abstract - open repositorychesterrep.openrepository.com/.../10034/620405/1/disser… · web...

Measuring anxiety in left and right handers via the BIS/BAS scale:

Is there a difference when the scales are reversed?

J11077

MSc Psychology (Conversion)

PS7112 Research Dissertation

2015/2016

University of Chester

MEASURING ANXIETY AND REVERSING THE SCALE

Measuring anxiety in left and right handers via the BIS/BAS scale: Is there a

difference when the scales are reversed?

Word Count – 8850

2


Declaration and DOPEC code.

This work is original and has not been submitted in relation to any other degree or

qualification.

This research received ethical approval from the Department of Psychology Ethics

Committee on 21/4/2016, DOPEC code (FDPR220416).

Signed:

Date:

3


With thanks to my supervisor, Dr. Paul Rodway for his assistance and eternal patience

throughout this piece of research.

4


Supervision Log

Department of Psychology

Research Module Meeting Log 2015/2016

NAME:

SUPERVISOR: Dr. Paul Rodway

Date Discussion topics

11/11/15 Discussed ideas for project.

Handedness combined with a measurable aspect of personality.

Action Plan

Read around the literature of handedness.

Choose personality aspect.

SIGNED

STUDENT __________________________________ DATE: ___________

SUPERVISOR ________________________________ DATE: ___________

5




NAME:



2/12/15 Anxiety chosen as dependent variable.

Obtained guidance for the individual project proposal.

Decided to examine handedness, anxiety and gender. Additionally, the effect of reversing the Likert scale of the anxiety questionnaire.

Action Plan

Complete project proposal. Deadline is 9/12/15.

SIGNED

STUDENT __________________________________ DATE: ___________

SUPERVISOR ________________________________ DATE: ___________

6




NAME:



8/12/15 Proposal has been submitted.

Discussed which online survey creator to use.esurvey chosen upon recommendation.

Action Plan

Obtain measures for questionnaire (BIS/BAS and EHI).

Design survey.

Consider ethics forms over Christmas.

SIGNED

STUDENT __________________________________ DATE: ___________

SUPERVISOR ________________________________ DATE: ___________

7




NAME:



6/1/16 Examined survey.

Looked at the logistical flow of the questions.Self-reported handedness dictates which version of the BIS/BAS scale the participant will be provided with.

Action Plan

Alter the title of the survey to prevent participants overthinking the intention of the research.

SIGNED

STUDENT __________________________________ DATE: ___________

8


SUPERVISOR ________________________________ DATE: ___________



NAME:



16/3/16 Discussed how to complete the ethical approval form, due 23/3/16.

Action Plan

Add an age related question to the survey to ensure that participants are aged sixteen or over.

SIGNED

STUDENT __________________________________ DATE: ___________

9


SUPERVISOR ________________________________ DATE: ___________



NAME:



13/4/16 Discussed ethical amendment form and the necessary changesrequired to achieve full approval.

Action Plan

Implement stated changes.

Consider reading a newly published relevant book, Laterality:Exploring the enigma of left-handedness. (Porac, 2016).

SIGNED

STUDENT __________________________________ DATE: ___________

10


SUPERVISOR ________________________________ DATE: ___________



NAME:



11/5/16 Survey went live on 3/5/16 on esurvey.

Discussed small alterations to be implemented to ensure anequal number of participants complete both versions of the BIS/BAS scale (normal/flipped). Requested assistance to get it on the SONA system.

Data collection period is eight weeks.

Action Plan

Begin the introduction section.

SIGNED

STUDENT __________________________________ DATE: ___________

11


SUPERVISOR ________________________________ DATE: ___________



NAME:



6/7/16 End of data collection period.

Discussed how to analyse data.

Agreed on how to score the scales in preparation for analysis.

Action Plan

Prepare data for analysis.

SIGNED

STUDENT __________________________________ DATE: ___________

12


SUPERVISOR ________________________________ DATE: ___________



NAME:



20/7/16 Analysed data.

Discussed possible reasons for the effects that were obtained,as well as how to incorporate them into this piece of research.

Action Plan

Begin the method section.

Reconvene at beginning of September.

SIGNED

STUDENT __________________________________ DATE: ___________

13


SUPERVISOR ________________________________ DATE: ___________

Table of contents

Title page and word count …………………………………………………….……….….…2

Declaration and DOPEC code ….……………………………………………….….…….….3

Acknowledgements ……………………………………………………………………….…4

Supervision log ……………………………………………………………………………....5

Table of contents ……………………………………………………………………………14

List of tables …...……………………………………………………………………………15

1. Abstract............................................................................................................................16

2. Introduction.....................................................................................................................17

2.1 Hand Preference................................................................................................................17

2.2 Hand Preference and Anxiety...........................................................................................22

2.3 Hand Preference, Gender, and Anxiety...........................................................................25

2.4 Direction of Scale...............................................................................................................28

2.5 Current Investigation........................................................................................................30

3. Method.............................................................................................................................32

3.1 Participants........................................................................................................................32

3.2 Measures.............................................................................................................................32

3.3 Procedure...........................................................................................................................33

3.4 Design and analysis............................................................................................................35

4. Results..............................................................................................................................36

4.1 Overall Conditions.............................................................................................................37

4.2 BIS Results.........................................................................................................................37

4.3 BAS results.........................................................................................................................38

14


4.4 BAS drive...........................................................................................................................38

4.5 BAS fun seeking.................................................................................................................38

4.6 BAS reward responsiveness..............................................................................................39

5. Discussion........................................................................................................................40

5.1 Findings..............................................................................................................................40

5.2 Limitations and Future Research.....................................................................................45

6. Conclusion.......................................................................................................................47

7. References........................................................................................................................48

8. Appendices.......................................................................................................................60

Appendix A: Questionnaire..........................................................................................................60

Appendix B: Participant information sheet.................................................................................64

Appendix C: Participant debrief information.............................................................................66

Appendix D: Ethics application form...........................................................................................67

Appendix E: Ethics amendment form..........................................................................................96

Appendix F: SPSS outputs – CD attached to rear cover..........................................................104

List of tables

Table 1: Distribution of the male sample across categories.................................................................36

Table 2: Number of left- and right-handed participants in each condition of the BIS/BAS scale........37

Table 3: Means and standard deviations for BIS scores for handedness and order of scale.................37

Table 4: Means and standard deviations for BAS sub-section scores for handedness and order of scale.

.............................................................................................................................................................38

15


1. Abstract

A considerable amount of research suggests that left-handers experience more

behavioural inhibition and anxiety than right-handers. This is due to the assumption that left-

handers operate with a right hemispheric dominance, where behavioural inhibition is believed

to be processed. The current study examined the relationship between handedness,

behavioural approach and inhibition, where it was hypothesised that left-handers would

achieve a higher score of behavioural inhibition than right-handers. Additionally, the effects

of inverting the scale of measurement were examined, as previous investigations suggest that

left-handers prefer items to the leftward spatial area, whereas right-handers prefer items to the

rightward spatial area. Participants (N=213) completed two self-report questionnaires online,

Carver and White’s (1994) BIS/BAS scale and the Edinburgh Handedness Inventory

(Oldfield, 1971). Participants were presented with either the normal version of the BIS/BAS

scale, or the inverted version. No significant effects of handedness were obtained, thus

suggesting that being left-handed does not increase anxiety. Additionally, there were no

significant effects of inverting the BIS/BAS scale. The lack of significant results are

discussed in relation to the importance of measuring handedness as a continuous variable

rather than as a dichotomous variable.

