~ F ) Pergamon
PII: S0028 3932(97)001073
Neuropsychologia, Vol. 36, No. 1, pp. 37 43, 1998
1998 Published by Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved
Printed in Great Britain
0028 3932"98 $19.00+0.00
LORIN J. ELIAS,* M. P. B R Y D E N t and M. B. B U L M A N - F L E M I N G
Department of Psychology, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
(Received 20 Januao' 1997; accepted 11 July 1997)
Abstraet--A tremendous amount of experimental work has attempted to identify reliable behavioural predictors of cerebral lat- eralization. Preferred handedness has been the most popular predictor, but some recent reports suggest that preferred footedness may serve as a more accurate predictor of functional laterality, especially in the left-handed population. The present study sought to test this claim by selectively recruiting individuals with either 'crossed' lateral preferences (right-handed and left-footed or left-handed and right-footed) or 'uncrossed' lateral preferences (right-handed and right-footed or left-handed and left-footed). Lateralization of emotional perception was assessed with two blocks of the dichotic Emotional Words Test (EWT), and lateral preference for both handedness and footedness was assessed using self-report questionnaires. Ear advantage on the dichotic task varied significantly with preferred foot (P--0.003), but not with preferred hand. Cerebral lateralization may be more related to footedness than to other lateral preferences. ~'i 1998 Published by Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved
Key Words: dichotic listening; footedness; handedness; eyedness; cerebral lateralization; emotion.
Introduction
Although a great deal of experimental work has attempted to identify reliable behavioural predictors of cerebral lateralization, no such predictor has been found.
Preferred handedness has probably received the most experimental attention, but there is a general consensus that hand preference alone is a relatively weak predictor of language lateralization [13, 15, 24, 28], lateralization of spatial abilities [5] and lateralization of emotional per- ception [4]. However, there is some recent evidence that language lateralization varies with preferred foot but not with preferred hand [13, 15, 28]. Given that footedness can predict language laterality, the question arises whether other functional asymmetries also vary with pre- ferred foot. Most language functions are preferentially subserved by the left hemisphere; therefore, testing footedness' predictive power with what is normally a right-hemispheric function is the next logical step in test- ing whether preferred foot can predict cerebral lateral- ization.
The right hemisphere has consistently been implicated
* Address for correspondence: Department of Psychology,
University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario N2L 3GI, Canada; e-mail: ljelias@ watarts.uwaterloo.ca. t Phil Bryden died suddenly in August 1996.
37 in tasks requiring emotional perception or output. Pat- ients suffering right-hemispheric lesions perform worse than those with left-hemispheric lesions at correctly ident- ifying and discriminating among emotional tones in speech [17, 31]. Patients with similar right-hemispheric lesions also demonstrate impairment in correctly ident- ifying emotional facial expressions [14].
There is also considerable evidence that the right hemi- sphere is superior at perceiving emotional stimuli in neurologically normal populations. In the visual modality, investigators have consistently reported a left- visual-field (LVF) advantage for perception of emotional stimulus material. Suberi and McKeever [29] tested facial recognition for emotional or non-emotional faces and found that the normal LVF advantage for facial rec- ognition was enhanced when the faces had emotional expressions. Further, the higher participants rated the emotionality of the faces used in such experiments, the stronger was the LVF advantage [20].
Right-hemispheric advantages for the processing of emotional stimuli have also been reported in the auditory modality. Left-ear advantages (LEAs) for dichotically presented material have been reported for the recognition of non-verbal emotional speech sounds. Haggard and
Parkinson [16] used a dichotic task in which participants heard six sentences in four emotional tones in one ear and a distracting stimulus in the other ear. They found

38 L.J. Elias et al./Footedness predicts emotional lateralization an LEA for the emotional intonation of the sentences, but failed to find a right-ear advantage (REA) for the verbal content of the sentences. King and Kimura [18] prepared a dichotic task that did not employ any verbal material. The stimuli consisted of natural human non- speech sounds, including laughing, crying, sneezing, moaning, coughing and sighing. The right-handers whom
King and Kimura [18] tested exhibited a significant LEA on this task. Carmon and Nachshon [9] performed a similar experiment in which the stimuli consisted of the crying, shrieking and laughing sounds of a child, an adult male and an adult female. A slight LEA was also reported for this task.
