Experimental Brain Research

, Volume 204, Issue 3, pp 431–446 | Cite as

Crossing the hands is more confusing for females than males

  • Michelle L. Cadieux
  • Michael Barnett-Cowan
  • David I. Shore
Research Article

Abstract

A conflict between an egocentric and an external reference frame can be highlighted by examining the marked deficit observed with tactile temporal order judgments (TOJ) when the hands are crossed. The anecdotally-reported large individual differences in the magnitude of this crossed-hands deficit were explored here by testing a large group of participants (48; 24 female). Given that females have been shown to be more visually dependent than males in the potentially related rod-and-frame test (RFT), we hypothesized that females would show a larger influence of the external reference frame (i.e., a larger crossed-hands deficit). As predicted, female participants produced larger tactile TOJ deficits compared to our male participants. We also administered the RFT in these participants with hands crossed and uncrossed. Crossing the hands increased the effect of the frame in the RFT, more so for females than males, further highlighting the potential difference in the way that each sex accommodates reference frame conflicts. Finally, examining the relation between the two tasks revealed a significant correlation, with larger frame effects associated with larger crossed-hands TOJ deficits, but this only held for males. We speculate that sex-specific differences in multisensory processing and spatial ability may explain why females are less able to disambiguate a crossed-hands posture than are males.

Keywords

Crossed-hands Egocentric Gravity perception Reference frame Rod-and-frame Sex difference Temporal order judgments Touch Vision 