16


2. Introduction

2.1 Hand Preference.

Handedness is an area that has captivated neuropsychologists for more than a century,

as it is a naturally occurring phenomenon that has been associated with asymmetrical

hemispheric functioning (Beaton, Kaack & Corr, 2015). One particular area of psychology

that has garnered a reasonable amount of interest is whether there are personality differences

between left- and right-handers. This piece of research sets out to examine whether anxiety,

as measured by behavioural inhibition and behavioural activation (Gray, 1982), differs

amongst left- and right-handed individuals. The body-specific hypothesis (Casasanto, 2009),

which suggests that right-handers prefer the rightward spatial area and left-handers prefer the

leftward spatial area, will also be tested by inverting the scale used to measure behavioural

inhibition and activation.

It has been largely agreed that left-handed people represent the clear minority of the

population at just 10% (Mukherjee, 2016), regardless of cultural or geographical variations

(Grimshaw & Wilson, 2013). It has also been speculated that this trend of distribution has

been present since the Australopithecines (the first hominids on the human rather than ape

line of evolution), some 4 million years ago (Annett, 1985). By examining stone-age

primitive tools, Wilson (1891) concluded that right-handedness was the norm and that left-

handedness was an exception. Given the evidence that polymorphism in handedness dates

back into the midst of human evolution, the possibility of heritability provides an explanation

of why this variation persists throughout societies today. Numerous studies suggest that left-

handers excel in physical activities such as cricket (Mukherjee, 2016; Wood & Aggleton,

1989), boxing (Gursoy, Ziyagil, Sahin & Dane, 2012), wrestling (Ziyagil, Gursoy, Dane &

Yuksel, 2010) and fencing (Harris, 2010). Additionally, there is an enhanced percentage of

17


left-handed individuals at an elite level of sporting activities compared to the left-handed

frequency of the normal population (Loffing & Hagemann, 2012). As left-handedness is said

to be heritable (Porac, 2016), from an evolutionary perspective, males with a physical

advantage had a favourable probability of procreating as females would choose a mate that

could not only provide healthy genes for her offspring (demonstrated by physical health), but

who could also protect her and her offspring (Buss, 2008). This obviously means that the left-

handed characteristic has a chance of being transmitted to the next generation, and so forth,

thus explaining why left-handedness still persists in modern day society.

Porac (2016) reports that among studies investigating handedness patterns of family

members (including twin pairs), the heritable component of determining handedness ranges

from 25 to 40%. Furthermore, adoption studies have demonstrated that the handedness of a

child is more largely influenced by the handedness of the biological parents, rather than that

of the adoptive parents (Carter-Saltzman, 1980). However, genetics is not the sole contributor

of handedness, as is evidenced by a meta-analysis of twin studies (Porac, 2016). Within this

report, the handedness concordance rates of monozygotic twins (100% genetically identical)

and dizygotic twins (50% genetically identical) was roughly the same (81% and 80%

respectively). Although the concordance rates were high, if genetic factors were entirely

responsible for handedness, the concordance rate among monozygotic twins would be

reported at 100%. In an investigation conducted to examine genetic linkage among left-

handedness, Somers et al. (2015) failed to observe any evidence in favour of a major gene

accountable for left-handedness, but were able to report left-handed heritability at 24%, thus

echoing the findings of previous research and supporting the notion of genetics being

partially responsible for left-handedness.

Left-handers have been compared to right-handers on numerous neurological measures,

such as intelligence (Ghayas & Adil, 2007) and memory (Lyle, McCabe & Roediger, 2008),

18


as well as various behavioural measures, like alcohol consumption (Denny, 2011) and

smoking (Harburg, Feldstein & Papsdorf, 1978). However, the consideration of handedness

and personality is a relatively recent area of research. Coren (1994) postulates that left- and

right-handers may differ in personality due to their experiences within the world. Other

researchers suggest that this difference in personality amongst left- and right-handers is due

to asymmetric hemispheric functioning (Davidson & Schaffer, 1983; Grimshaw & Wilson,

2013: Sutton & Davidson, 1997). A documented example of asymmetric hemispheric

difference among hand preference is language lateralisation, whereby virtually all right-

handers are specialised for language processing in the left hemisphere, compared to just 70%

of left-handers exhibiting this pattern of lateralisation. (Grimshaw & Wilson, 2013).

This notion of asymmetric lateralisation has garnered much interest and through the use

of electroencephalograms (EEGs), differences within frontal lobe activity have been

associated with numerous variables of personality. An increased function in the left frontal

lobe corresponds with approach-related traits, such as behavioural activation (Coan & Allen,

2003) and positive affect (Pauls, Wacker & Crost, 2005), whereas a greater right than left

frontal activity corresponds with withdrawal-related traits, such as behavioural inhibition

(Diego, Field & Hernandez-Reif, 2001; Sutton & Davidson, 1997) and shyness (Beaton et al.,

2008). These traits have been said to be affiliated with anxiety, as high levels of behavioural

inhibition and low levels of behavioural activation can predict susceptibility to this

heightened state (Jorm et al., 1999). As there is an evident relationship between asymmetric

neurological functioning and behavioural traits, alongside a postulated asymmetric

functioning associated with handedness, further research is warranted to establish whether a

link between anxiety and handedness is not just a confound. Based on the existing literature,

it would be expected that the left-handers would exhibit high levels of behavioural inhibition

as both of these individual differences involve right hemispheric functioning. Oppositely, it

19


would be expected that the right-handers would display increased levels of behavioural

activation as both of these individual differences occur within the left hemisphere.

A further reason for investigating the relationship between handedness and anxiety is

that left-handers constitute a visible minority in any population (Grimshaw & Wilson, 2013).

Beaton et al. (2015) state that in most behavioural and cognitive psychological studies, left-

handers are excluded from participation to minimalize possible cerebral heterogeneity. This

obvious preference for right-handedness is reflected in the positive and negative connotations

for the right and left sides respectively. Denny (2011, p. 387) states that “being left-handed in

a largely right-handed world generates stresses”, stresses that could amount to elevated levels

of anxiety. The positive/negative pattern of association with right and left has been found to

exist across different cultures, for example, within the religion of Islam, the right hand is

honoured over the left, thus eating and drinking is conducted by the right, whereas hygiene is

restricted to the left (Saalih al-Munajjid, 2007). Furthermore, consumption of food from the

left hand is believed to be associated with the Shaytaan, the Islamic devil. This bias also

extends across Christianity when referring to how the people of the earth will be divided,

whereby the sheep (who will inherit the kingdom) are placed on Jesus’ right hand and the

goats (who are cursed unto hell) on the left (Matthew 25:33-34). The negative connotations

for the left side are also evident across different languages. Among Indo-European languages,

the words used to represent left possess other meanings, such as the French word gauche,

meaning left and awkward, or the Latin word sinister, pertaining to evil and unfortunate as

well as left (McManus, 2003). In comparison, the words for right, such as the French word

droit (meaning upright and honourable, Porac, 2016), are synonymous with good or correct

(Grimshaw & Wilson, 2013).

This prejudice towards left-handed people still occurs in modern society, as is

witnessed by the design of tools and other objects, such as scissors or guitars (Coren, 1994).

