Why are infants held on the left? A test of the attention hypothesis with a doll, a book, and a bag

Functional lateralization in social-emotional processing: The influence of sexual orientation and gender identity on cradling preferences

The left-cradling bias (i.e., the motor asymmetry for cradling infants on the left side) has often been associated to the right-hemispheric social-emotional specialization, and it has often been reported to be stronger in females than in males. In this study we explored the effects of sexual orientation and gender identity on this lateral bias by means of a web-based investigation in a sample of adults (485 biological females and 196 biological males) recruited through LGBTQIA+ networks and general university forums. We exploited a cradling imagery task to assess participants' cradling-side preference, and standardized questionnaires to assess participants' homosexuality (Klein Sexual Orientation Grid) and gender nonconformity (Gender Identity/Gender Dysphoria Questionnaire for Adults and Adolescents). Results confirmed the expected left-cradling bias across all sexual orientation groups except for heterosexual males. Importantly, higher homosexuality scores were associated with higher proportions of left cradling in males. These results suggest that sexual orientation can influence cradling preference in males, indicating a complex interaction between biological and psychological factors in the laterality of social-emotional processing. Finally, the left-cradling bias seems to confirm its role as a behavioral proxy of social-emotional functional lateralization in humans.

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.

Who goes where in couples and pairs? Effects of sex and handedness on side preferences in human dyads

There is increasing evidence that inter-individual interaction among conspecifics can cause population-level lateralization. Male-female and mother-infant dyads of several non-human species show lateralised position preferences, but such preferences have rarely been examined in humans. We observed 430 male-female human pairs and found a significant bias for males to walk on the right side of the pair. A survey measured side preferences in 93 left-handed and 92 right-handed women, and 96 left-handed and 99 right-handed men. When walking, and when sitting on a bench, males showed a significant side preference determined by their handedness, with left-handed men preferring to be on their partner's left side and right-handed men preferring to be on their partner's right side. Women did not show significant side preferences. When men are with their partner they show a preference for the side that facilitates the use of their dominant hand. We discuss possible reasons for the side preference, including males prefering to occupy the optimal "fight ready" side, and the influence of sex and handedness on the strength and direction of emotion 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.

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.

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.

The Role of Ethnic Prejudice in the Modulation of Cradling Lateralization

The left-cradling bias is the tendency to cradle an infant on the left side, regardless of the individuals' handedness, culture or ethnicity. Many studies revealed associations between socio-emotional variables and the left-side bias, suggesting that this asymmetry might be considered as a proxy of the emotional attunement between the cradling and the cradled individuals. In this study we examined whether adult females with high levels of prejudice toward a specific ethnic group would show reduced left-cradling preferences when required to cradle an infant-like doll with ethnical features of the prejudiced group. We manipulated the ethnicity of the cradled individual by asking 336 Caucasian women to cradle a White or a Black doll and then assessed their prejudice levels toward African individuals. Significant correlations were shown only in the Black doll group indicating that the more the prejudice toward Africans, the more the cradling-side preferences shifted toward the right. Furthermore, participants exhibiting low levels-but not those exhibiting high levels-of ethnic prejudice showed a significant left-cradling bias. These findings show that ethnic prejudice toward the specific ethnic group of the cradled individual can interfere with the left preference in the cradling woman. The present study corroborates our suggestion that the left-cradling bias might be considered as a natural index of a positive socio-communicative relationship between the cradling and cradled individuals. On the contrary, the right-cradling bias might be considered as a cue of the presence of affective dysfunctions in the relationship.

Keep a Left Profile, Baby! The Left-Cradling Bias Is Associated with a Preference for Left-Facing Profiles of Human Babies

The left-cradling bias (LCB) refers to the (typically female) preference to hold an infant on the left side of one’s own body. Among the three main accounts proposed for such a phenomenon, namely the “handedness”, “heartbeat” and “hemispheric asymmetry” hypotheses, the latter has met with the greatest empirical success. Accordingly, the LCB would facilitate the communication of socio-emotional information through the right hemisphere of both the cradled and the cradling individual, and should emerge mainly in face-to-face interactions. In this regard, it should be noticed that when the infant’s body is oriented toward the cradler, the left or right side of their face is relatively more visible to left- and right-cradlers, respectively. Therefore, we hypothesized that the LCB might also be associated with a preference for left-facing profiles (i.e., those showing the left, and more expressive, hemiface/cheek) of human babies. In order to test our hypothesis, we assessed the cradling-side preferences of female participants, as well as their preference for the left- or right-facing profile of a human infant depicted in a drawing. Left-cradlers exhibited a significantly larger preference for the left-facing version of the drawing compared with right-cradlers, a finding further corroborating the right-hemisphere hypothesis.