References

  1. Azañón E, Soto-Faraco S (2007) Alleviating the ‘crossed-hands’ deficit by seeing uncrossed rubber hands. Exp Brain Res 182:537–548CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Barnett-Cowan M (2009) Multisensory spatial perception: sex and neurological differences. Ph.D. thesis. York University, TorontoGoogle Scholar
  3. Barnett-Cowan M, Harris LR (2008) Perceived self-orientation in allocentric and egocentric space: effects of visual and physical tilt on saccadic and tactile measures. Brain Res 1242:231–243CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Barnett-Cowan M, Dyde RT, Thompson C, Harris LR (2010) Multisensory determinants of orientation perception: task specific sex differences. Eur J Neurosci 31(10):1899–1907CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Batista AP, Buneo CA, Snyder LH, Andersen RA (1999) Reach plans in eye-centered coordinates. Science 285:257–260CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Berthoz A, Viaud-Delmon I (1999) Multisensory integration in spatial orientation. Curr Opin Neurobiol 9:708–712CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Bock RD, Kolakowski D (1973) Further evidence of sex-linked major-gene influence on human spatial visualizing ability. Am J Hum Genet 25:1PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Bogo N, Winget C, Gleser GC (1970) Ego defenses and perceptual styles. Percept Mot Skills 30:599–605PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Botvinick M, Cohen J (1998) Rubber hands ‘feel’ touch that eyes see. Nature 391:756CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Bridgeman B, Peery S, Anand S (1997) Interaction of cognitive and sensorimotor maps of visual space. Percept Psychophys 59:456–469PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Butler T, Imperato-McGinley J, Pan H, Voyer D, Cordero J, Zhu YS, Stern E, Silbersweig D (2006) Sex differences in mental rotation: top-down versus bottom-up processing. Neuroimage 32:445–465CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Cavanna AE, Trimble MR (2006) The precuneus: a review of its functional anatomy and behavioural correlates. Brain 129:564–583CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Chaudhury S, Eisinger JM, Hao L, Hicks J, Chivukula R, Turano KA (2004) Visual illusion in virtual world alters women’s target-directed walking. Exp Brain Res 159:360–369CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Collaer ML, Hines M (1995) Human behavioral sex-differences—a role for gonadal-hormones during early development. Psychol Bull 118:55–107CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Craig JC, Belser AN (2006) The crossed-hands deficit in tactile temporal-order judgments: the effect of training. Perception 35:1561–1572CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Darlington CL, Smith PF (1998) Further evidence for gender differences in circularvection. J Vestib Res Equilib Orient 8:151–153Google Scholar
  17. Dassonville P, Bala JK (2004) Perception, action, and Roelofs effect: a mere illusion of dissociation. PLoS Biol 2:1936–1945CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Dassonville P, Bridgeman B, Bala JK, Thiem P, Sampanes A (2004) The induced Roelofs effect: two visual systems or the shift of a single reference frame? Vision Res 44:603–611CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Drew F (1896) Attention: experimental and critical. Am J Psychol 7:533–573CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Dyde RT, Jenkin MR, Harris LR (2006) The subjective visual vertical and the perceptual upright. Exp Brain Res 173:612–622CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Finney DJ (1971) Probit analysis. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  22. Gallace A, Spence C (2005) Visual capture of apparent limb position influences tactile temporal order judgments. Neurosci Lett 379:63–68CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Gallace A, Soto-Faraco S, Dalton P, Kreukniet B, Spence C (2008) Response requirements modulate tactile spatial congruency effects. Exp Brain Res 191:171–186CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Garron DC (1970) Sex-linked, recessive inheritance of spatial and numerical abilities, and Turner’s syndrome. Psychol Rev 77:147–152CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Gorbet DJ, Sergio LE (2007) Preliminary sex differences in human cortical BOLD fMRI activity during the preparation of increasingly complex visually guided movements. Eur J Neurosci 25:1228–1239CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Gormley GJ, Dempster M, Best R (2008) Right-left discrimination among medical students: questionnaire and psychometric study. Br Med J 337:a2826CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Gouchie C, Kimura D (1991) The relationship between testosterone levels and cognitive-ability patterns. Psychoneuroendocrinology 16:323–334CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Gron G, Wunderlich AP, Spitzer M, Tomczak R, Riepe MW (2000) Brain activation during human navigation: gender-different neural networks as substrate of performance. Nat Neurosci 3:404–408CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Gross F (1959) The role of set in perception of the upright. J Pers 27:95–103CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Hampson E (1995) Spatial cognition in humans—possible modulation by androgens and estrogens. J Psychiatr Neurosci 20:397–404Google Scholar