20


Despite this discrimination, left-handedness still persists, thus adding weight to the

evolutionary theory of handedness. Up until fairly recently, rightward conversion attempts in

schools were common place, whereby left-handers were forced to switch to right-handedness

(Porac, 2016). Suitner, Maass, Bettinsoli, Carraro and Kumar (2015) proffer that being left-

handed in a rightward world requires more effort than expended by their right-handed

counterparts. For example, the majority of scripts are written from left-to-right, which reflects

the natural flow across the page for right-handers when writing, as outward movements are

easier to perform. Left-handers have to write against their natural outward flow (from right-

to-left), which requires more effort to learn and maintain (Suitner et al., 2015). It is not

beyond postulation that left-handers, who endure the regular struggle of fitting in to a world

that was not designed with them in mind (Suitner et al., 2015), may experience more

behavioural inhibition than right-handers, who interact with the world with ease (Wright &

Hardie, 2015).

When assessing handedness, it is crucial to note that there is a difference between hand

preference and hand performance (Porac, 2016). Hand preference can be measured by asking

individuals to describe which hand would be used to carry out tasks where only one hand

may be used, such as writing or using scissors. This measure of handedness can be collected

from questionnaires, like the Annett Hand Preference Questionnaire (Annett, 1970), or the

Edinburgh Handedness Inventory (Oldfield, 1971). To assess hand performance, individuals

are required to complete dexterity tasks as quickly as possible, first with one hand and then

the other. The time difference in task completion for both hands is then calculated to provide

a score of hand performance. These methods of hand assessment measure different things and

although many individuals’ scores on both measures may demonstrate a correlation (Bishop,

1989), this is not always the case (Porac, 2016). For example, a person who writes with their

right hand could be faster with their left hand in motor dexterity tasks.

21


2.2 Hand Preference and Anxiety.

The connection between anxiety and handedness was originally proposed by Hicks and

Pellegrini in 1978, who announced that consistent right-handers were significantly less

anxious than those who reported left-hand usage. Wright, Hardie and Wilson (2009) further

investigated this relationship by focusing on behavioural inhibition and approach, which are

two separate neural motivational symptoms that influence behaviour. Proposed by Gray

(1982), the behavioural inhibition system (BIS) is related to anxiety, as it predicts a person’s

response to anxiety causing cues, such as punishment or negative events resulting in

avoidance behaviours, whereas the behavioural activation system (BAS) is related to

impulsivity and the willingness to pursue and achieve goals, accomplished by approach

behaviours.

By using the BIS/BAS Scale (Carver & White, 1994), a self-report Likert scale

questionnaire designed to measure behavioural inhibition and activation, Wright et al. (2009)

were able to conclude that left-handers scored significantly higher on the BIS scale than their

right-handed counterparts. The BIS/BAS scale (Carver & White, 1994) has been correlated

with other personality scales, with the BIS scale demonstrating positive correlations with the

Neuroticism scale of the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire Revised (EPQ-R) (Eysenck,

Eysenck & Barrett, 1985) (r = 0.64), the Negative Affect scale of the Positive and Negative

Affect Schedule (PANAS) (Kercher, 1992) (r = 0.48), and anxiety and depressive symptoms

of Goldberg scales (Goldberg, Bridges, Duncan-Jones & Grayson, 1988), (r = 0.42, r = 0.36

respectively). The BAS section, as a total of the sub-sections, positively correlates with

Extraversion scale of the EPQ-R (r = 0.44) and Positive Affect scale of PANAS (r = 0.46)

(Jorm et al., 1999), thus giving the BIS/BAS scale construct validity (Cozby & Bates, 2012).

Adding to the supporting research, a replication study of Wright et al. (2009) also recounted

that non-right handers (that is, those who reported using their left hand either consistently or

22


inconsistently) achieved significantly higher BIS scores than right-handers (Beaton, Kaack &

Corr, 2015). However, both studies (Beaton et al., 2015; Wright et al., 2009) failed to observe

a significant difference in BAS scores across handedness, a finding briefly attributed to a

complex relationship between impulsivity and behavioural activation, as explained by Quilty,

Oakman and Farvolden (2007). Another investigation that implemented the BIS/BAS scale to

examine effects between handedness not only reported that the consistent left-handers

achieved the highest mean BIS score compared to the other groups of handedness

(inconsistent handedness and consistent right), but it was also reported that on one of the

BAS subscales (BAS-Fun Seeking), the inconsistent handedness category produced the

highest mean score (Hardie & Wright, 2014). The BAS-Fun Seeking significance was

explained in terms of inconsistent handers being less conservative and more open to non-

standard concepts, but the lack of significant findings on the other BAS subscales was not

discussed (Hardie & Wright, 2014).

Nonetheless, findings supporting the relationship between anxiety and handedness have

been found in experimental settings. In a study involving a computing task, Wright and

Hardie (2012) discovered that left-handers produced significantly higher state anxiety scores

than the right-handed participants, which substantiates the notion of right hemispheric

functioning for behavioural inhibition. Another method of inspecting behavioural inhibition,

or in fact, behavioural activation, is to employ apparatus requiring motor skills for

completion, such as the Tower of Hanoi (ToH) task, and observe participant response times.

The ToH is a three pegged, three ringed problem solving task that requires participants to

move the stacked rings from the initial state to the goal state in as fewest moves as possible.

When using this apparatus, Wright, Hardie and Rodway (2004) concluded that left-handers

took significantly longer than right-handers to initiate the task, thus demonstrating higher

behavioural inhibition as well as lower behavioural activation. These findings have been

23


shown to be replicable in a similar investigation involving the ToH task, where it was

reported that the left-handers were slower to respond to the task than right-handers, regardless

of whether the stimuli was novel to the participant, as this pattern was observed across

several repeated measures trials (Wright & Hardie, 2015). Significant behavioural inhibition

of action amongst left-handers has also been recorded in a manual sorting task involving card

sorting, where task initiation was slower than the right-handed participants (Wright & Hardie,

2011).

Contradictorily, there have been several studies that have failed to observe a significant

difference in anxiety measures between left- and right-handers. Wienrich, Wells and

McManus (1982) were among the first researchers to report no significant differences

between anxiety and handedness, although their findings did suggest that extreme

handedness, that is consistent left- and right-handers, demonstrated more anxiety than the

mixed-handed group, regardless of hand preference. This particular discovery could be

explained by the mixed-handed group tending to select less extreme options on the

questionnaire that was used (the Taylor Manifest Anxiety Scale, 1963), such as disagreeing

with strongly worded items, which would generate lower anxiety scores overall. Beaton and

Moseley (1984) also failed to find a relationship between handedness and anxiety, but

attribute their null findings to the measure of handedness that was implemented (Annett Hand

Preference Questionnaire, 1970), which created eight classes of hand preference. Although

Beaton and Moseley’s (1984) anxiety scores were miscalculated, an error that was made

apparent by a replication and extension study (French & Richards, 1990), an additional paper

that analysed the correct scores was published (Beaton & Moseley, 1991). The reanalysis

concurred with the original paper, whereby the relationship between handedness and anxiety

was found to be nonsignificant. Additionally, Beaton and Moseley (1991) reported that the

mixed-handed participants were no less likely to select extreme options on the scale of the

24


questionnaire that was used than the consistent handed participants, thus contradicting the

findings of Wienrich et al. (1982). Furthermore, the replication study inspiring the reanalysis

reported that anxiety was unrelated to handedness (French & Richards, 1990). In a clinical

trial, handedness of participants with an anxiety disorder were compared to the handedness of

a normal control group (Merckelbach, de Ruiter & Olff, 1989). No support was found for a

connection between handedness and anxiety as the main effect of group failed to reach

significance (F<1). More recently, Lyle, Chapman and Hatton (2013) reported that neither

direction nor consistency of handedness had a main effect on any of the five measures used to

assess anxiety. As the existing evidence is inconsistent, the relationship between handedness

and anxiety needs further investigation.

