Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 2,283

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

A CLASSIFICATION OF HAND PREFERENCE BY ASSOCIATION ANALYSIS

ANNETT, MARIAN·1970·British Journal of Psychology

Abstract

An association analysis was made of the responses of young adults to a hand‐preference questionnaire. Many patterns of preference were distinguished and there were no marked differences between adjacent classes. These findings are believed to demonstrate that hand preference is distributed continuously and not discretely. When it is necessary to classify handedness, the preference continuum can be divided at several levels of discrimination. A second study of hand preference and manual speed showed that it is possible to order the main preference groups for asymmetry of manual skill. Some of the problems of studies of laterality are examined as possible consequences of the treatment of a continuous distribution as if it were discrete.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.2044-8295.1970.tb01248.x

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
ANNETT, M.
Venue
British Journal of Psychology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1970-08
Volume
61
Issue
3
Pages
303-321
ISSN
  • 0007-1269 (ISSN-L)
  • 2044-8295
OpenAlex
W2075545465
Cited by
2,283
References
0
FWCI
6.03
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.