  31. Hannay HJ, Ciaccia PJ, Kerr JW, Barrett D (1990) Self-report of right-left confusion in college men and women. Percept Mot Skills 70:451–457CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Harris LJ, Gitterman SR (1978) University professors’ self-descriptions of left-right confusability: sex and handedness differences. Percept Mot Skills 47:819–823PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Hartlage LC (1970) Sex-linked inheritance of spatial ability. Percept Mot Skills 31:610PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Heed T, Röder B (2010) Common anatomical and external coding for hands and feet in tactile attention: evidence from event-related potentials. J Cogn Neurosci 22:184–202CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Holmes NP, Spence C (2005) Visual bias of unseen hand position with a mirror: spatial and temporal factors. Exp Brain Res 166:489–497CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Holmes NP, Sanabria D, Calvert GA, Spence C (2006) Multisensory interactions follow the hands across the midline: evidence from a non-spatial visual-tactile congruency task. Brain Res 1077:108–115CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Howard IP (1982) Human visual orientation. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  38. Hyde JS, Geiringer ER, Yen WM (1975) On the empirical relation between spatial ability and sex differences in other aspects of cognitive performance. Multivar Behav Res 10Google Scholar
  39. Inhelder B, Piaget J (1999) The growth of logical thinking from childhood to adolescence. Routledge, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  40. Jordan K, Wüstenberg T, Heinze HJ, Peters M, Jäncke L (2002) Women and men exhibit different cortical activation patterns during mental rotation tasks. Neuropsychologia 40:2397–2408CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Kennedy RS, Hettinger LJ, Harm DL, Ordy JM, Dunlap WP (1996) Psychophysical scaling of circular vection (CV) produced by optokinetic (OKN) motion: individual differences and effects of practice. J Vestib Res Equilib Orient 6:331–341Google Scholar
  42. Kobor I, Furedi L, Kovacs G, Spence C, Vidnyanszky Z (2006) Back-to-front: improved tactile discrimination performance in the space you cannot see. Neurosci Lett 400:163–167CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Linn MC, Petersen AC (1985) Emergence and characterization of sex-differences in spatial ability—a meta-analysis. Child Dev 56:1479–1498CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Lloyd DM, Shore DI, Spence C, Calvert GA (2003) Multisensory representation of limb position in human premotor cortex. Nat Neurosci 6:17–18CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Luyat M (1997) Subjective vertical versus postural vertical: a note on the study of perception of the vertical dimension. Annee Psychol 97:433–447Google Scholar
  46. MacLeod JW, Lawrence MA, McConnell MM, Eskes GA, Klein RM, Shore DI (2010) Appraising the ANT: psychometric and theoretical considerations of the attention network test. Neuropsychology (in press)Google Scholar
  47. Maravita A, Spence C, Kennett S, Driver J (2002) Tool-use changes multimodal spatial interactions between vision and touch in normal humans. Cognition 83:B25–B34CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Mittelstaedt H (1988) The information processing structure of the subjective vertical. A cybernetic bridge between its psychophysics and its neurobiology. In: Marko H, Hauske G, Struppler A (eds) Processing structures for perception and action. VCH Weinheim, pp 217–263Google Scholar
  49. Moffat SD, Hampson E (1996) A curvilinear relationship between testosterone and spatial cognition in humans: possible influence of hand preference. Psychoneuroendocrinology 21:323–337CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. Ofte SH, Hugdahl K (2002) Right-left discrimination in male and female, young and old subjects. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol 24:82–92CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. Parsons TD, Larson P, Kratz K, Thiebaux M, Bluestein B, Buckwalter JG, Rizzo AA (2004) Sex differences in mental rotation and spatial rotation in a virtual environment. Neuropsychologia 42:555–562CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. Pavani F, Spence C, Driver J (2000) Visual capture of touch: out-of-the-body experiences with rubber gloves. Psychol Sci 11:353–359CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. Peters M, Lehmann W, Takahira S, Takeuchi Y, Jordan K (2006) Mental rotation test performance in four cross-cultural samples (N = 3367): overall sex differences and the role of academic program in performance. Cortex 42:1005–1014CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. Pouget A, Ducom JC, Torri J, Bavelier D (2002) Multisensory spatial representations in eye-centered coordinates for reaching. Cognition 83:B1–B11CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. Reinking R, Goldstein G, Houston BK (1974) Cognitive style, proprioceptive skills, task set, stress, and the rod-and-frame test of field orientation. J Pers Soc Psychol 30:807–811CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. Resnick SM, Gottesman II, Berenbaum SA, Bouchard TJ (1986) Early hormonal influences on cognitive-functioning in congenital adrenal-hyperplasia. Dev Psychol 22:191–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Rizzolatti G, Fogassi L, Gallese V (2002) Motor and cognitive functions of the ventral premotor cortex. Curr Opin Neurobiol 12:149–154CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. Röder B, Rosler F, Spence C (2004) Early vision impairs tactile perception in the blind. Curr Biol 14:121–124PubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. Röder B, Kusmierek A, Spence C, Schicke T (2007) Developmental vision determines the reference frame for the multisensory control of action. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 104:4753–4758CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. Röder B, Foecker J, Hoetting K, Spence C (2008) Spatial coordinate systems for tactile spatial attention depend on developmental vision: evidence from event-related potentials in sighted and congenitally blind adult humans. Eur J Neurosci 28:475–483CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. Roelofs C (1935) Optische localization. Ach Augenheilkunde 109:395–415Google Scholar
