeneous lateralization across the four motor tasks. Macaca fascicularis do not exhibit a clear hand preference. Furthermore, hand preference often changed with task repetition, both during training and plateau phases. For human subjects, the hand preference mostly followed the self-assessment of lateralization by the subjects and the questionnaire (in the latter, right-handers were more lateralized than left-handers), except a few discrepancies based on the tube task. There was no hand dominance in seven right-handers (the other three performed better with the right hand) and in four left-handers. Five left-handers showed left-hand dominance, whereas surprisingly, one left-hander performed better with the right hand. In the modified Brinkman board task, females performed better than males, right-handers better than left-handers. Conclusions The present study argues for a distinction between hand preference and hand dominance, especially in macaque monkeys.

Genetic and environmental contributions to the expression of handedness in chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes)

Most humans are right-handed and, like many behavioral traits, there is good evidence that genetic factors play a role in handedness. Many researchers have argued that non-human animal limb or hand preferences are not under genetic control but instead are determined by random, non-genetic factors. We used quantitative genetic analyses to estimate the genetic and environmental contributions to three measures of chimpanzee handedness. Results revealed significant population-level handedness for two of the three measures-the tube task and manual gestures. Furthermore, significant additive genetic effects for the direction and strength of handedness were found for all three measures, with some modulation due to early social rearing experiences. These findings challenge historical and contemporary views of the mechanisms underlying handedness in non-human animals.

Planum temporale grey matter asymmetries in chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes), vervet (Chlorocebus aethiops sabaeus), rhesus (Macaca mulatta) and bonnet (Macaca radiata) monkeys

Brain asymmetries, particularly asymmetries within regions associated with language, have been suggested as a key difference between humans and our nearest ancestors. These regions include the planum temporale (PT) - the bank of tissue that lies posterior to Heschl's gyrus and encompasses Wernicke's area, an important brain region involved in language and speech in the human brain. In the human brain, both the surface area and the grey matter volume of the PT are larger in the left compared to right hemisphere, particularly among right-handed individuals. Here we compared the grey matter volume and asymmetry of the PT in chimpanzees and three other species of nonhuman primate in two Genera including vervet monkeys (Chlorocebus aethiops sabaeus), rhesus macaques (Macaca mulatta) and bonnet macaques (Macaca radiata). We show that the three monkey species do not show population-level asymmetries in this region whereas the chimpanzees do, suggesting that the evolutionary brain development that gave rise to PT asymmetry occurred after our split with the monkey species, but before our split with the chimpanzees.

Hand preferences for coordinated bimanual actions in 777 great apes: implications for the evolution of handedness in hominins

Whether or not nonhuman primates exhibit population-level handedness remains a topic of considerable scientific debate. Here, we examined handedness for coordinated bimanual actions in a sample of 777 great apes including chimpanzees, bonobos, gorillas, and orangutans. We found population-level right-handedness in chimpanzees, bonobos and gorillas, but left-handedness in orangutans. Directional biases in handedness were consistent across independent samples of apes within each genus. We suggest that, contrary to previous claims, population-level handedness is evident in great apes but differs among species as a result of ecological adaptations associated with posture and locomotion. We further suggest that historical views of nonhuman primate handedness have been too anthropocentric, and we advocate for a larger evolutionary framework for the consideration of handedness and other aspects of hemispheric specialization among primates.

Differential effect of ill-being and chronic stress on cradling behavior of first and multi-time parents

A preference for cradling infants on the left side has been demonstrated in women, as has a relation of reduced left-cradling and stress/negative affect. This relation has not yet been investigated in male participants. Due to less left-cradling in non-fathers compared to fathers it was suggested that fatherhood might have an influence on cradling behavior. The present study investigated the cradling preference of first- and multi-time parents before and after birth, and its relation to ill-being and stress. Results revealed that cradling behavior of first-time fathers was not different before and after the birth of the infant. Thus, fatherhood does not seem to have an acute influence on cradling behavior. Furthermore, cradling behavior of first- and multi-time parents was differentially influenced by ill-being and stress. These results present new information about the course of cradling preference from pregnancy to postpartum and indicate that the relation of cradling and ill-being/stress is more complex for parents than for non-parents.

Is infant holding-side bias related to motor asymmetries in mother and child?

Studies have revealed a preference for the left hemibody in infant holding in 65-85% of cases. Several investigations have linked this preference to maternal asymmetries. The main goal of the present study was to assess manual and hemispheric asymmetries in both mother and child and delineate their respective influence on holding-side biases. Holding side was assessed by direct observation, and by use of a questionnaire within populations of mother-child dyads. Maternal asymmetries were handedness and hemispheric specialization for perceiving emotions. Infant asymmetries were fetal position, asymmetric tonic neck reflex (ATNR) at birth and handedness at 19 months of age. To that purpose a longitudinal study has been made with infants observed at 2 and 19 months of age. A significant relationship was found between maternal handedness and holding preferences, but no significant relation was obtained between hemispheric specialization and holding preferences. Fetal position in utero but not ATNR, was significantly related to holding-side preferences. Finally, holding side at 2 months was significantly associated with infants' unimanual preferences.

Brief communication: Captive gorillas are right-handed for bimanual feeding

Predominance of right-handedness has historically been considered as a hallmark of human evolution. Whether nonhuman primates exhibit population-level manual bias remains a controversial topic. Here, we investigated the hypothesis that bimanual coordinated activities may be a key-behavior in our ancestors for the emergence and evolution of human population-level right-handedness. To this end, we collected data on hand preferences in 35 captive gorillas (Gorilla gorilla) during simple unimanual reaching and for bimanual coordinated feeding. Unimanual reaching consisted of grasping food on the ground, while bimanual feeding consisted of using one hand for holding a food and processing the food item by the opposite hand. No population-level manual bias was found for unimanual actions but, in contrast, gorillas exhibited a significant population-level right-handedness for the bimanual actions. Moreover, the degree of right-handedness for bimanual feeding exceeds any other known reports of hand use in primates, suggesting that lateralization for bimanual feeding is robust in captive gorillas. The collective evidence is discussed in the context of potential continuity of handedness between human and nonhuman primates.

Bipedal tool use strengthens chimpanzee hand preferences

The degree to which non-human primate behavior is lateralized, at either individual or population levels, remains controversial. We investigated the relationship between hand preference and posture during tool use in chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) during bipedal tool use. We experimentally induced tool use in a supported bipedal posture, an unsupported bipedal posture, and a seated posture. Neither bipedal tool use nor these supported conditions have been previously evaluated in apes. The hypotheses tested were 1) bipedal posture will increase the strength of hand preference, and 2) a bipedal stance, without the use of one hand for support, will elicit a right hand preference. Results supported the first, but not the second hypothesis: bipedalism induced the subjects to become more lateralized, but not in any particular direction. Instead, it appears that subtle pre-existing lateral biases, to either the right or left, were emphasized with increasing postural demands. This result has interesting implications for theories of the evolution of tool use and bipedalism, as the combination of bipedalism and tool use may have helped drive extreme lateralization in modern humans, but cannot alone account for the preponderance of right-handedness.