In our laboratory, Bryden and MacRae [6] developed a dichotic-listening task in which four rhyming verbal tokens ('bower', 'dower', 'tower' and 'power') are spoken in four emotional tones of voice (happy, neutral, sad and angry). When participants were instructed to detect the presence of a particular tone of voice, LEAs were obtained, regardless of the tone of voice. When par- ticipants were instructed to detect the presence of one of the four words, REAs were obtained, even though the stimulus material was identical under both circumstances
[6]. However, this result was confounded by the fact that the LEAs for the emotional component of the test and the REAs for the verbal component of the test were obtained during different testing blocks. Subjects may have been using different attentional strategies to detect the two types of stimuli.
To test for the possibility of this confounding, Bulman-
Fleming and Bryden [8] modified the task by instructing the participants to attend to various combinations of words and affective tokens. By analysing the three differ- ent types of false-positive errors (responding 'yes' when only the affective or verbal component of the target is present, or when both components of the target are present, but to opposite ears), one can test individuals for ear advantages on both emotional and verbal stimuli at the same time, ruling out biased attention as an expla- nation for the results. Most participants exhibited an
REA for the verbal material and an LEA for the non- verbal material on this task, regardless of the valence of the emotional target [8].
Although there is a general consensus that visual-field studies and dichotic-listening studies consistently impli- cate the right hemisphere in the perception of emotional stimuli, studies of patients with unilateral brain damage have suggested that the right hemisphere is more involved in the production of negative emotion, whereas the left hemisphere preferentially produces positive emotion.
Patients suffering left-hemispheric lesions are much more likely than right-hemispheric lesioned patients to develop post-injury depression [25]. Further, right-hemispheric lesions have been associated with positive mood changes and even pathological laughter, whereas left-hemispheric lesions appear to induce more negative mood changes, such as an increase in crying [27].
Studies of patients undergoing sodium amytal testing
Methods have produced similar results. When the left hemisphere is anaesthetized, patients often suffer a 'catastrophic reac- tion', presumably the result of the right hemisphere being released from contralateral inhibition. Conversely, when the right hemisphere is infused with the sodium amytal, euphoric reactions have been reported [22, 26, 30]. There- fore, contrary to the non-invasive studies of emotional perception in neurologically normal participants, the studies of emotional production described above suggest a valence by hemisphere interaction wherein the right hemisphere is more involved in the production of negative emotion, whereas the left hemisphere produces positive emotion.
In order to test whether it is handedness or footedness that better predicts the lateralization of emotional per- ception, one needs to test individuals who have incon- gruent hand and foot preferences. Most people have uncrossed lateral preferences in that they prefer the foot ipsilateral to their preferred hand. However, between
1.5% and 6% of right-handed adults appear to prefer their left foot. The prevalence of crossed lateral pref- erence is higher in left-handed individuals, in whom between 20% and 50% prefer their right foot [1, 3, 10,
12, 13, 19, 21, 23].
In the present experiment, we sought to test whether the preferred foot could better predict the lateralization of emotional perception by selectively recruiting par- ticipants with both crossed and uncrossed lateral pref- erences. Because the lateralization of higher functions may also be related to eyedness [2], participants recruited according to hand and foot preference were also tested for eye preference. The stimulus material employed is identical to that described by Bryden and MacRae [6]. If the preferred foot accurately predicts emotional lat- eralization in addition to language lateralization, preva- lence of an LEA on the dichotic task should be reduced in left-footed participants. Further, because two blocks of the dichotic task were to be administered to each participant (one with 'angry-sounding' targets and one with 'happy-sounding' targets), we were also able to test the 'valence hypothesis' within subjects. If the right hemi- sphere is specialized for the perception of negative stimuli and the left is specialized for positive stimuli, individual participants should demonstrate LEAs for the angry words and REAs for the happy words.