2.3 Hand Preference, Gender, and Anxiety.

When considering the left-handed population, it is a frequently reported statistic than

there are more males than females (Annett, 1985; McManus, 2003; Porac, 2016). A meta-

analysis examining sex differences in left-handedness reported that across the 144 studies

included, there were significantly more males than females, with an estimated male to female

ratio of 1.23 (Papadatou-Pastou, Martin, Munafò & Jones, 2008). One theory that attempts to

explain the predominance of left-handedness amongst males is the Geschwind-Galaburda

hypothesis (1987). This hypothesis suggests that exposure to elevated levels of prenatal

testosterone can have an effect on the developing foetal brain. More specifically, it is

proposed that an abundance of prenatal testosterone influences cerebral lateralisation by

delaying the development on the left hemisphere, which in turn causes compensatory growth

in the right hemisphere. As more left-handers than right-handers are lateralised to the right

hemisphere (Porac, 2016), the Geschwind-Galaburda hypothesis (1987) offers a

neuropsychological explanation for this occurrence. Additionally, as testosterone is the

25


principal male hormone, male foetuses are exposed to more prenatal testosterone than female

foetuses (Lust et al., 2011). However, of the experiments that investigate the Geschwind-

Galaburda hypothesis (1987), the majority of findings do not support the association between

elevated prenatal testosterone and left-handedness (Beaton, Rudling, Kissling, Taurines &

Thome, 2011; Bryden, McManus & Bulman-Fleming, 1994; Grimshaw, Bryden & Finegan,

1995; Lust et al., 2011).

Another possible explanation of the higher incidence of left-handedness in males could

be that females have been reported to be more successful at left-to-right handed conversions

(Porac & Buller, 1990), which would reduce the number of left-handed females whilst the

left-handed male figure remains the same. This notion garners support from the fact that

larger sex differences were reported in earlier studies than in comparison to more recent

studies (Papadatou-Pastou et al., 2008), as the practice of forced handedness conversions are

much less common in today’s society (Porac, 2016). Bryden (1977) provides an alternate

reason for the sex difference among left-handers by attributing the disparity to the way in

which males and females answer questionnaire items. The findings of Bryden’s (1977)

investigation suggest that males are less likely to opt for extreme responses on a Likert scale

(whereby 1 = always right and 5 = always left) in comparison to females. When tallied, the

final male score adds up to a score that represents a more mixed-handed or left-handed total

than the females.

In contrast to the sex differences among handedness, a widely documented finding

within psychiatric epidemiology is that females are more likely to develop an anxiety

disorder then males (McLean, Asnaani, Litz & Hofmann, 2011; Remes, Brayne, van der

Linde & Lafortune, 2016). When relating this discovery to the psychological literature, it is

documented that females achieve higher scores on a number of anxiety measures than males

(Beaton et al., 2015; Wienrich et al., 1982; Wright et al., 2009). When using the BIS/BAS

26


Scale (Carver & White, 1994) to examine a community sample of nearly 3000 individuals,

Jorm et al. (1999) report that females scored significantly higher on the behavioural inhibition

scale than the males. Wright et al. (2009) also reported that females were more sensitive to

the BIS scale than the males, especially the left-handed females, as they exhibited higher BIS

scores. Similarly, Beaton et al. (2015) found that non-right-handed females had the highest

BIS scores of the investigation. However, in both Wright et al.’s (2009) and Beaton et al.’s

(2015) experiments, the BAS scales remained unaffected by sex differences, thus suggesting

that behavioural activation occurs uniformly across men and women. As it is only the BIS

scale that is concerned with anxiety, these findings provide further evidence to the case that

more females than males are affected by anxiety.

Regardless of this accepted finding, there have been numerous studies that have failed

to observe a significant difference of anxiety between males and females. French and

Richards (1990) were unable to detect any main effects of sex for anxiety scores in their

investigation. However, the measure used to gauge anxiety within this particular study was

the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) Form Y (Spielberger, Gorsuch, Lushene, Vagg &

Jacobs, 1983), thus meaning that even though the BIS scale has been shown to correlate with

trait anxiety (Li et al., 2008), the results cannot be truly comparable to the investigations

using the BIS/BAS. One experiment that used the BIS/BAS scale but still failed to yield a

significant difference between males’ and females’ scores also examined differences in

neurological functioning (Li et al., 2014). By implementing voxel-based morphometry, sex

differences in regional grey matter volume were detected, thus suggesting a sex-related

neuroanatomical functioning for behavioural inhibition and activation. Simply stated,

although the behaviours for both males and females were similar, the areas of the brain

responsible for this conduct differed between the sexes. This finding echoes the claims of

27


Cahill (2006), who states that the neural processing of emotional stimuli differs significantly

between men and women.

2.4 Direction of Scale.

The body-specificity hypothesis (B-SH) (Casasanto, 2009) posits that if mental

representations of the world are formed by the way in which individuals interact with their

physical environment, then people with different bodies (namely left- and right-handed

people) will differ in this interaction and therefore develop systematically different mental

representations. More specifically, the B-SH states that right-handed people associate the

rightward spatial area with positivity and the leftward spatial area with negativity, whereas

this pattern is reversed for left-handed people. In an investigation that consisted of five

separate experiments, which included physical interaction with the environment as well as

orally stated spatial preferences, Casasanto (2009) obtained support for the B-SH in every

trail. The consistent finding was that the left-handed participants associated positive ideas

with the left and negative ideas with the right, whereas the reverse association was

demonstrated by the right-handed participants. Further support for the B-SH hails from an

investigation that examined spatial memory and the ability to recall positively- and

negatively-valenced locations (Brunyé, Gardony, Mahoney & Taylor, 2012). The results

suggested that right-handed participants would overestimate how far right the positively-

valenced locations were in relation to the original site of the item, whilst overestimating how

far left the negatively-valenced locations were, whereas the left-handed participants displayed

the opposite pattern.

Casasanto (2011) further proposed that it is the ease of the interaction with the physical

environment that influences the valence associations, rather than just cultural and language

28


perceptions of right meaning good and left meaning sinister, a factor highlighted by

Grimshaw and Wilson (2013). Ease of interaction, or motor fluency, promotes positive

emotions and evaluations for the side that is dominant, as individuals prefer the easiest

possible manner to accomplish tasks (Casasanto, 2011). Consequently, right-handed people

interact more fluently with the environment on their right and more clumsily on their left,

thus inherently associating right with good and left with bad, as opposed to left-handed

people who will form the reverse association.

The importance of motor experience has been evidenced in both clinical (long-term)

and non-clinical (short-term) settings. Amongst initially right-handed stroke patients, those

who had experienced right hemi-paresis, thus causing them to be effectively left-handed,

demonstrated orally that they regarded positively valenced items to be on the left side and

negatively valenced items on the right (Casasanto & Chrysikou, 2011). In non-clinical

settings, a short-term switch of valence association was reported following a handicapping of

the dominant hand, thus forcing participants to switch to the non-dominant hand for a simple

motor task, making the non-dominant hand the preferred hand as task completion was

temporarily easier (Casasanto & Chrysikou, 2011). It was concluded that motor experience

(even after just one task) can influence the participants’ spatial mapping of good and bad.

