Search

Abstract How stress affects functional hemispheric asymmetries is relevant because stress represents a risk factor for the development of mental disorders and various mental disorders are associated with atypical lateralization. Using three lateralization tasks, we investigated whether functional hemispheric asymmetries in the form of hemispheric dominance for language (verbal dichotic listening task), emotion processing (emotional dichotic listening task), and visuo-spatial attention (line bisection task) were affected by acute stress in healthy adults. One hundred twenty right-handed men and women performed these lateralization tasks in randomized order after exposure to a mild online stressor (i.e., an online variant of the Trier Social Stress Test (TSST), TSST-OL) and a non-stressful online control task (friendly TSST-OL, fTSST-OL) in a within-subjects design. Importantly, the verbal and the emotional dichotic listening tasks were presented online whereas the line bisection task was completed in paper–pencil form. During these tasks, we found the expected hemispheric asymmetries, indicating that online versions of both the verbal and the emotional dichotic listening task can be used to measure functional hemispheric asymmetries in language and emotion processing remotely. Even though subjective and physiological markers confirmed the success of the online stress manipulation, replicating previous studies, we found no stress-induced effect on functional hemispheric asymmetries. Thus, in healthy participants, functional hemispheric asymmetries do not seem to change flexibly in response to acute stress.

Compared to the in-person Trier Social Stress Test (TSST), virtual reality (VR) variants reduce resource-intensity and improve standardization but induce stress with smaller effect sizes. However, higher cortisol reactivity is given for more immersive TSST-VRs. Immersivity depends on the VR-system, but perceived immersion may be targeted by exposure to, or interaction with the VR. We investigated whether stress reactivity towards the openly accessible OpenTSST VR can be enhanced by prior exposure to a sensorimotor game completed in VR as mediated by increased immersion. Therefore, N = 58 healthy participants underwent the OpenTSST VR or its inbuilt control condition (placebo TSST-VR, pTSST-VR). Beforehand, participants completed a sensorimotor game either in VR or in real life. Stress was measured by means of self-reports, salivary cortisol concentrations, and salivary alpha-amylase (sAA) activity. Perceived immersion was assessed with the Igroup Presence Questionnaire (IPQ). The TSST-VR-group showed higher subjective stress than the pTSST-VR-group. Even though area under the curve measures indicated significant differences in cortisol levels between TSST-VR and pTSST-VR, this effect was not replicated in omnibus-analyses. Likewise, sAA was not responsive to stress. Our data suggests the OpenTSST VR does not reliably trigger physiological stress reactivity. Likewise, participants playing the VR-game before exposure to the TSST-VR did not show enhanced stress reactivity. Importantly, playing the VR-game did not lead to increased immersion (indicated by the IPQ), either. The key question resulting from our study is which manipulation may be fruitful to obtain a comparable stress response toward the TSST-VR compared to the in-person TSST.

Abstract: Introduction: The Stress Overload Scale (SOS; Amirkhan, 2012, 2018) was introduced as a two-factorial self-report measure of stress to overcome limitations of other scales. Methods: We developed a German translation of the SOS and validated it in addition to a short version and an extra-short version. Furthermore, we tested whether manipulating the time frame introduced as retention interval in the instructions affected its psychometric properties. Results: Using two independent age-heterogeneous convenience samples (Ntotal = 1,239), we found good psychometric properties for a modified German short version of the SOS-S (SOS-S-G) and a new extra-short version (SOS-XS-G), but not for the German long version of the SOS. Moreover, manipulating the time frame of the SOS did not affect its psychometric quality. Discussion The SOS enriches the repertoire of self-report measures of stress as it captures the nonpathological core facets of stress in line with theoretical stress conceptualizations.

Abstract The development of handedness and other form of functional asymmetries is not yet understood in its critical determinants. Early life factors (e.g., birth weight, birth order) have been discussed to contribute to individual manifestations of functional asymmetries. However, large-scale data such as the UK Biobank suggest that the variance in handedness that is explained by early life factors is minimal. Additionally, atypical handedness has been linked to clinical outcomes such as neurodevelopmental and psychiatric disorders. Against the background of this triad, the current study investigated associations between different forms of functional asymmetries and (a) early life factors as well as (b) clinical outcomes. Functional asymmetries were determined by means of a deep phenotyping approach which notably extends previous work. In our final sample of N = 598 healthy participants, the different variables were tested for associations by means of linear regression models and group comparisons (i.e., ANOVAs and Chi-squared tests). Confirming previous findings from larger cohorts with shallow phenotyping, we found that birth factors do not explain a substantial amount of variance in functional asymmetries. Likewise, functional asymmetries did not seem to have comprehensive predictive power concerning clinical outcomes in our healthy participants. Future studies may further investigate postulated relations in healthy and clinical samples while acknowledging deep phenotyping of laterality.

Abstract Background In the general population, 10.6% of people favor their left hand over the right for motor tasks. Previous research suggests higher prevalence of atypical (left-, mixed-, or non-right-) handedness in (i) twins compared to singletons, and in (ii) monozygotic compared to dizygotic twins. Moreover, (iii) studies have shown a higher rate of handedness concordance in monozygotic compared to dizygotic twins, in line with genetic factors playing a role for handedness. Methods By means of a systematic review, we identified 59 studies from previous literature and performed three sets of random effects meta-analyses on (i) twin-to-singleton Odds Ratios (21 studies, n = 189,422 individuals) and (ii) monozygotic-to-dizygotic twin Odds Ratios (48 studies, n = 63,295 individuals), both times for prevalence of left-, mixed-, and non-right-handedness. For monozygotic and dizygotic twin pairs we compared (iii) handedness concordance Odds Ratios (44 studies, n = 36,217 twin pairs). We also tested for potential effects of moderating variables, such as sex, age, the method used to assess handedness, and the twins’ zygosity. Results We found (i) evidence for higher prevalence of left- (Odds Ratio = 1.40, 95% Confidence Interval = [1.26, 1.57]) and non-right- (Odds Ratio = 1.36, 95% Confidence Interval = [1.22, 1.52]), but not mixed-handedness (Odds Ratio = 1.08, 95% Confidence Interval = [0.52, 2.27]) among twins compared to singletons. We further showed a decrease in Odds Ratios in more recent studies (post-1975: Odds Ratio = 1.30, 95% Confidence Interval = [1.17, 1.45]) compared to earlier studies (pre-1975: Odds Ratio = 1.90, 95% Confidence Interval = [1.59–2.27]). While there was (ii) no difference between monozygotic and dizygotic twins regarding prevalence of left- (Odds Ratio = 0.98, 95% Confidence Interval = [0.89, 1.07]), mixed- (Odds Ratio = 0.96, 95% Confidence Interval = [0.46, 1.99]), or non-right-handedness (Odds Ratio = 1.01, 95% Confidence Interval = [0.91, 1.12]), we found that (iii) handedness concordance was elevated among monozygotic compared to dizygotic twin pairs (Odds Ratio = 1.11, 95% Confidence Interval = [1.06, 1.18]). By means of moderator analyses, we did not find evidence for effects of potentially confounding variables. Conclusion We provide the largest and most comprehensive meta-analysis on handedness in twins. Although a raw, unadjusted analysis found a higher prevalence of left- and non-right-, but not mixed-handedness among twins compared to singletons, left-handedness was substantially more prevalent in earlier than in more recent studies. The single large, recent study which included birth weight, Apgar score and gestational age as covariates found no twin-singleton difference in handedness rate, but these covariates could not be included in the present meta-analysis. Together, the secular shift and the influence of covariates probably make it unsafe to conclude that twinning has a genuine relationship to handedness.