EVALUATION OF LATERALITY

I. Technical sheet
Lateral Dominance Battery
Nadine Galifret-Granjon
Population: Children aged 6 to 14 years
Application Form: Individual
Area evaluated: Genetic evolution of lateral dominance

II. Description of the Test

This instrument is part of the battery used by R. Zazzo, intended for a detailed study of
movement and the different possible dominance formulas in the overall motor skills of a
individual.
R. Zazzo's battery consists of a total of 15 tests; of these, only 6 have been preserved for study.
genetically, knowingly sacrificing the subtlety of the original battery to practical demands that
consisted of the relatively simple verification of the results by the other.

III. Application material

For the application of this battery, it is necessary to have the following material:
A game of 32 cards
A cardboard (25 x 15 cm) perforated in the center, with a hole of 0.5 cm in diameter
approximately
A tube or a small opaque glass vial; the upper opening covered with a paper and perforated with a
hole of approximately 0.3 cm in diameter
A wooden puck thick enough to be pushed with the foot (3 cm high, 5 x 5)
cm for example)
A stopwatch
Test manual and registration sheet

IV.Sample
310 children between the ages of 6 and 14 from the community schools of Paris.

V. Application Standards
In order not to immediately enter into the test of dealing the cards with the maximum speed possible
We will require the subject, we have retained from R. Zazzo's battery two preliminary tests that do not enter.
in our calculation of the formula and the dominance index, but whose results we noted down for everyone
ways on the exam sheet. It is about "cutting" and "shuffling" the set of cards or deck.
In both movements, we note the 'active' hand. The way the subject proceeds can already put us
about the notice regarding what we are going to observe.
Here are the six tests that will serve to develop the formula and the prevalence index.

1
Deal the 32 cards:
Instruction
Now listen to what you are going to do. You are going to put the cards one by one on the table; like this, see, so fast
as you can" (demonstration with a speed that should correspond more or less to the possibilities
of the child). "They have to be taken out like this (show the pinching gesture between thumb and index finger) one by one, being careful to
do not take two at a time or drop them. So, as fast as you can. Prepare yourself well, you will start
When I tell you. Ready? Let's go!

Notation:
We note the "active" hand, whether right or left. We note whether the thumb of the other hand is working or not, and
everything that may be interesting. We stimulate speed, except of course if the child, nervous because of the
order to act quickly and by the march of the clock, whether more hurried than one could,
running the risk of dropping the deck at any moment. In such a case, it is advisable to calm him down,
encouraging him in a kind way, and if necessary, the test will need to be restarted once the child
he has regained serenity.
Every time two cards are dealt at once, we score +1 and add a second to the total time. The child
one must not pick up a fallen card from the floor or far away on the table, nor take back a card if one realizes having
given two at a time. As a general rule, one must also prohibit anything that could translate into a
systematic distribution of the cards on the table: for example, placing them side by side or
form a well-adjusted stack. Also prevent the movement of turning over the cards that have not been
fallen "back". The evaluator's interventions must be quick and prevent it from happening.
useless movement that would extend the execution time. Out of the entire battery, this card test is at
good insurance that most responds to the evaluator's attitude.
If the child drops the letter or an important part of it, we start the test again encouraging them, without
especially stimulate the speed.
We note the total time.
We ask the child to gather all the cards again or we will do it ourselves if we see that the child
he/she has difficulty doing it.
Now you are going to do the same, but with the other hand.
Identical instructions as the first time. Often the child will say that they can't do it, and indeed
Sometimes it is very difficult for him/her. We encourage him/her and note the way to proceed, if there is a place.

We will do three trials with each hand1.

To elaborate the laterality formula, we will note for this first point D or I according to the hand.
dominant e = if the granting times are equal or if they have, at most, a 2-second difference.
The "style" is also not significant in a decisive way.

