Gessa Berretz

Bio: Gessa Berretz is an academic researcher from Ruhr University Bochum. The author has contributed to research in topics: Population & Footedness. The author has an hindex of 1, co-authored 1 publications receiving 13 citations.

Four meta-analyses across 164 studies on atypical footedness prevalence and its relation to handedness.

Abstract: Human lateral preferences, such as handedness and footedness, have interested researchers for decades due to their pronounced asymmetries at the population level. While there are good estimates on the prevalence of handedness in the population, there is no large-scale estimation on the prevalence of footedness. Furthermore, the relationship between footedness and handedness still remains elusive. Here, we conducted meta-analyses with four different classification systems for footedness on 145,135 individuals across 164 studies including new data from the ALSPAC cohort. The study aimed to determine a reliable point estimate of footedness, to study the association between footedness and handedness, and to investigate moderating factors influencing footedness. We showed that the prevalence of atypical footedness ranges between 12.10% using the most conservative criterion of left-footedness to 23.7% including all left- and mixed-footers as a single non-right category. As many as 60.1% of left-handers were left-footed whereas only 3.2% of right-handers were left-footed. Males were 4.1% more often non-right-footed compared to females. Individuals with psychiatric and neurodevelopmental disorders exhibited a higher prevalence of non-right-footedness. Furthermore, the presence of mixed-footedness was higher in children compared to adults and left-footedness was increased in athletes compared to the general population. Finally, we showed that footedness is only marginally influenced by cultural and social factors, which play a crucial role in the determination of handedness. Overall, this study provides new and useful reference data for laterality research. Furthermore, the data suggest that footedness is a valuable phenotype for the study of lateral motor biases, its underlying genetics and neurodevelopment.

[About meta-analyses].

Abstract: . Based on the publication in this issue of AI&R of a metanalytic assessment of the degree and the quality of the available evidences on the clinical efficacy of an otherwise diffuse utilization of nutritional integration on a spectrum of fragile patients, the methodological comment is focused on the limitations, biases, misleading implications which are today threatening the role of metanalytical analyses of existing literature, to produce useful-reliable evidences in areas where the representativeness of the source of data is substantially scarce. The exposure to such risk appears to be specifically worrying in the field of nursing care, due to the very limited availability of randomized and other "controlled" prospective original studies with hard end-points.

Laterality 2020: entering the next decade

Abstract: In the 2010s, significant progress has been made in several key areas of laterality research, including neuroimaging, genetics and comparative research. In the present article, we discuss which trends are likely to shape laterality research in the 2020s. These include, but are not limited to: (1) Finding laterality-specific solutions to the replication crisis. (2) Integrating non-W.E.I.R.D. (Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic) samples into laterality research to a larger extent. (3). Combining meta-analysis and large-scale databank studies to come to unbiased conclusions about true effects. (4) Understanding altered laterality in different psychiatric and neurodevelopmental disorders. (5) Exploring the relevance of laterality research for the treatment of psychiatric and neurodevelopmental disorders. (6) Investigating the molecular correlates of environmental factors that affect laterality. (7) Bridging the gap between laterality research in human subjects and non-human model species. (8) Utilizing "next-generation" neuroimaging in laterality research. (9) Integrating graph-theory and machine learning into laterality research. (10) Enhancing ecological validity in laterality research using mobile EEG and smartphone-based data collection. These trends will likely shape the next decade of laterality research by opening the way for novel questions, enhancing collaborations and boosting the reliability and validity of research findings in our field.

Birth Order and Lateral Preferences

Abstract: Associations between birth order and lateral preferences of hand, eye, and foot were examined in a sample of 6436 black seven-year-old boys and girls whose mothers participated in the Collaborative Perinatal Project (CPP) in Philadelphia. Overall, most of the subjects (87%) showed right-hand preference, and the majority of the subjects showed right-eye (55%) and foot (63%) preferences. Analysis of cross preferences indicated some tendency for a consistent right side orientation. However, patterns of lateral preferences were similar for both boys and girls across seven birth order groups. The data were interpreted as showing that birth order and lateral preferences are not interrelated.

A large-scale estimate on the relationship between language and motor lateralization

Abstract: Human language is dominantly processed in the left cerebral hemisphere in most of the population. While several studies have suggested that there are higher rates of atypical right-hemispheric language lateralization in left-/mixed-handers, an accurate estimate of this association from a large sample is still missing. In this study, we comprised data from 1,554 individuals sampled in three previous studies in which language lateralization measured via dichotic listening, handedness and footedness were assessed. Overall, we found a right ear advantage indicating typical left-hemispheric language lateralization in 82.1% of the participants. While we found significantly more left-handed individuals with atypical language lateralization on the categorical level, we only detected a very weak positive correlation between dichotic listening lateralization quotients (LQs) and handedness LQs using continuous measures. Here, only 0.4% of the variance in language lateralization were explained by handedness. We complemented these analyses with Bayesian statistics and found no evidence in favor of the hypothesis that language lateralization and handedness are related. Footedness LQs were not correlated with dichotic listening LQs, but individuals with atypical language lateralization also exhibited higher rates of atypical footedness on the categorical level. We also found differences in the extent of language lateralization between males and females with males exhibiting higher dichotic listening LQs indicating more left-hemispheric language processing. Overall, these findings indicate that the direct associations between language lateralization and motor asymmetries are much weaker than previously assumed with Bayesian correlation analyses even suggesting that they do not exist at all. Furthermore, sex differences seem to be present in language lateralization when the power of the study is adequate suggesting that endocrinological processes might influence this phenotype.