Participants
Thirty-five undergraduate and graduate students participated in this experiment for six dollars remuneration. The data from three participants were excluded from the analysis: two because of severe knee injuries and one because the participant could not complete one of the blocks of dichotic trials with sat- isfactory error rates. Participants were selectively recruited such that the three factors of gender, handedness and footedness were completely crossed. This resulted in four groups of eight

participants in each handedness/footedness group, each of which was balanced for sex. In other words, data from an equal number of right-handed and left-handed males and females in each footedness group, and equal numbers of people with uncrossed (right-handed and right-footed or left-handed and left-footed) and crossed lateral preferences (right-handed and left-footed or left-handed and right-footed), were included in the analysis.
L. J. Elias et al./Footedness predicts emotional lateralization 39 trials. After completing the first block of trials, the participant was instructed to listen for a different emotional target and was left to respond to another block of 144 dichotic trials. Half the participants in each sex, handedness and footedness group were required to detect angry targets first, and half the participants were required to detect the happy targets first. The testing procedure took approximately 45 min.
Materials
All participants completed the 'Waterloo Footedness Ques- tionnaire-Revised' (WFQ-R) and the 'Waterloo Handedness
Questionnaire--Revised' (WHQ-R). Copies of both of these questionnaires are appended to this report. The WFQ-R (see the Appendix) assessed foot preference for two types of tasks.
Half of the questions (questions 1, 3, 5, 7 and 9) assessed foot preference for the foot manipulating an object (such as kicking a ball, picking up a marble etc.). The other half (questions 2, 4,
6, 8 and 10) assessed foot preference for the foot providing support during an activity (such as standing on one foot bal- ancing on a railway track etc.). Each participant's handedness was defined according to his or her summed responses to the
"skilled' subscale of the WHQ-R. Lateralization of emotional perception was assessed using the Emotional Words Test
(EWT) described by Bryden and MacRae [6]. The test consists of a stimulus set of the words 'power', 'bower', 'dower' and
'tower' spoken by a male speaker in happy, sad, angry and neutral emotional tones, producing a total of 16 different tokens. When appropriate tokens had been selected, each token was digitized on a modified PDP-11/40 computer, edited to a common length of 500 msec, equalized in intensity and stored.
Each item was then paired dichotically with every other item that differed in both affective tone and verbal content, to pro- duce 144 different stimulus pairs with aligned onset times. These pairs were recorded on an audio cassette in a random sequence for presentation through earphones at an average intensity of
75 dB. Each stimulus pair was separated by a 3-sec intertrial interval, with a 10-sec break after each block of 18 trials.
The tape was played on a Sony Professional Walkman (model
WM-D6C) through Sony earphones (model MDR-51) with circumaural cushions. Test trials were preceded by 16 practice trials in which each affective and phonetic stimulus was paired once and presented binaurally. During the testing, participants indicated whether or not they heard the emotional target by circling 'Yes' or 'No' on a sheet of paper.
Procedure
Each participant was tested individually in a sound-proof room. First, each participant completed the WFQ-R, followed by the WHQ-R. Preferred eye was assessed by asking par- ticipants to cup their hands, leaving a narrow hole in between the hands, and to look at the experimenter's nose through the hole. The experimenter recorded which eye was used. Then, each participant completed two blocks of 144 trials of the EWT.
During each dichotic session, the participant was first told what a dichotic-listening test consisted of, what his or her target
(happy or angry) was to be, and then heard each of the 16 word/affect combinations once, presented binaurally. No response was required at this time. The experimenter then stop- ped the cassette player and asked the participants if they had identified the target item. If a participant had not heard his or her target, the 16 binaurally presented items were played again.