1
A single test with each hand may suffice if the difference between them is clear (a ratio of 2 to 3 in speeds). Without
embargo, the learning or fatigue curves obtained by doing three trials with each hand often reveal facts
interesting, especially a left-handedness disguised by education. It is then confirmed a progressive improvement of the
yields of I, from one trial to another, while those of D remain constant or decrease.
2
2. Diadocokinesia (puppets)
Description
The forearm is vertical at a right angle to the arm held horizontally. The hand rotates at the wrist.
as quickly as possible (alternating movement of pronation and supination. Diadochokinesia =
successive movement.

Instruction
Now you are going to get up (we get up with the child and stand in front of him). You are going to do this, you see?
(puppet demonstration, arms separated from the body, forearm vertical) as fast as you can with the
hand("it doesn’t matter which" if you ask).
If the child moves their whole arm, we will say: "No, try not to move the elbow, just the hand, like this, you see?"
Observe the movement for a few seconds.
Good. Lower your arm. Now with the other hand.
Restart until a clear difference is observed or until we are sure that there isn't one.
try to observe the flexibility and speed of movement and not the synkinesis that may appear. But the
observation of synkinesias can help determine which hand is more flexible. Generally, the hand
less capable in diadochokinesia induces more clearly the synkinesias of the other. If the result is
doubtful, we will tell the child to sit down and we will have him start over with his elbow resting on the table.
One should not 'force' the results by wanting to reach a decision at all costs. In this case, it also
it will use the sign = in the annotation if necessary.
If one of the hands is shown to be especially 'bad' in this test, it should be noted.
The inability to perform the movement (adiadocokinesis) may hint at a disorder.
more serious than will be discovered then by a neurological examination.

3. Sighting
It is known that a single eye 'directs' vision without the subject themselves knowing it. The ocular direction, of order
cerebral, it is independent of sharpness.
The sighting test aims to discover the directing eye. The only material is a cardboard with a hole in it.
the center.

Introduction
Now listen to what I am going to ask you. Look, do you see the power outlet down there on the wall?
object or part of it in reduced size). I will give you this perforated cardstock and you will look at the taking of
current through the hole, thus (demonstration), arms extended and both eyes open. You have to
look with both eyes, do you understand?, both eyes open and arms outstretched; you will seek the shot of
current and when you see it you will slowly bring the poster board closer to your face always looking carefully at the shot of
current. Now, take the cardboard.
It should be verified from the beginning that the child really has both eyes open and be forced to.
to extend the arms well, which is not always easy to achieve with small children, nor with the weak and
paratonic.
The eye towards which the hole in the cardstock is directed is the 'director' eye.

3
 Now you are going to do the same, but looking at the other outlet down there (or any other
object in the room) holding the cardboard with one hand, with this" (opposite hand in relation to the
eye "director".
We noted the eye towards which the cardboard was brought in the second test. Then we restarted by
third time, changing position and aim again and making take the cardboard with the other hand.
And we noted for the third time the eye that directs vision. In total: three trials. In the first, the cardboard is
he has with both hands. In the second, with one hand, the opposite in relation to the eye determined as
director in the first rehearsal. In the third test, the poster board is held with the other hand. In each rehearsal.
we modify the orientation of the child and the object to look at.
The first test, with the cardboard in both hands, is usually enough to determine the dominant eye. The
Next, holding the cardboard with one hand and changing the orientation, they are used to test the
constancy of ocular direction.

Aiming
Aiming depends on numerous factors, not only on the ocular 'direction' like sighting, but also on the
visual acuity and especially the motility of the eyelids (ability to close one eye more easily)
than the other).

Introduction
Now you are going to look in this small jar to tell me what is inside, you see?, it only has this little one.
opening that you should bring closer to the eye like this (show it). This time you can close one eye." If we see that the child is
annoyed because he doesn't know how to close an eye, we suggest closing one with his hand.
We note the chosen eye, D or I. It sometimes happens that the child starts looking with one eye and then, not seeing
Well, it changes. It is evident that this also does not happen (like the change in the sighting) when the child
it has passed a certain level of organization. That is why it seemed interesting to us to note in that
case: =. Otherwise, we have found it very few times.

