4.1 Article

Individual and setting differences in the hand preferences of chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes): A critical analysis and some alternative explanations

Journal

LATERALITY
Volume 10, Issue 1, Pages 65-80

Publisher

ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/13576500342000301

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. EUNICE KENNEDY SHRIVER NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF CHILD HEALTH &HUMAN DEVELOPMENT [P01HD038051] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  2. NATIONAL CENTER FOR RESEARCH RESOURCES [P51RR000165] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  3. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF NEUROLOGICAL DISORDERS AND STROKE [R01NS036605, R55NS029574, R01NS042867, R01NS029574, R29NS029574] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  4. NCRR NIH HHS [RR-00165, P51 RR000165] Funding Source: Medline
  5. NICHD NIH HHS [P01 HD038051, P01 HD038051-050005, HD-38051] Funding Source: Medline
  6. NINDS NIH HHS [NS-42867, NS-29574, R01 NS036605, NS-36605, R01 NS042867-05, R01 NS036605-08, R01 NS042867] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Several recent papers have been critical at a theoretical and empirical level of the evidence of population-level right-handedness in chimpanzees and other great apes. For example, Palmer (2002) has recently argued that the evidence of population-level handedness in chimpanzees is weak because there are sampling biases in the data. McGrew and Marchant (1997) argue that all the evidence of right-handedness in apes is from captive animals and therefore the observed phenomenon has little ecological validity. In this paper, we address recent issues regarding the presentation and interpretation of other hand preference data and argue that chimpanzees are right-handed for some measures. We further argue that purported differences in hand use between wild and captive chimpanzees due to rearing environments are unfounded and we emphasise that more cooperative work between researchers working in captive and feral populations is needed to facilitate collection of data on common measures of hand preference.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available