The experimenter then started the tape recorder again, and left the participant to respond to the first block of 144 dichotic
Scoring and analysis
All lateral preference questionnaire data were scored as fol- lows: Responses of (i) left-always, (ii) left-usually, (iii) equal,
(iv) right-usually and (v) right-always were scored on a scale from - 2 to 2. The results obtained with the emotional words dichotic tape were scored and converted to 2 scores, an index described by Bryden and Sprott [7]. Lambda is the natural log-odds ratio of right-ear responses to left-ear responses, and results in an index that is unbounded, approximately normally distributed and unconstrained by accuracy. Positive 2 values are indicative of REAs. We also looked for group differences in degree of handedness and footedness by summing the absolute values of participants' scores for individual items on the ques- tionnaires (regardless of direction of preference). These summed values represent the absolute strength of handedness or foot- edness. Two additional four-way factorial analyses of variance
(ANOVAs) were completed to detect systematic differences in absolute handedness or absolute footedness.
Results
Similar to the results o f previous studies [13, 15, 28], ear a d v a n t a g e on the dichotic task varied significantly with footedness but n o t with handedness in the present experiment. A multiple regression analysis was perfor- med, including the five variables o f footedness, hand- edness, eyedness, sex and order o f the dichotic task
( ' h a p p y ' target first or ' a n g r y ' target first), to detect any effects (or interactions) o f the order o f the dichotic task.
Preferred f o o t was the only variable that a c c o u n t e d for a significant a m o u n t o f variance in dichotic-listening scores
(/~ = --0.538, t = - 3.494, P = 0.002). Therefore, the vari- able ' o r d e r ' was d r o p p e d f r o m subsequent analyses.
W h e n 2 scores were analysed with a repeated-measures
A N O V A with the between-subjects variables o f foot- edness, handedness, eyedness a n d sex, the footedness main effect was highly significant [F(1,16)=12.65,
P = 0.003], but the handedness m a i n effect was n o t sig- nificant [F(1,16)=2.32, P = 0 . 1 4 8 ] . There were no main effects or interactions involving the factors o f sex or eye- dness. Because there was no m a i n effect o f valence o f the e m o t i o n a l targets [F(1,6)=1.97, P = 0 . 2 1 0 ] and par- ticipants' 2 scores on the ' a n g r y ' a n d ' h a p p y ' targets were highly significantly correlated (r = 0.556, P < 0.001 ), each participant's 2 scores for the ' a n g r y ' and ' h a p p y ' e m o t i o n a l targets were averaged, p r o v i d i n g a single mea- sure o f e m o t i o n a l lateralization.
Individuals w h o were right-footed tended to exhibit significant L E A s on e m o t i o n a l targets [t(15)=6.44,
P < 0.001], whereas left-footed people exhibited non-sig- nificant L E A s [t(15) = 1.07, P = 0.150]. Participants w h o

40
A ¢=
"o
J~
E
1
L.J. Elias et al./Footedness predicts emotional lateralization were both left-handed and left-footed exhibited non-sig- nificant REAs [t(15)=1.15, P=0.289], whereas those who were right-handed and left-footed exhibited sig- nificant LEAs [t(15)=3.04, P=0.002] on the dichotic task. Both left-handed right-footers and right-handed right-footers exhibited significant LEAs [t(15)=7.67,
P<0.001; t(15)=3.37, P=0.011, respectively] on the dichotic task (see Fig. 1). Newman-Keuls pairwise com- parisons for the various handedness/footedness groups revealed that left-handed, left-footed participants exhi- bited significantly higher 2 scores (P < 0.05) than all other groups (indicating a higher prevalence of REA), but no other intergroup comparisons were significant.
When one looks only at the direction of ear advantage,
94% of right-footed participants exhibited an LEA, com- pared with 63% of those who were left-footed
[~2(1) = 4.57, P < 0.05]. When participants were grouped according to handedness, 88 % of right-handers exhibited
LEAs compared with 69% of the left-handers
[X2(1) = 1.65, n.s.]. Prevalence of an LEA was highest in the left-handed, right-footed group (100%), followed by the right-handed, right-footed group and the right- handed, left-footed groups (88%); the left-handed, left- footed group contained the fewest people with an LEA
(38%).
To identify which footedness items were most pre- dictive of emotional lateralization, participants' average Z scores for the two blocks of dichotic trials were correlated with their responses to the footedness questionnaire.