  62. Sadato N, Ibanez V, Deiber MP, Hallett M (2000) Gender difference in premotor activity during active tactile discrimination. Neuroimage 11:532–540CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. Sanabria D, Soto-Faraco S, Spence C (2005) Spatiotemporal interactions between audition and touch depend on hand posture. Exp Brain Res 165:505–514CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. Sato H, Sando I, Takahashi H (1992) Computer-aided 3-dimensional measurement of the human vestibular apparatus. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 107:405–409PubMedGoogle Scholar
  65. Sherman JA (1967) Problem of sex differences in space perception and aspects of intellectual functioning. Psychological Rev 74:290–299CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Shore DI, Stanford L, MacInnes WJ, Klein RM, Brown RE (2001) Of mice and men: virtual Hebb-Williams mazes permit comparison of spatial learning across species. Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci 1:83–89CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. Shore DI, Spry E, Spence C (2002) Confusing the mind by crossing the hands. Cogn Brain Res 14:153–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Shore DI, Gray K, Spry E, Spence C (2005) Spatial modulation of tactile temporal-order judgments. Perception 34:1251–1262CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  69. Shore DI, Gallace A, Mimnagh K, Spence C (2006) Assessing the frames of references involved in the crossed hands temporal order judgments deficit: the role of response demands. Paper presented at the International Multisensory Research Forum, Dublin, Ireland. www.imrf.info/2006/186
  70. Shute VJ, Pellegrino JW, Hubert L, Reynolds RW (1983) The relationship between androgen levels and human spatial abilities. Bull Psychon Soc 21:465–468Google Scholar
  71. Soto-Faraco S, Ronald A, Spence C (2004) Tactile selective attention and body posture: assessing the multisensory contributions of vision and proprioception. Percept Psychophys 66:1077–1094PubMedGoogle Scholar
  72. Spence C, Shore DI, Klein RM (2001) Multisensory prior entry. J Exp Psychol Gen 130:799–832CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. Stafford RE (1961) Sex differences in spatial visualization as evidence of sex-linked inheritance. Percept Mot Skills 13:428CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Thomson T, Hugdahl K, Ersland L, Barndon R, Lundervold A, Smievoll AI, Roscher BE, Sundberg H (2000) Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) study of sex differences in a mental rotation task. Med Sci Monit 6:1186–1196Google Scholar
  75. Tremblay L, Elliott D (2007) Sex differences in judging self-orientation: the morphological horizon and body pitch. BMC Neurosci 8:6CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  76. Tremblay L, Elliott D, Starkes JL (2004) Gender differences in perception of self-orientation: software or hardware? Perception 33:329–337CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  77. Viaud-Delmon I, Ivanenko YP, Berthoz A, Jouvent R (1998) Sex, lies and virtual reality. Nat Neurosci 1:15–16CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  78. Voyer D, Voyer S, Bryden MP (1995) Magnitude of sex-differences in spatial abilities—a metaanalysis and consideration of critical variables. Psychol Bull 117:250–270CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  79. Wada M, Yamamoto S, Kitazawa S (2004) Effects of handedness on tactile temporal order judgment. Neuropsychologia 42:1887–1895CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  80. Walter E, Dassonville P (2008) Visuospatial contextual processing in the parietal cortex: an fMRI investigation of the induced Roelofs effect. Neuroimage 42:1686–1697CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  81. Weiss E, Siedentopf CM, Hofer A, Deisenhammer EA, Hoptman MJ, Kremser C, Golaszewski S, Felber S, Fleischhacker WW, Delazer M (2003) Sex differences in brain activation pattern during a visuospatial cognitive task: a functional magnetic resonance imaging study in healthy volunteers. Neurosci Lett 344:169–172CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  82. Wichmann FA, Hill J (2001) The psychometric function: I. Fitting, sampling, and goodness of fit. Percept Psychophys 63:1293–1313PubMedGoogle Scholar
  83. Witkin HA, Asch SE (1948) Studies in space orientation IV. Further experiments on perception of the upright with displaced visual fields. J Exp Psychol 28:762–782CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Witkin HA, Goodenough DR (1981) Cognitive styles, essence and origins. International Universities Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  85. Witkin HA, Lewis HB, Hertzman M, Machover K, Meissner PB, Wapner S (1954) Personality through perception. An experimental and clinical study. Harper, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  86. Wolf SM (1973) Difficulties in right-left discrimination in a normal population. Arch Neurol 29:128–129PubMedGoogle Scholar
  87. Yamamoto S, Kitazawa S (2001) Reversal of subjective temporal order due to arm crossing. Nat Neurosci 4:759–765CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  88. Yen WM (1975) Sex-linked major-gene influences on selected types of spatial performance. Behav Genet 5:281–298CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  89. Zar JH (1999) Biostatistical analysis, 2nd edn. Prentice-Hall, Englewood CliffsGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michelle L. Cadieux
    • 1
  • Michael Barnett-Cowan
    • 2
    • 3
  • David I. Shore
    • 1
  1. 1.Multisensory Perception Lab, Department of Psychology, Neuroscience & BehaviourMcMaster UniversityHamiltonCanada
  2. 2.Multisensory Integration Laboratory, Centre for Vision Research, Department of PsychologyYork UniversityTorontoCanada
  3. 3.Department of Human Perception, Cognition and ActionMax Planck Institute for Biological CyberneticsTübingenGermany

Personalised recommendations