» Articles » PMID: 17380323

The Dominant and Nondominant Arms Are Specialized for Stabilizing Different Features of Task Performance

Overview
Journal Exp Brain Res
Specialty Neurology
Date 2007 Mar 24
PMID 17380323
Citations 75
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

We have previously proposed a model of motor lateralization, in which the two arms are differentially specialized for complementary control processes. During aimed movements, the dominant arm shows advantages for coordinating intersegmental dynamics as required for specifying trajectory speed and direction, while the nondominant arm shows advantages in controlling limb impedance, as required for accurate final position control. We now directly test this model of lateralization by comparing performance of the two arms under two different tasks: one in which reaching movement is made from one fixed starting position to three different target positions; and the other in which reaching is made from three different starting positions to one fixed target position. For the dominant arm, performance was most accurate when reaching from one fixed starting position to multiple targets. In contrast, nondominant arm performance was most accurate when reaching toward a single target from multiple start locations. These findings contradict the idea that motor lateralization reflects a global advantage of one "dominant" hemisphere/limb system. Instead, each hemisphere/limb system appears specialized for stabilizing different aspects of task performance.

Citing Articles

Grip and manipulation forces are controlled independently in a coupled bimanual task.

Gunter C, Heimburger N, Franklin D, Leib R J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2025; 22(1):56.

PMID: 40069743 PMC: 11900355. DOI: 10.1186/s12984-025-01600-4.


Task demands modulate distal limb handedness: A comparative analysis of prehensile synergies of the dominant and non-dominant hand.

Shenoy P, M V Sci Rep. 2024; 14(1):25565.

PMID: 39462144 PMC: 11514032. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-75001-3.


Implicit motor sequence learning using three-dimensional reaching movements with the non-dominant left arm.

Smith C, Baird J, Buitendorp J, Horton H, Watkins M, Stewart J Exp Brain Res. 2024; 242(12):2715-2726.

PMID: 39377917 PMC: 11569025. DOI: 10.1007/s00221-024-06934-4.


Lateralization of acquisition and consolidation in direction but not amplitude of a motor skill task.

Yuk J, Sainburg R Exp Brain Res. 2024; 242(10):2341-2356.

PMID: 39110162 DOI: 10.1007/s00221-024-06900-0.


The complementary dominance hypothesis: a model for remediating the 'good' hand in stroke survivors.

Kitchen N, Dexheimer B, Yuk J, Maenza C, Ruelos P, Kim T J Physiol. 2024; 603(3):663-683.

PMID: 38733166 PMC: 11610521. DOI: 10.1113/JP285561.


References
1.
Cisek P, Crammond D, Kalaska J . Neural activity in primary motor and dorsal premotor cortex in reaching tasks with the contralateral versus ipsilateral arm. J Neurophysiol. 2003; 89(2):922-42. DOI: 10.1152/jn.00607.2002. View

2.
Kawato M . Internal models for motor control and trajectory planning. Curr Opin Neurobiol. 1999; 9(6):718-27. DOI: 10.1016/s0959-4388(99)00028-8. View

3.
Gottlieb G . On the voluntary movement of compliant (inertial-viscoelastic) loads by parcellated control mechanisms. J Neurophysiol. 1996; 76(5):3207-29. DOI: 10.1152/jn.1996.76.5.3207. View

4.
Sainburg R . Evidence for a dynamic-dominance hypothesis of handedness. Exp Brain Res. 2002; 142(2):241-58. PMC: 10710695. DOI: 10.1007/s00221-001-0913-8. View

5.
Sainburg R, Kalakanis D . Differences in control of limb dynamics during dominant and nondominant arm reaching. J Neurophysiol. 2000; 83(5):2661-75. PMC: 10709817. DOI: 10.1152/jn.2000.83.5.2661. View