Lambda scores correlated most highly with the question that assessed foot preference for smoothing sand at the beach (r= -0.533, P = 0.002), followed by that for kick- ing a ball ( r = - 0 . 5 1 3 , P=0.003), picking up a marble with one's toes (r= -0.359, P=0.044) and stomping on
¢=
-2
Left/Left Right/Left Left/Right Right/Right
H a n d / F o o t P r e f e r e n c e
Fig. 1. Mean (_S.E.M.) ear advantage scores (2) for each handedness/footedness group on the Emotional Words Test
(EWT). Positive scores are indicative of REAs. a bug ( r = - 0 . 3 5 4 , P=0.047). The footedness ques- tionnaire was composed of five questions that assessed preference for skilled unipedal activities and five ques- tions that assessed preference for the stabilizing or bal- ancing limb. Participants' summed scores for the skilled unipedal activities correlated significantly with their Z scores (r = -0.492, P = 0.004), but their summed scores for the questions identifying the stabilizing/balancing limb did not (r= -0.218, P=0.230).
A stepwise multiple regression analysis was performed on the 2 scores using the continuous (degree and direction combined) data from the lateral preference ques- tionnaires. The only variable that accounted for a sig- nificant amount of the variance (r2=0.242) was the
'skilled' footedness subscale (/~=-0.492, t = - 3 . 0 9 5 ,
P=0.004). Because the 'postural' subscale on the foot- edness questionnaire did not account for a significant amount of variance in participants' 2 scores, nor did it correlate well with 2 scores, it appears as though the
'skilled' unipedal activities are most predictive of lat- eralization of emotional perception.
Discussion
In the present study, preferred foot was a far better predictor of cerebral lateralization than was handedness, a result that resembles those from a number of other recent studies of language lateralization [13, 15, 28]. The hypothesis that negative emotions may be preferentially processed by the right hemisphere and positive emotions by the left hemisphere was not supported in this experi- ment. Of the 32 participants tested, only one individual exhibited ear advantages in opposing directions for the happy and angry emotional targets. Admittedly, this indi- vidual exhibited an REA for the happy target and an
LEA for the angry target, just as would be predicted by the valence hypothesis, but the vast majority of par- ticipants in this experiment exhibited ear advantages that were similar in both degree and direction on both emotional valences.
It is unclear why preferred foot is a better predictor of emotional lateralization than preferred hand. Assuming that all people have a 'global' lateral preference for per- forming skilled motoric activities, it is tempting to make the conclusion that footedness may be providing a more pure measure of 'sidedness' than is handedness. Foot- edness may be less culturally or environmentally influ- enced than is handedness: it is obvious that left-handed individuals live in a right-handed world, where their scis- sors, notebook computers, sewing machines and count- less other devices are often designed exclusively for the right-hander. This influence may help explain why a frac- tion of the right-handed population is left-footed. Unfor- tunately, an environmental or cultural explanation does not explain the higher prevalence of 'crossed' lateral pref- erence in the left-handed population. Why would one prefer the left hand (despite cultural and environmental

L. J. Elias
pressure) and the right foot if there is a global sidedness?
Furthermore, the very existence of left-handed, right- footed individuals appears to contradict the notion that people have global lateral preferences.
The results of the present study are also problematic for many evolutionary theories of cerebral lateralization
[11]. Most of these theories claim that linguistic functions and fine manual skills involve similar motor components and therefore were localized to the same hemisphere.
Other functions, such as visuospatial skills and emotional perception, were presumably lateralized to the right hemi- sphere. If fine manual skill is most related to cerebral lateralization, then handedness should predict language lateralization more accurately than footedness. Studies by Searleman [28], Day and MacNeilage [13], and Elias and Bryden [15] indicate that this is not the case. Fur- thermore, such evolutionary scenarios might predict that emotional perception would be preferentially subserved by the hemisphere contralateral to that which controls the preferred hand. The present study found that lat- eralization of emotional processing was predicted better by preferred foot than by preferred hand.
Other theories have been put forward to try to account for the relations of footedness to cerebral lateralization.