5. Hopscotch
Introduction
Do you know how to play hopscotch? (if it's a child, it will often be necessary to explain it to them). You will do
as if you were playing hopscotch, jumping on one foot until you reach this piece of wood and you will hit it
kicks to carry it gently along this line. Let's go.
Be careful to place the tejo so that it is no closer to one foot than the other, in order not to influence the
election. If it is insisted that the child stays well on one foot all the time and brings back the tejo
in front of him, if he had sent it too far in one go, advising him to jump very little
small ones and are asked to follow a line drawn on the floor (or the joint of the material, tiles, wood, etc.), the
the test will be more sensitive.
We noted the chosen foot spontaneously. Then we started the same thing with the other foot. If there is no
difference in styles, if the child is as agile to jump on one foot as on the other, we note =. If there is
little difference, it is interesting to ask the child if he generally tends to jump indifferently on one foot or if
Have you noticed that you prefer one of them.

6. Shooting:

4
 Instruction
Now you are going to give a strong kick to the tejo, as if it were a ball, to get it to the other side of the room.
loud and clear, don't be afraid to make noise.
Once again, care must be taken not to place the piece of wood closer to one foot than the other.
Note the chosen foot spontaneously. The test is repeated several times to ensure consistency.
With the hand or foot, we return the disk to the child, asking him to kick it as soon as he receives it. This means that
the examiner is able to throw the disc correctly in the direction of the child.
We note D, I or = according to the result. Generally, as the trial unfolds, the choice
it is clear. But naturally, it is important to consider that in a particularly trained child (by
For example, in playing soccer, the ability to kick with both feet can reveal a higher level.
the adult, it will be related to sports training. In school-aged children, that
Ambivalence is rarely found in cases where dominance is well established.

VI. Grading Standards

The establishment of the predominance formula consists of recording, always in the same order, the
predominance for the 6 points:
Hand: speed –diadoco
Eye aim
Pie hopscotch–shooting

This allows for a quick reading of the individual formula.

Manual dominance index

This index is established by the timing of delivering the cards, according to the formula:

time I time D
dominant hand time

Positive indices indicate right-handedness, negative ones indicate left-handedness. Index 0 indicates ambidexterity.
From 6 to 14 years old, we obtained indices from -1.5 to +1.6.
Agreeing that ambidexterity is defined by the indices between +0.3 and -0.3, the following is obtained
distribution given by table 1.

FRAME 1
Distribution of hand dominance indices in the card test

Age Number of Indices < -0.3 from -0.3 to +0.3 > +0.3
subjects (left-handed) ambidextrous (right-handed)

6 years 22 1 (5%) 52 inches 5

7 years 38 3 (8%) 42 inches 8

5
 8 years 38 23 inches 39" 8
9 years 41 18 inches 31 inches 7
10 years 39 18 inches 29” 2
11-12 years 66 15" 26 inches 14
13-14 years 61 14 inches 21 inches 8
The distribution of cards considered as a test of speed
It is interesting to know the average times for each age and for each hand, depending on whether it is about
right-handed, left-handed or ambidextrous. This way, the times obtained by a child can be confronted with the
averages obtained by children of their age, which will allow knowing if the time of the dominant hand
corresponds to the child's actual age or their mental age; and also, if the difference between the times of
both hands correspond to the average age in question. Table 2 presents the norms
differentials for left-handed, right-handed, and ambidextrous subjects, according to age.

TABLE 2
Time rules in the distribution test of the 32 cards

Average time of the Average time of the Average time of the

right-handed left-handed ambidextrous
Age
N Hand Hand N Hand Hand N Hand Hand
D I D I D I
6 years 12 36 inches
52 inches5 51" 36 inches6 53 inches55"
7 years 25 29” 42 inches8 41 inches30" 7 36" 38 inches
8 years 24 23" 39 inches8 33 inches25 inches7 36 inches34"
9 years 25 18" 31" 7 29" 22 inches9 29 inches28"
10 years 27 18 inches
29 inches2 27" 17" 10 29" 30 inches
11-12 years 49 15 inches
26" 14 27 inches16 inches3 23" 23 inches
13-14 years 48 14 inches
21" 8 19 inches13" 5 23” 21"

Looking at table 2, we find that left-handed people are not slower than right-handed people. The hand
the left-handed dominance (left) is as fast as the right-handed dominance (right).
The ambidextrous, on the other hand, are generally very slow; their times correspond, roughly speaking, to
the children with non-dominant hands who are lateralized.
To have a measure of the dispersion of the results at each age, we have established the median and
the Q1-Q3 values for each hand (table 3). Considering only right-handed and left-handed individuals, the distributions

6
 corresponding to the dominant hand and the non-dominant hand, are clearly differentiated better, over
everything for the first age groups examined.

