PofoliaShared via Pofolia

British Journal of Psychology· 2026Q1

Of eyes and hands: Assessing the evolutionarily stable strategy of human handedness by means of eye‐tracking

Giulia Prete, Adolfo Di Crosta, Erika Marascia, Pasquale La Malva et al.

Short summary

Human handedness distribution (1:9 left- to right-handers) may be an evolutionarily stable strategy (ESS) where left-handers excel in competition and right-handers in cooperation. Eye-tracking during a 'friend or foe' task showed participants responded better to competitive stimuli and to stimuli matching their own handedness, supporting the ESS hypothesis.

AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.

Key points

  • Human handedness distribution (1:9 left- to right-handers) may be an evolutionarily stable strategy (ESS).
  • Participants performed better in competitive trials ('weapon effect') and when stimuli matched their own handedness.
  • Eye-tracking revealed faster initial saccades towards left-handed stimuli, especially males, suggesting an attentional bias towards potential threats.
  • Results partially support the ESS model and other evolutionary biases related to handedness distribution.

AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.

Abstract

An evolutionarily stable strategy (ESS) suggests that the 1:9 ratio of left- to right-handers in humans could reflect a frequency-dependent equilibrium: the minority of left-handers and the majority of right-handers may have an advantage in competitive and cooperative circumstances, respectively. To evaluate this account, we recorded eye movements during a 'friend or foe' variation of a Go/NoGo task in 24 left- and 24 right-handed participants. Stimuli were silhouettes carrying either a food item (cooperation with a 'friend') or a weapon (competition against an 'enemy') in one hand, and participants were asked to save the friend or to hit the enemy. A better performance emerged in competitive than cooperative trials, confirming the 'weapon effect' (highest efficiency in detecting threatening stimuli), and for right- than left-handed stimuli, confirming an advantage in responding to the most frequent handedness phenotype. Left/right-handed stimuli were better categorized in the competition/cooperation trials and first saccades were faster towards left- than right-handed stimuli, particularly when these were males. We interpret this pattern as an attentional bias favouring earlier orienting to potentially more threatening targets, left-handed males. Results are discussed as partially supporting the ESS and other evolutionary biases, which might be associated with the handedness distribution of humans.

The authors' abstract, as published at the source. British Journal of Psychology, 2026 · DOI ↗

TakeawaysPremium
Ask the paperFree account

Continue with a free account

Ask the paper: 3 free questions a day about this paper; save it, get its citation, new summaries every day for your field. Takeaways are Premium.

Continue free on the web

Sign in with Google or Apple; no card needed. You come back to this paper.

On your phone:

Field: Cognitive Neuroscience

Cognitive NeuroscienceNeuroscience