Language or music? Environmental influences on infants' handedness from 5 to 12 months

The main purpose of this study was to test the influence of music environment on hand-use preference in infants from 5 to 12 months, compared to speech environment. According to hemispheric specialization, our hypothesis was that infants would reach for objects more with their right hand in a speech context (left hemisphere), and more with their left hand in a music context (right hemisphere). 61 full-term infants aged from 5 to 12 months participated in this study. A prehension task was proposed successively in two sound environments (music and speech) in a counterbalanced order. Left-, right-movement and/or bimanual movements were scored. Results show that whatever the sound context, from 8 months a lateral right bias occurs and increases strongly. However, 5- to 7-months-old infants used more their left hand when they listen to a piece of classical music that an adult speech. Bimanual movements were more frequent at 6 and 7 months than unimanual movements in the speech condition. Results are discussed in terms of manual specialization.

Are only infants held more often on the left? If so, why? Testing the attention-emotion hypothesis with an infant, a vase, and two chimeric tests, one "emotional," one not

Most adults, especially women, hold infants and dolls but not books or packages on the left side. One reason may be that attention is more often leftward in response to infants, unlike emotionally neutral objects like books and packages. Women's stronger bias may reflect greater responsiveness to infants. Previously, we tested the attention hypothesis by comparing women's side-of-hold of a doll, book, and package with direction-of-attention on the Chimeric Faces Test (CFT) [Harris, L. J., Cárdenas, R. A., Spradlin, Jr., M. P., & Almerigi, J. B. (2010). Why are infants held on the left? A test of the attention hypothesis with a doll, a book, and a bag. Laterality: Asymmetries of Body, Brain and Cognition, 15(5), 548-571. doi:10.1080/13576500903064018]. Only the doll was held more often to the left, and only for the doll were side-of-hold and CFT scores related, with left-holders showing a stronger left-attention bias than right-holders. In the current study, we tested men and women with a doll and the CFT along with a vase as a neutral object and a "non-emotional" chimeric test. Again, only the doll was held more often to the left, but now, although both chimeric tests showed left-attention biases, scores were unrelated to side-of-hold. Nor were there sex differences. The results support left-hold selectivity but not the attention hypothesis, with or without the element of emotion. They also raise questions about the contribution of sex-of-holder. We conclude with suggestions for addressing these issues.

Lateralization of infant holding by mothers: A longitudinal evaluation of variations over the first 12 weeks

The maternal preference to hold infants on the left rather than right side of the body was examined longitudinally, with attention to 4 explanations: maternal monitoring of infant state, maternal handedness, infant proximity to the mother's heartbeat, and preferred infant head position. The side and site of holding were measured over the first 12 weeks of the lives of 24 infants. Information about group and individual consistency in holding side allowed novel evaluation of the theories. A strong bias to hold on the left dropped below significance when the infants were aged 12 weeks and was limited to specific holding positions. Findings were generally consistent with the monitoring hypothesis, and little support was found for the 3 alternative explanations.

Breastfeeding predicts handedness

This study examined whether being breastfed predicts handedness. Two large representative samples from Britain (n=13,421) and Ireland (n=8,426) were used. Multivariate probit models are estimated, reporting the marginal effects of covariates on the probability of a child being right-handed. For both datasets, children who have been breastfed for a minimum period (between 1 month and 6 weeks) are significantly less likely to be left-handed. The results are robust to a variety of controls. Hence breastfeeding is an environmental factor that predicts handedness in a non-linear way, although the mechanism is unknown.

Oxytocin modulates amygdala, insula, and inferior frontal gyrus responses to infant crying: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Oxytocin facilitates parental caregiving and mother-infant bonding and might be involved in responses to infant crying. Infant crying provides information about the physical status and mood of the infant and elicits parental proximity and caregiving. Oxytocin might modulate the activation of brain structures involved in the perception of cry sounds-specifically the insula, the amygdala, and the thalamocingulate circuit-and thereby affect responsiveness to infant crying.

METHOD

In a randomized controlled trial we investigated the influence of intranasally administered oxytocin on neural responses to infant crying with functional magnetic resonance imaging. Blood oxygenation level-dependent responses to infant crying were measured in 21 women who were administered oxytocin and 21 women who were administered a placebo.

RESULTS

Induced oxytocin levels reduced, experimentally, activation in the amygdala and increased activation in the insula and inferior frontal gyrus pars triangularis.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that oxytocin promotes responsiveness to infant crying by reducing activation in the neural circuitry for anxiety and aversion and increasing activation in regions involved in empathy.

The effects of mothers' past infant-holding preferences on their adult children's face processing lateralisation

Face processing development is negatively affected when infants have not been exposed to faces for some time because of congenital cataract blocking all vision (Le Grand, Mondloch, Maurer, & Brent, 2001). It is not clear, however, whether more subtle differences in face exposure may also have an influence. The present study looked at the effect of the mother's preferred side of holding an infant, on her adult child's face processing lateralisation. Adults with a mother who had a left-arm preference for holding infants were compared with adults with a mother who had a right-arm holding preference. All participants were right-handed and had been exclusively bottle-fed during infancy. The participants were presented with two chimeric faces tests, one involving emotion and the other one gender. The left-arm held individuals showed a normal left-bias on the chimeric face tests, whereas the right-arm held individuals a significantly decreased left-bias. The results might suggest that reduced exposure to high quality emotional information on faces in infancy results in diminished right-hemisphere lateralisation for face processing.