The B-SH (Casasanto, 2009) has been shown to be present in children as young as 5, as

right handed children attributed positive ideas to the stimulus on the right side, which

suggests that the development of abstract concepts such as intelligence and friendliness can

be influenced by handedness and motor experience at an early age (Casasanto & Henetz,

2012). The supporting evidence for the B-SH is not just limited to the investigations

conducted by psychologist who proposed this theory. In 2013, de la Vega, Dudschig, De

Filippis, Lachmair and Kaup reported that even when participants’ hands were crossed (right

hand in the left spatial area, left hand in the right spatial area), those who were right-handed

29


responded to positive stimuli significantly faster with their right hand than their left, which

further endorses the notion of learned valence tendencies through physical interactions.

When relating the B-SH to Likert scale questionnaires, it would be expected that right-

handed participants would select items on the right of the scale, whereas left-handed

participants would select items to the left of the scale. In the case of the BIS/BAS Scale

(Carver & White, 1994), where the scale ranges from 1 = very true and 4 = very false, and

most items are reverse scored, it would be expected that right-handed participants would

demonstrate low scores as they have opted for the items on the right of scale due to their

spatial positioning. This expectation is reversed for the left-handed participants. However,

should the BIS/BAS Scale (Carver & White, 1994) be inverted, whereby 1 = very false and 4

= very true, and the items no longer need reverse scoring, it would be expected that the right-

handed participants would maintain high scores as they have selected the most rightward

option on the scale. Again, this expectation for the left-handed participants would be

reversed, thus meaning that they would exhibit low scores on the BIS/BAS Scale.

2.5 Current Investigation.

The current investigation examined the relationship between handedness, gender,

anxiety (in the form of self-report BIS/BAS scores) and direction of scale, using the

Edinburgh Handedness Inventory (Oldfield, 1971) and two versions of Carver and White’s

(1994) BIS/BAS scale; one with the normal scale (1 = very true, 4 = very false), and one with

an inverted scale (1 = very false, 4 = very true). The questionnaires were posted online as this

method was quicker and easier to distribute than paper versions, thus meaning a larger

sample size was obtained (Cozby & Bates, 2012). As left-handers are lateralised to the right

hemisphere (Grimshaw & Wilson, 2013), which is associated with behavioural inhibition, it

30


was hypothesised that the left-handers would achieve higher BIS scores than the right-

handers. As right-handers are lateralised to the left hemisphere (Grimshaw & Wilson, 2013),

which is associated with behavioural activation, it was hypothesised that right-handers would

achieve higher BAS scores than the left-handers. In addition, it was hypothesised that females

would achieve higher BIS scores than males, as of the sexes, anxiety is more prevalent

amongst women (Jorm et al., 1999), which would be reflected by higher behavioural

inhibition scores. Furthermore, it was hypothesised that the left-handers who are presented

with the normal version of the BIS/BAS scale would achieve higher scores than the right-

handers who complete the normal version of the scale, as they would prefer the items that are

on the leftward side, as in left-handers, this is the area that is associated with positivity. For

the inverted scale, this hypothesis was reversed, meaning that the left-handers would achieve

lower BIS/BAS scores than the right-handers who completed the inverted scale, as the most

leftward option in this version would generate a lower total sum as the scoring of the

BIS/BAS scale is no longer reversed.

31


3. Method

3.1 Participants

Participants consisted of 163 females and 50 males aged 16 and over, of whom 14

identified as ambidextrous, 63 identified as left-handed and 136 identified as right-handed. A

convenience sampling method was employed as this questionnaire was open to internet users

who were using social media. Ethical approval was granted by the University of Chester

Psychology Department Ethics Committee. The British Psychological Society’s ethical

guidelines were also adhered to by ensuring that participants were aged 16 or over.

3.2 Measures

Anxiety was measured using Carver and White’s (1994) BIS/BAS questionnaire. This

consists of 24 items which are divided into four sub-scales. Behavioural inhibition (BIS

scale) measures anxiety and avoidance behaviours and contains 7 items, such as “Criticism or

scolding hurts me quite a bit”. Behavioural activation (BAS scale) measures impulsivity and

approach behaviours by using three sub-scales: BAS-D (drive, containing 4 items, for

example “If I see a chance to get something I want I move on it right away”), BAS-FS (fun

seeking, containing 4 items such as “I'm always willing to try something new if I think it will

be fun”) and BAS-RR (reward responsiveness, consisting on 5 items like “When I'm doing

well at something I love to keep at it”. The questionnaire also includes 4 filler items that do

not contribute towards the scoring. Each item is scored on a 4-point Likert scale. For the

normal questionnaire, the responses ranged from 1 (very true for me) to 4 (very false for me).

For the inverted questionnaire, this was reversed (1 = very false for me, 4 = very true for me).

32


All items, excluding two (2 and 22), were reverse scored and then tallied to provide a total

score for each sub-scale. The maximum scores were; BIS = 28, BAS-D = 16, BAS-FS = 16

and BAS-RR = 20. The BIS/BAS questionnaire has been shown to achieve strong reliability,

with Cronbach α of 0.65 and above for all sub-sections (Jorm et al., 1999).

Handedness was then assessed using the Edinburgh Handedness Inventory (EHI)

(Oldfield, 1971). This is a ten item survey that queries the direction and consistency of

preferred hand usage for different activities, such as writing, throwing and using a spoon. The

response options (with corresponding values for scoring) are “always left” (– 10), “mostly

left” (– 5), “either” (0), “mostly right” (+5) and “always right” (+10). Laterality scores range

from – 100 (exclusively left-handed) to +100 (exclusively right-handed). By measuring items

on a continuum, the EHI produces a numerical score which can indicate the strength of hand

preference (McMeekan & Lishman, 1975). The original EHI required participants to place +

in the appropriate left or right column, + + if the hand preference was so strong that they

would never use the other hand unless forced, or + in both columns if there was no preferred

hand choice. However, Fazio, Coenen and Denney (2012) demonstrated that less than half

(47.3%) of their participants were able to fully understand this original format, compared to

88.2% comprehending the Likert scale system. Additionally, the Likert scale used in this

investigation made data collection and comparisons simpler (Cozby & Bates, 2012).

3.3 Procedure

The questionnaire was available via a link, which directed participants to an esurvey

webpage where they were invited to complete the questionnaire (see appendix A). By

advertising the survey through social media, rather than the SONA system employed solely

33


by Chester University, the catchment of potential participants was widened to beyond

psychology students, thus increasing the representativeness of the sample (Cozby & Bates,

2012). Participants were provided with an information sheet prior to the questionnaire (see

appendix B). It was ensured that participants were of consenting age by including the

question “Are you aged 16 or over?”, whereby if the response was “No”, they were directed

to the debriefing page which ended the survey (see appendix C). As the questionnaire was

posted on social media, participants were able to complete the survey multiple times. For this

reason, participants were asked to complete the questionnaire only once.

Initially, recruitment began with a general request for participants via social media. The

following message accompanied the survey link:

Hello. I am a postgraduate Psychology student conducting research for my

dissertation. I am aiming to examine whether there is an association between

handedness and anxiety. This questionnaire should take no more than twenty

minutes to complete. The link is below should you wish to take part. Thank you

in advance.