TABLE 3
Values of the medians, of quartiles 1 and 3 of the card distribution test (excluding ambidextrous individuals)

Dominant hand Non-dominant hand

Number of
Age subjects Dispersion Dispersion
Median Median
(Q1- Q3) (Q1- Q3)

6 years 17 35 +/- 3 32–38 50 +/- 5.5 45-56

7 years 33 28 +/- 4 26–34 40 +/- 5.5 35–46
8 years 32 24 +/- 1.5 18–27 34 +/- 4.5 31–40
9 years 32 19 +/- 2 17–21 32 +/- 4 27–35
10 years 29 18 +/- 2 16–20 30 +/- 2 27–31
11-12 years 63 15 +/- 1.5 14-17 26 +/- 4 22-30
13-14 years 56 14 +/- 1.5 12–15 24 +/- 2.5 20–25

VII. Measurement and clinical qualities

The fidelity problem is not presented here in the same way as for efficiency tests. It
It aims to make a direct verification, with the help of tests very similar to the trials.
neurological. We will make three observations:
These tests, of a neurological type, often present certain difficulties for notation; the
Verification is not always easy, and the experimenter needs some training for the notation.
qualitative aspects of some points, especially regarding diadochokinesis and hopscotch.
2. Since the prevalence formula varies statistically depending on age, the results
they may not be faithful to a particular individual during their development, in case that
its homogeneous dominance right is not established from childhood.
Finally, one of the tests in the battery, the card distribution, leads to the measurement of a
performance; and since it is the comparative performance of both hands that serves to determine the
index of manual dominance and qualitative notation (right, left, or ambidextrous), could
check the fidelity of that performance.

7
 It is evident that a subject qualified as 'ambidextrous' by that test, if slightly improved the
single-handed performance can change category in no time. For example: If in
place of two seconds difference between the times of both hands, there are 3 or 4 seconds, it will be
noted as right-handed or left-handed instead of ambidextrous. One must be prudent, therefore, in the estimation of
a little differentiated individual result.

VIII. Sensitivity
This battery is obviously much less sensitive than those that come with a large number of tests.
As the descriptive formula is calculated based on just six tests, it is understood that it
they mix in their results subjects that would be differentiated from each other with one more battery
important. We have already said why we have limited ourselves to those six tests, but it is evident that the
the reasons for group comparison that have guided us are not valid for individual exams and
that the limitation of the battery slightly favors the subtlety and precision of the results obtained, such
as we sometimes wish to establish them in exams of subjects that pose specific problems.
To achieve greater accuracy in individual results, we currently believe it would be a matter of
add at least one test at each anatomical level studied from those found in the battery
translated
1. For the hand: a strength test (dynamometer) - notation of the strongest hand;
2. For the eye: the ocular convergence test – notation of the eye that remains longer;
3. For the foot: a combined test of balance and strength: getting up on a stool without using the arms.
Notation of the chosen foot to step up.
The 3rd test of each level would reinforce the indication obtained by one of the other two in case of
discrepancy and would sway the notation towards the side that would prevail then two times out of three.

IX. Validity
It is worth explaining here what is meant by the validity of a test battery of this kind:
Manual predominance
In our collaboration with Dr. Ajuriaguerra, we initially had the impression that
our tests were not valid to the extent that the predominance, especially the manual,
we established for such or such child, it was not confirmed either by the anamnesis or by the tests
neurological muscle tone tests, nor by other motor or psychomotor tests whose results were
exposed by our colleagues. Within the consulted group, we were sometimes the only ones who
we affirmed that such a child was left-handed or ambidextrous.