MacNeilage [19] has proposed that the first evolutionary step in hemispheric specialization was a left-hand, right- hemisphere visuospatial specialization for unimanual predation. The postural demands of unimanual pre- dation then lead to a right-side, left-hemisphere spe- cialization for postural support. Because the respiratory and phonatory components of language production are influenced by postural factors, and facial and whole-body communicative gestures played a principal role in early communication, the left hemisphere may have been pre- disposed for linguistic functions, whereas the right may have dominated other functions, such as emotional per- ception.
However, if footedness is interpreted as a measure of lateralization of postural support, the results from this experiment do not completely support the MacNeilage
[19] evolutionary theory. The foot preference items that correlated significantly with the measures of cerebral lat- eralization were: smoothing sand at the beach, kicking a ball at a target, stomping on a bug and picking up a marble with one's toes. All of these items assess pref- erence for the foot manipulating an object, not the foot providing balance or postural support during the action.
Furthermore, because in another study the same foot preference items were predictive of language laterality
[15], footedness may be related to language lateralization and emotional lateralization in a similar way.
At present, we are not certain which component of footedness is predictive of cerebral lateralization.
Although 'skilled' or 'sequenced' pedal activities such as kicking appear to be good predictors of language lat- eralization, MacNeilage [19] claims that it is the 'postural control' element of footedness that predicts cerebral lat- eralization. Future work should include performance predicts emotional lateralization 41 measures of asymmetries in postural control. If Mac-
Neilage [19] is correct, these performance measures should better predict language lateralization.
experiment was supported by a grant to M. P. Bryden and a fellowship to L. J. Elias by the Natural
Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
(NSERC).
References
1. Augustyn, C. and Peters, M., On the relation between footedness and handedness.
1986, 63, 1115-1118.
Handedness and eye dominance: a meta-analysis of their relationship.
1996, 1, 5-34.
3. Brown, E. R. and Taylor, P., Handedness, foot- edness, and eyedness.
1988, 66, 183-186.
4. Bryden, M. P., Free, T., Gagn6, S. and Groff, P.,
Handedness effects in the detection of dichotically- presented words and emotions.
1991, 27,
229-235.
5. Bryden, M. P., H6caen, H. and DeAgostini, M., Pat- terns of cerebral organization.
1983, 20, 249-262.
6. Bryden, M. P. and MacRae, L., Dichotic laterality effects obtained with emotional words.
1988, 1, 171-176.
7. Bryden, M. P. and Sprott, D. A., Statistical deter- mination of degree of laterality.
1981, 19, 571-581.
8. Bulman-Fleming, M. B. and Bryden, M. P., Sim- ultaneous verbal and affective laterality effects.
1994, 32, 787-797.
9. Carmon, A. and Nachshon, I., Ear asymmetry in perception of emotional nonverbal stimuli.
1973, 37, 351-357.
10. Chapman, J. P., Chapman, L. J. and Allen, J. J., The measurement of foot preference.
1987, 25, 579-584.
11. Corballis, M. C.,
Academic Press, New York, 1991.
12. Coren, S., The lateral preference inventory for measurement of handedness, footedness, eyedness, and earedness: norms for young adults.
1993, 31, 1-3.
13. Day, L. B. and MacNeilage, P. F., Postural asym- metries and language lateralization in humans
1996, 110, 88-96.
14. DeKosky, S., Heilman, K. M., Bowers, D. and Val- enstein, E., Recognition and discrimination of emotional faces and pictures.
1980, 9, 206 214.
15. Elias, L. J. and Bryden, M. P., Footedness is a better predictor of language lateralization than handedness.
1997, in press.
2. Bourassa, D. C., McManus, I. C. and Bryden, M .P.,

42
16. Haggard, M. and Parkinson, A. M., Stimulus and task factors as determinants of ear advantages.
1971, 23,
168-177.
17. Heilman, K. M., Scholes, R. and Watson, R. T.,
Auditory affective agnosia: disturbed comprehension of affective speech.
1975, 38, 69-72.
18. King, F. L. and Kimura, D., Left ear superiority in dichotic perception of vocal nonverbal sounds.
1972, 26, 111-116.