Throughout the course of recruitment, the need for more left-handed participants arose,

so the bulletin of “CALLING ALL LEFTIES!” was added to the recruitment text.

Participants were first asked to specify their gender, with the options being male or

female. They were then asked to select which option best describes their handedness; left,

right or ambidextrous. This enabled the distribution of normal versus inverted scale of the

BIS/BAS questionnaire (left and ambidextrous received normal, right received inverted,

which was then switched halfway through the data collection period), thus ensuring a similar

sample size for both left- and right-handers to answer the normal and inverted scales. As the

34


questionnaire was advertised through social media, this methodology was deemed necessary

as the pool of potential participants was limited to those who had access to the survey link.

Participants were asked to complete the BIS/BAS questionnaire, followed by the EHI.

There were three questions collecting demographic information and 34 items on the BIS/BAS

(24 items) and the EHI (10 items). All of which took no longer than 20 minutes to complete.

Included at the end of the questionnaire was a space for University of Chester Psychology

students to type their unique identity code to receive 2 RPS credits. Participants were then

thanked for their participation and invited to contact the researcher should they have any

questions.

3.4 Design and analysis

The design of this investigation was a between-subjects quantitative questionnaire. The

dependent variables were the scores on the BIS/BAS scales. The independent variables were

handedness (left/right), direction of scale (normal/inverted), and sex (male/female). The data

was then analysed using a two-way unrelated analysis of variance (ANOVA), with the alpha

level set at p<0.05. The IBM statistical package, version 22 was used to run this analysis.

35


4. Results

Data was prepared for analysis in Microsoft Excel®. Of the 255 participants, 42 had

failed to complete the entire questionnaire, thus resulting in the removal of these incomplete

sets of data.

Handedness was calculated by examining the laterality scores provided by the

Edinburgh Handedness Inventory (Oldfield, 1971). The participant’s with a laterality score

between -10 and +10 (N=15) were deemed to be ambidextrous. As there were too few

participants within this category to analyse as its own condition, they were removed from all

analyses. When preparing the remaining laterality scores, those with a score of +15 and

higher were deemed right handed, whereas those with a score -15 or lower were categorised

as left handed. Eight self-report ambidextrous participants were sorted into the right handed

category according to their laterality score, and one was sorted into the left-handed category.

One participant self-reported as right-handed but their laterality score was -80, indicating a

consistent left hander. As it was unclear which section of the questionnaire they had

misinterpreted, their data set was removed from analysis. A further participant was removed

as they self-reported as left-handed but had a right-handed laterality score (LS = 15).

This resulted in N=196 for statistical analysis (females = 150, males = 46). As the

female to male ratio was 3:1, and very few males were in some of the conditions, the effect of

sex was not analysed. See Table 1 for the male categorical distribution.

Table 1: Distribution of the male sample across categories.

Handedness Normal Scale Inverted Scale

Left 2 9

Right 21 14

36


4.1 Overall Conditions

Table 2 displays the number of left- and right-handers in each condition of the

BIS/BAS scale. The percentage of left-handed participants was calculated at 29.6%, which

was a large enough sample to see an effect.

Table 2: Number of left- and right-handed participants in each condition of the BIS/BAS scale.

Handedness Normal Scale Inverted Scale Total

Left 19 39 58

Right 71 67 138

Total 90 106

4.2 BIS Results

Table 3 displays the BIS scores for the handedness and order of the scale. The left

handed inverted scale group scored higher than the other conditions.

Table 3: Means and standard deviations for BIS scores for handedness and order of scale. Normal Scale Inverted Scale

Left Right Total Left Right Total

BIS Score 20.7 (3.1) 20.2 (3.2) 20.3 (3.2) 21.6 (3.4) 20.3 (2.9) 20.8 (3.2)

A 2 x 2 (handedness (left vs. right) by order of scale (normal vs. inverted)) between-

subjects ANOVA was conducted on the mean BIS scores. The effect of handedness failed to

reach significance F(1, 195) = 3.52, p = 0.06. There was no significant effect of order of scale

F < 1. The interaction between handedness and order failed to reach significance F < 1.

37


4.3 BAS results

Table 4 illustrates the mean BAS sub-section scores for left and right handers on the

normal and inverted scales.

Table 4: Means and standard deviations for BAS sub-section scores for handedness and

order of scale. Normal Scale Inverted Scale

Left Right Total Left Right Total

BAS-D 9.8 (2.4) 10.3 (2.4) 10.2 (2.4) 10.1 (1.5) 9.9 (2.7) 10.0 (2.3)

BAS-FS 10.7 (2.5) 12.1 (2.1) 11.8 (2.3) 11.4 (2.0) 10.9 (2.5) 11.1 (2.4)

BAS-RR 15.3 (3.3) 16.4 (2.2) 16.2 (2.5) 16.4 (2.5) 16.1 (2.3) 16.2 (2.4)

4.4 BAS drive


subjects ANOVA was conducted on the mean BAS drive scores. There was no significant

effect of handedness F < 1. There was no significant effect of order of scale F < 1, and the

interaction between handedness and order was also not significant F < 1.

4.5 BAS fun seeking


subjects ANOVA was conducted on the mean BAS fun seeking scores. The effect of

handedness failed to reach significance. There was no significant effect of order of scale F <

1. The interaction between handedness and order of scale was significant F(1, 195) = 7.27, p

= 0.008, where the left-handers scored lower than the right-handers on the normal scale, but

the right-handers scored lower than the left-handers on the inverted scale.

38


Further one-way ANOVAs were conducted to analyse the effect of the interaction

between handedness and order of scale. There was a significant effect of handedness on the

normal scale F(1, 89) = 6.55, p = 0.012, with the right-handers scoring higher than the left-

handers. However, the effect of handedness on the inverted scale was not significant.

4.6 BAS reward responsiveness


subjects ANOVA was conducted on the BAS reward scores. There was no significant effect

of handedness F<1. There was no significant effect of order of scale F<1. The effect of

interaction between handedness and order of scale failed to reach significance F(1, 195) =

3.10, p = 0.08.

39


5. Discussion

5.1 Findings

This investigation examined anxiety via behavioural inhibition and behavioural

activation by using the BIS/BAS Scale (Carver & White, 1994) in relation to handedness,

gender, and order of scale. It was hypothesised that the left-handers would score higher on

the BIS scale than the right-handers, but this was not supported as there was no significant

difference between the groups’ BIS means. Inspection of the BIS means prohibits the

possibility of a type II error, as both the left- and right-handed groups achieved virtually the

same score. These findings contrast with the results of previous research, such as Wright et

al. (2009) and Beaton et al. (2015), whose results stated that the right-handed participants had

the significantly lower BIS scores. However, in the Beaton et al.’s (2015) investigation, the

highest scoring BIS group is referred to as ‘non-right-handed’, which encompassed both left-

and mixed-handed participants. This terminology can potentially be misleading, as it was not

solely the left-handed participants who exhibited high BIS scores. This investigation removed

the ambidextrous participants before analysis, rather than assign them to a non-right-handed

group. In Beaton et al.’s (2015) analyses where handedness was treated as a categorical

variable, whereby handedness scores were split into three, four, or five groups indicating

strength of hand preference, the results of BIS difference failed to reach significance, a fact

attributed to a small number of left-handers in their sample (Beaton et al., 2015). Therefore,

Beaton et al.’s (2015) findings should be treated with caution as the results seem to depend

on how left-handedness was measured.