We will review each of those main points one by one:

a) Concordance with the history. We know the difficulties that sometimes exist in specifying certain
points of the individual history of the child we are examining and obtaining, furthermore, reports
exactly about the other members of their family. However, we believe that efforts should be made to obtain
those reports. Because it is obvious that a child known by the family as left-handed since childhood
it is not exactly the same as one whose left-handedness (revealed in the laboratory setting) never
It was evident to the family. Additionally, a reeducated left-handed child, according to the applied procedures.
and the ages at which reeducation took place will not be the same as an untrained left-handed person nor
in the family environment nor in the school. Whatever our results may be, the reports
obtained from the anamnesis should allow for the establishment of various categories of subjects that then
they should be compared to ours. From the clinical point of view, it must be taken into account that
8
 The report obtained from the anamnesis is as important as the one provided by the test. In the fact to
at times they differ, but this proves that we cannot do without either the anamnesis or the test; we will see
later why.

b) Concordance with neurological tests (extensibility of the limbs). These tests,

practiced by Dr. Ajuriaguerra, consist of exploring, at the level of the fist, elbow, and shoulder, the
comparative extensibility of the two upper limbs. In principle, a right-handed subject has
a lesser extensibility to the right due to a greater residual muscle tone, occurring
Hello from the age of 4-5 years.
What that neurological examination attests to must, therefore, be related to the activities.
habitual. A subject, even if they were left-handed or still are somewhat, and to whom they were forced to
using the right hand, it may show a more pronounced residual tone towards the side that has been
dominant fact. In reality, things are infinitely complex and there are sometimes discrepancies.
extremes and other times such a small difference that, if a global index of tonicity were to be calculated
muscular at different anatomical levels, one would often obtain indices of a slight
lateralization. In certain cases, however, the difference is very clear. These are cases of
entirely normal evolution of a homogeneous right-handed person, or of a selective neurological condition
that I have left at half body, right or left, with a pathological hypermobility in l
level of the studied joints.
Anyway, we must retain from those neurological exams:
There are great individual variations and often significant discrepancies according to the levels.
studied;
That many times, in clearly pathological cases, there is the possibility that the
obtained reports involve a different dimension that is related to the
usual use of one hand.

If there is a disparity between our examination and the neurological one, it also demonstrates this
case, where neither one nor the other can be dispensed with. Only if there was a concordance
permanent, you could choose the faster procedure and select one of the two.
Sometimes the child already shows skill in front of us, or at least is ambidextrous, while still being
in re-education for the right, after a encephalopathic accident that causes him
a still marked hyperextensibility on the right side. The educational advice depends
then from the child's motor and mental levels, from their actual age and also from their integration
affective. It is advisable to be extremely cautious, and the decision should only be made after an examination.
neurological assessment, conducted by the specialist (child neuropsychiatrist).

c) Concordance with other motor or psychomotor tests. Until now it was something to find
In France, a completely left-handed person, even for writing. Like the tendency not to oppose to
the stutter was becoming more pronounced in family education and even in school, we found
already in 1953 a much higher number of left-handed children, not purposefully reeducated, than
during the year 1950. Perhaps this is due to the randomness of the contrast.
The motor activities that we propose to the vast majority of children, with the batteries
classic motor tests, being comparable to those learned in the family or school environment,

9
 results, relating those from the right hand with those from the left, those from the side are better
right in terms of style or efficiency.
The activity of dealing cards with the greatest speed is not usually learned or common.
That is why there is little agreement between her and the results of anything related to pencil handling.
pen or another instrument of more or less common use. In addition, that test, in a study
systematic of the existing relationships between the speed of execution and the predominance of both manual
Globally, it has shown sensitivity regarding the type of preponderance.
This last point seems to fully justify the use of the test and its value.
diagnosis. It presents itself as irreplaceable, providing a report that does not offer any
another one of those that are proposed to children with the other motor tests; and a report that is
precisely what we wish to obtain since the execution of the task itself is very...
influenced by the predominance.
In conclusion, if the results obtained regarding manual dominance in the first test
they do not agree with the anamnesis, nor with the neurological examination, nor with the other tests
engines, if they do not appear in many statistically validated cases according to that agreement, then
are even more important and valuable, since our systematic study of predominance has in
the effect, the aim of discerning a driving formula that may have played an important role
in the course of the child's development.
The second test, that of diadochokinesis, does not pose any validity problems. We have already
It is noted that the verification being carried out is delicate and requires certain training.