19. MacNeilage, P. F., The "postural origins" theory of primate neurobiological asymmetries. In
ed. N. A. Krasnegor, D. M. R u m b a u g h ,
R. L. Schiefelbusch and M. G. Studdert-Kennedy.
Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, 1991, pp. 165-187.
20. McKeever, W. F. and Dixon, M. S., Right hemi- sphere superiority of discriminating memorized from non-memorized faces: affective imagery, sex, and perceived emotional effects.
1981, 12, 246-260.
21. Nachson, I. and Denno, D., Birth order and lateral preferences.
1987, 22, 567-578.
22. Perria, P., Rosadini, G. F. and Rossi, G. F., Deter- mination of side o f cerebral dominance with A m o - barbital.
1961, 4, 175-181.
23. Peters, M. and Durding, B. M., Footedness of left- and right-handers.
1979, 92, 133-142.
L.J. Elias
predicts emotional lateralization
24. Rasmussen, T. and Milner, B., The role of early left brain injury in determining lateralization of cerebral speech functions.
1977, 299, 355-369.
25. Robinson, R. G. and Price, T. R., Post-stroke depressive disorders: a follow-up study of 103 pati- ents.
1982, 13, 635-641.
26. Rossi, G. F. and Rosadini, G. R., Experimental analyses of cerebral dominance in man. In
ed. D.
H. Millikan and F. L. Darley, pp. 167-184. Grune &
Stratton, New York, 1967.
27. Sackeim, H., Greenburg, M. S., Weimen, A. L., Gur,
R. C., Hungerbuhler, J. P. and Geschwind, N., Hemi- spheric asymmetry in the expression of positive and negative emotions: neurologic evidence.
1982, 39, 210-218.
28. Searleman, A. Subject variables and cerebral organ- ization for language.
1980, 16, 239-254.
29. Suberi, M. and McKeever, W. F., Differential right hemisphere m e m o r y storage of emotional and non- emotional faces.
1977, 15, 757-
768.
30. Terzian, H., Behavioral and E E G effects of intra- carotid sodium amytal injections.
1964, 12, 230-240.
31. Tucker, D. M., Watson, R. T. and Heilman, K. M.,
Discrimination and evocation of affectively intoned speech in patients with right parietal disease.
1977, 27, 947-950.
Appendix: Waterloo Footedness Questionnaire---Revised
Instructions: Answer each of the following questions as best you can. If you
use one foot to perform the described activity, circle Ra or La (for right always or left always). If you usually use one foot circle Ru or Lu, as appropriate. If you use both feet equally often, circle Eq.
Please do not simply circle one answer for all questions, but imagine yourself performing each activity in turn, and then mark the appropriate answer. If necessary, stop and pantomime the activity.
1. Which foot would you use to kick a stationary ball at a target straight in front of you?
2. If you had to stand on one foot, which foot would it be?
3. Which foot would you use to smooth sand at the beach?
4. If you had to step up onto a chair, which foot would you place on the chair first?
5. Which foot would you use to stomp on a fast-moving bug?
6. If you were to balance on one foot on a railway track, which foot would you use?
7. If you wanted to pick up a marble with your toes, which foot would you use?
8. If you had to hop on one foot, which foot would you use?
9. Which foot would you use to help push a shovel into the ground?
10. During relaxed standing, people initially put most of their weight on one foot, leaving the other leg slightly bent. Which foot do you put most of your weight on first?
11. Is there any reason (i.e. injury) why you have changed your foot preference for any of the above activities?
12. Have you ever been given special training or encouragement to use a particular foot for certain activities?
13. If you have answered YES for either question 11 or 12, please explain:
La Lu Eq Ru Ra
La Lu Eq Ru Ra
La Lu Eq Ru Ra
La Lu Eq Ru Ra
La Lu Eq Ru Ra
La Lu Eq Ru Ra
La Lu Eq Ru Ra
La Lu Eq Ru Ra
La Lu Eq Ru Ra
La Lu Eq Ru Ra
YES NO (circle one)
YES NO (circle one)

L. J. Elias et al./Footedness predicts emotional lateralization 43
Waterloo Handedness Questionnaire Revised
Instructions: Please indicate your hand preference for the following activities by circling the appropriate response. If you always
(i.e. 95 % or more of the time) use one hand to perform the described activity, circle Ra or La (for right always or left always). If you usually (i.e. about 75% of the time) use one hand circle Ru or Lu as appropriate. If you use both hands equally often (i.e. you use each hand about 50% of the time), circle Eq.