The non-significant BIS results from the current study also conflict with the

behavioural inhibition results from the investigations that used experimental settings, namely

the Tower of Hanoi trials (Wright et al., 2004; Wright & Hardie, 2015) and Wright &

40


Hardie’s (2011) study involving a card sorting task. However, within these experiments,

behavioural inhibition was deduced from task initiation times, where the left-handed

participants were found to take longer to start the tasks than the right-handed participants. It

may have been that the initiation of task time was influenced more by the act of planning how

to complete the task, rather than actual behavioural inhibition. Wright and Hardie (2015)

predicted that behavioural inhibition would be higher amongst left-handers when the task was

novel, which would mean that when the ToH was presented for a second time, the left-

handers would experience less behavioural inhibition, as reflected by a shorter initiation

period than the first trial. This prediction was based on Rogers (1999) suggestion that novel

stimuli is processed by the left-hemisphere, which controls exploratory behaviour, thus

resulting in the right-handed participants who are lateralised to this hemisphere to be quicker

in novel task initiation. However, task novelty was not deemed significant, as in both trials,

the left-handed participants took significantly longer then the right-handed participants to

initiate the task, which strengthens the notion of additional planning time, rather than

behavioural inhibition. As the current investigation measured behavioural inhibition by using

Carver and White’s (1994) BIS/BAS scale, the results can never be truly comparable to the

studies that used task initiation time to behavioural inhibition.

An alternative explanation for the lack of significant difference between the mean BIS

scores for the left- and right-handed participants is that the investigation has focused on the

wrong aspect of handedness. Prichard, Propper and Christman (2013) suggest that

directionality of handedness is irrelevant to cognitive performance, but instead it is the degree

of handedness that should be the variable of interest within the handedness literature.

Schacter (1994) echoes this view and claims that investigations that fail to distinguish

between directionality and degree of handedness run the risk of generating null results and

loss of statistical power when consistent and inconsistent handers are combined. According to

41


this perspective, the comparisons should be made between consistent/strong handedness and

inconsistent/mixed handedness. The reasoning behind this proposal is that inconsistent

handedness involves interhemispheric communication and access to the right hemisphere

(Prichard et al., 2013), whereas consistent handedness is associated with poor functional

coordination between the cerebral hemispheres (Lyle, Chapman & Hatton, 2013).

Furthermore, in a neuroimaging investigation, the corpus callosum (the connecting bundle of

neural fibres between the two cerebral hemispheres) was found to be larger in the inconsistent

handed participants than the consistent handed participants, thus allowing for ease of

interhemispheric communication for those whose handedness is inconsistent (Luders et al.,

2010).

There has been a large amount of support generated for the inconsistent versus

consistent handedness theory among the investigations that have included degree of

handedness in their analyses when examining the relationship between handedness and

anxiety. Wienrich et al. (1982) reported that the direction of handedness within their study

was inconsequential in relation to anxiety, but it was in fact the extreme/consistent

handedness groups that achieved the highest score on the anxiety measure. A significant

difference in the mean score of anxiety between inconsistent right-handers and consistent

right-handers was reported by Lyle et al. (2013), with the inconsistent right-handers reporting

less anxiety. However, this trend was not found amongst the inconsistent and consistent left-

handed participants, a fact attributed to consistency-related differences in the

interhemispheric interaction between inconsistent left- and right-handers. In an investigation

using the BIS/BAS scale to measure anxiety, Hardie and Wright (2014) announced that for

the left-handed participants, BIS scores and hand strength were significantly correlated, thus

resulting in the consistent left-handers achieving the highest BIS score, and therefore, the

most behavioural inhibition. As there was no association reported between the right-handers

42


and BIS scores, it was concluded that the relationship between handedness consistency and

preference differs for right- and left-handers, thus supporting the notion of differences in

interhemispheric interaction (Lyle et al., 2013).

However, as Beaton and Moseley (1984) point out, those who opt for moderate

responses on one measure, such as the EHI, may be just as likely to opt for the moderate

response on another measure, namely the BIS/BAS scale. These moderate selectors will then

achieve lower scores than those who select extreme responses, thus giving the impression that

mixed-handers have less behavioural inhibition than consistent handers. Additionally, this

pattern of response selection could account for the significant correlation between left-

handedness and BIS score, as reported by Hardie and Wright (2014). As the current

investigation failed to take consistency of handedness into account, due to insufficient mixed-

handed participants, this particular theory was unable to be tested.

Another hypothesis was that the right-handers would score higher on the BAS

questions than the left-handers, but this hypothesis was not supported as there was no

significant difference between the groups’ BAS scores. The lack of consistent BAS findings

echoes the results of previous research (Beaton et al., 2015; Hardie & Wright, 2014; Wright

et al., 2009), which suggests that behavioural activation is unrelated to handedness. To return

to the proposal of Prichard et al. (2013), the lack of significant BAS results could be due to

the direction of handedness being the wrong variable of interest. Instead, focus should have

been given to the degree of handedness, that is, the consistency. In support of this possibility,

Christman (2014) reports that inconsistent handedness was associated with higher levels of

sensation seeking than consistent handedness, a factor which is akin to the fun seeking

subscale of the BAS section. Prichard et al. (2013) also states that right-handers tend to more

consistent in their handedness than left-handers. Therefore, if the right-handers were more

consistent than the left-handers, then according to Christman (2014), they would not have

43


achieved a high score on the BAS scale as the inconsistent handers, which by deductive

reasoning refers to the left-handers. Perhaps the conflicting theories (behavioural activation

occurs in the left hemisphere/ inconsistent handers possess more behavioural activation)

cancelled each other out, which would explain why the mean BAS scores for the left- and

right-handed participants did not significantly differ. Alternatively, behavioural activation is

just not related to handedness.

It was hypothesised that females would score higher on the BIS section than males,

however, gender differences were unable to be tested due to the disparity among participant

population. In one condition, the left-handed males who completed the normal BIS/BAS

scale, there were only two participants, which is not a large enough sample to analyse

statistically. Additionally, there were three times as many females as there were males. This

might be due to there being more females within the catchment area of social media.

Research conducted by Smith (2008) highlighted the fact that women are more likely to

participate in online surveys than men, an issue that has clearly resonated within the current

investigation. Penner and Finkelstein (1998) suggest that female volunteers have more

prosocial characteristics than male volunteers, such as more helpfulness. This could partially

explain why the sample of the current investigation mainly consisted of women.

The final hypotheses predicted that when presented with the normal BIS/BAS scale, the

left-handers would achieve higher scores than the right-handers of the same scale version,

whereas when presented with the inverted BIS/BAS scale, the left-handers would achieve

lower scores than the right-handers of the same scale. Neither of these hypotheses were

supported, as the total BIS/BAS means for both versions of the scale did not significantly

differ. In fact, the mean scores of the BAS-FS for the left- and right-handers contradicted

these propositions and therefore, the body-specific hypothesis (Casasanto, 2009), as in this

subscale, the right-handers scored higher than the left-handers on the normal scale, whereas

44


the left-handers scored higher than the right-handers on the inverted scale. The results of the

BAS-FS on the normal scale, although not at a significant level, do support the previous

research that reports left-handers as exhibiting less behavioural activation than right-handers.