Ocular predominance
There are quite a few controversies in the literature regarding the validity of the predominance test.
ocular through the sighting and aiming tests. The criticism that has been made of the sighting test
it would be too influenced by motility factors, particularly by the tonic disposition, and
that she would not inform us with certainty about the 'true' ocular predominance, that is to say in the
plan of the cerebral hemispheres. To verify that 'true' ocular predominance has been
proposed more accurate tests, especially Jasper's 'Phi-test'.
On our part, we applied the sighting test to a large number of normal and sick children.
After hearing those criticisms; we still believe that the notation made on that basis is a
valid and necessary measure for our purposes; indeed, we are interested in knowing if the predominance
ocular can change depending on certain postural arrangements; for example, if a
change of the dominant eye depending on the hand used. Because in most cases, in the
a child's exam will be very important to know if during the course of the activities they should carry out
There will be a stable and well-structured motor adaptation. In that case, whatever it may be
purposeful induced solicitation in the experiment will react in a constant, stable manner if
the ocular predominance is strongly established. Otherwise, the response will be variable depending
from the solicitation: being the directing eye the right when the right hand is at play and the left
when the left acts. This is what is important to know and what is valued:
a) By the genetic study that has shown us that ambivalence, the undifferentiation of
ocular dominance is really very rare from the age of 13-14 in normals;
b) Due to the pathology, where an undifferentiated predominance of the ocular is found much later,
in the sense of our test.

10
 In the aiming test, eyelid mobility is involved; the child who cannot close one of their eyes,
it will bring the tube opening closer to the side of the eye that remains open. The possibility of closing one eye with
the hand may not provide a greater security of choice, because it could simply be the hand
free the one that determines the homologous choice of the eye to be closed. In reality, it is not a test of
not the ocular predominance per se, but the predominance of facial mobility at the level of the eyes, what
which involves the same advantages and also the same disadvantages as those that have been pointed out
regarding the sighting test.

3. Predominance at the level of the lower limbs

We have studied the predominance of the lower limb, since we know that from the point of view
neurological, in a normal subject with homogeneous right predominance, the lateralization of the limb
The inferior is equally right from the point of view of extensibility at the joint level.
Nevertheless, the problems of psychomotricity and the organization of perceptual motor skills that are usually
The child psychologist is presented with the study of the ocular predominance in the foreground.
manually, in isolation or in their mutual relationships. That's why we have not systematically studied the
predominance at the level of the lower limb.
Regarding the validity of that notation, we note that we have never found a disagreement between
our notes and the knowledge that the child himself had of the foot with which he preferred to jump and kick
the ball, except in exceptional cases where no preference was indicated, while for us
was presented to us.

11
 LATERAL DOMINANCE BATTERY
(Nadine Galifret-Granjon)

REGISTRATION FORM

Names and Surnames:....................................................................................

Age: .......................... Grade: .......................... Date: ........................

a. Cut
b. Shuffle
(The time spent and the active hand are noted in each case)

Speed 1 ... 3 .......... 5 …………

2 ………… 4 ... 6 …………

2. Active member: …………………………………

Dominant hand: Right ... Left .......... Ambidextrous

1 ………… (eye director)

3. Sighting 2 ………… (the opposite hand to the directing eye is used)
3 ………… (the other hand is used)

4. Chosen Eye Targeting: ………………………………….

Dominant eye: Right ... Left Ambivalent

Hopscotch Chosen pie: ……………………………………

6. Selected ShootingPie: ……………………………………

Dominant pie: Law ... Left Ambivalent

12