1. Which hand would you use to adjust the volume knob on a radio?
2. With which hand would you use a paintbrush to paint a wall?
3. With which hand would you use a spoon to eat soup?
4. Which hand would you use to point to something in the distance?
5. Which hand would you use to throw a dart?
6. With which hand would you use the eraser on the end of a pencil?
7. In which hand would you hold a walking stick?
8. With which hand would you use an iron to iron a shirt?
9. Which hand would you use to draw a picture?
10. In which hand would you hold a mug full of coffee?
11. Which hand would you use to hammer a nail?
12. With which hand would you use the remote control for a TV?
13. With which hand would you use a knife to cut bread?
14. With which hand would you use to turn the pages of a book?
15. With which hand would you use a pair of scissors to cut paper?
16. Which hand would you use to erase a blackboard?
17. With which hand would you use a pair of tweezers?
18. Which hand would you use to pick up a book?
19. Which hand would you use to carry a suitcase?
20. Which hand would you use to pour a cup of coffee?
21. With which hand would you use a computer mouse?
22. Which hand would you use to insert a plug into an outlet?
23. Which hand would you use to flip a coin?
24. With which hand would you use a toothbrush to brush your teeth?
25. Which hand would you use to throw a baseball?
26. Which hand would you use to turn a doorknob?
27. Which hand would you use for writing?
28. Which hand would you use to pick up a piece of paper?
29. Which hand would you use a hand saw?
30. Which hand would you use to stir a liquid with a spoon?
31. In which hand would you hold an open umbrella?
32. In which hand would you hold a needle while sewing?
La
La
La
La
La
33. Which hand would you use to strike a match?
34. Which hand would you use to turn on a light switch?
35. Which hand would you use to open a drawer?
36. Which hand would you use to press buttons on a calculator?
La
La
La
La
37. Is there any reason (i.e. injury) why you have changed your hand preference Y E S / N O for any of the above activities'?
38. Have you been given special training or encouragement to use a particular hand for certain activities?
39. If you have answered YES for either Questions 37 or 38, please explain:
YES/NO
La
La
La
La
La
La
La
La
La
La
La
La
La
La
La
La
La
La
La
La
La
La
La
La
La
La
La Lu
Lu
Lu
Lu
Lu
Lu
Lu
Lu
Lu
Lu
Lu
Lu
Lu
Lu
Lu
Lu
(circle one)
Eq
Eq
Eq
Eq
Eq
Eq
Eq
Eq
Eq
Eq
Eq
Eq
Eq
Eq
Eq
Eq
Lu
Lu
Lu
Lu
Lu
Lu
Lu
Lu
Lu
Lu
Lu
Lu
Lu
Lu
Lu
Lu
Lu
Lu
Lu
Lu
Eq
Eq
Eq
Eq
Eq
Eq
Eq
Eq
Eq
Eq
Eq
Eq
Eq
Eq
Eq
Eq
Eq
Eq
Eq
Eq
(circle one)
Ra
Ra
Ra
Ra
Ra
Ra
Ra
Ra
Ra
Ra
Ra
Ra
Ra
Ra
Ra
Ra
Ra
Ra
Ra
Ra
Ra
Ra
Ra
Ra
Ra
Ra
Ra
Ra
Ra
Ra
Ra
Ra
Ra
Ra
Ra
Ra
Ru
Ru
Ru
Ru
Ru
Ru
Ru
Ru
Ru
Ru
Ru
Ru
Ru
Ru
Ru
Ru
Ru
Ru
Ru
Ru
Ru
Ru
Ru
Ru
Ru
Ru
Ru
Ru
Ru
Ru
Ru
Ru
Ru
Ru
Ru
Ru