This could be due to both right-handedness (Grimshaw & Wilson, 2013) and behavioural

activation (Coan & Allen, 2003) being lateralised in the left hemisphere. In an investigation

that examined white matter integrity and scores on the Carver and White’s (1994) BIS/BAS

scale, a positive correlation between BAS-FS scores and left hemisphere activation was

obtained (Xu et al., 2012), which might assist in the explanation of the current findings for

the normal scale. However, this reasoning cannot be extended to the inverted scale as the

opposite pattern was obtained.

5.2 Limitations and Future Research

As with any investigation, the current study is not without flaws. Firstly, the method of

participant recruitment may be criticised, as the questionnaires were administered using a

web-based approach. By offering the questionnaire via the internet, there is the possibility

that participants may not respond accurately or honestly (Hardie & Wright, 2104). However,

due to the anonymity provided by internet, there is no a priori reason to believe that

participants would have been deceitful in their answering, as any effects of social desirability

would have been eliminated by their anonymous identity (Cozby & Bates, 2012).

Additionally, the sample of participants will have been subject to self-selection biases,

namely, the willingness to participate. This could have been the reasoning behind the female

to male ratio, as Smith (2008) suggests that women are more likely to participate in online

research than men. As previously discussed, owing to the insufficient number of male

participants in some of the conditions, the hypotheses that females would achieve higher BIS

scores than males was unable to be tested. Future investigations could ensure the same

45


sample size for males and females by actively requesting more male participants and having a

maximum cut off for female participants.

Another limitation of the current research is that handedness was treated as a

dichotomous variable, due to insufficient inconsistent left- and right-handed participants. By

categorising participants as either left- or right-handed, any possible differences between

handedness consistency was unable to be examined. As a considerable amount of the pre-

existing literature has included consistent and inconsistent handedness within the analyses

(Beaton et al., 2015; Hardie & Wright, 2014; Lyle et al., 2013; Wienrich et al., 1982), this

could explain why the current investigation failed to see any significant differences in the

BIS/BAS scores of the left- and right-handed groups, as handedness is not as absolute as

initially assumed (Prichard et al., 2013). Subsequent research could therefore examine

handedness in terms of consistency, which would allow the analyses to identify possible

correlations between the degree of handedness and BIS/BAS score.

Lastly, this research has discussed the notion of differences in hemispheric

lateralisation between left- and right-handers, as well as differences in hemispheric

functioning for behavioural inhibition and activation. It would be advantageous to employ

fMRI techniques to actually observe the hemispheric contributions towards behavioural

inhibition and activation in relation to handedness.

46


6. Conclusion

The aims of this investigation were to examine whether there was a relationship

between handedness, gender and anxiety, as well as seeing if inverting the BIS/BAS scale

would make a difference to the scores. Gender differences were unable to tested, due to an

insufficient male sample. In line with some of the previous research (Beaton & Moseley,

1984, 1991; French & Richards, 1990; Wienrich et al., 1982), no significant differences

between handedness and BIS/BAS scores were obtained from this investigation, thus

suggesting that being left-handed does not increase anxiety and associated behaviours.

Inverting the BIS/BAS scale had no significant effect, as the left-handers did not prefer the

most leftward option over the rightward options, just as the right-handers did not prefer the

most rightward option over the leftward options, which therefore contradicts the body-

specific hypothesis (Casasanto, 2009). It may well be that the lack of significant results in the

current study are due to handedness being measured as a dichotomous variable, rather than

being measured on a continuum.

47


7. References

Annett, M. (1970). A classification of hand preference by association analysis. British

Journal of Psychology, 61(3), 303-321. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-

8295.1970.tb01248.x

Annett, M. (1985). Left, right, hand and brain: The right shift theory. London, United

Kingdom: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Beaton, A. A., Kaack, I. H., & Corr, P. J. (2015). Handedness and behavioural inhibition

system/behavioural activation system (BIS/BAS) scores: A replication and extension

of Wright, Hardie, and Wilson (2009). Laterality: Asymmetries of Body, Brain and

Cognition, 20(5), 585-603. Retrieved from http://www.ebscohost.com

Beaton, A. A., & Moseley, L. G. (1984). Anxiety and the measurement of handedness.

British Journal of Psychology, 75(2), 275-278. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-

8295.1984.tb01899.x

Beaton, A. A., & Moseley, L. G. (1991). Hand preference scores and completion of

questionnaires: Another look. British Journal of Psychology, 82(4), 521-525.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8295.1991.tb02417.x

Beaton, A. A., Rudling, N., Kissling, C., Taurines, R., & Thome, J. (2011). Digit ratio

(2D:4D), salivary testosterone, and handedness. Laterality: Asymmetries of Body,

Brain and Cognition, 16(2), 136-155. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13576500903410369

Beaton, E. A., Schmidt, L. A., Ashbaugh, A. R., Santesso, D. L., Antony, M. M., & McCabe,

R. E. (2008). Resting and reactive frontal brain electrical activity (EEG) among a non-

clinical sample of socially anxious adults: Does concurrent depressive mood matter?

48


Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment, 4(1-B), 187-192. Retrieved from

http://www.ebscohost.com

Bishop, D. V. (1989). Does hand proficiency determine hand preference? British Journal of

Psychology, 80(2), 191-199. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8295.1989.tb02313.x

Brunyé, T. T., Gardony, A., Mahoney, C. R., & Taylor, H. A. (2012). Body-specific

representations of spatial location. Cognition, 123(2), 229-239.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2011.07.013

Bryden, M. P. (1977). Measuring handedness with questionnaires. Neuropsychologia, 15(4-

5), 617-624. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0028-3932(77)90067-7

Bryden, M. P., McManus, I. C., & Bulman-Fleming, M. B. (1994). Evaluating the empirical

support for the Geschwind-Behan-Galaburda model of cerebral lateralization. Brain

and Cognition, 26(2), 103-167. http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/brcg.1994.1045

Buss, D. M. (2008). Evolutionary psychology: The new science of the mind. (3rd ed.). Boston,

MA: Pearson/Allyn and Bacon.

Cahill, L. (2006). Why sex matters for neuroscience. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 7(6),

477-484. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nrn1909

Carter-Saltzman, L. (1980). Biological and sociocultural effects on handedness: Comparison

between biological and adoptive families. Science, 209(4462), 1263-1265.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.7403887

Carver, C. S., & White, T. L. (1994). Behavioral inhibition, behavioral activation, and

affective responses to impending reward and punishment: The BIS/BAS scales.

49


Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 319–333.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.67.2.319

Casasanto, D. (2009). Embodiment of abstract concepts: Good and bad in right- and left-

handers. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 138(3), 351-367.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0015854

Casasanto, D. (2011). Different bodies, different minds: The body specificity of language and

thought. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 20(6), 378-383.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0963721411422058

Casasanto, D., & Chrysikou, E. G. (2011). When left is 'right': Motor fluency shapes abstract

concepts. Psychological Science, 22(4), 419-422.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0956797611401755

Casasanto, D., & Henetz, T. (2012). Handedness shapes children's abstract concepts.

Cognitive Science, 36(2), 359-372. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1551-

6709.2011.01199.x

Christman, S. (2014). Individual differences in personality as a function of degree of

handedness: Consistent-handers are less sensation seeking, more authoritarian, and

more sensitive to disgust. Laterality: Asymmetries of Body, Brain and Cognition,

19(3), 354-367. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1357650X.2013.838962

Coan, J. A., & Allen, J. B. (2003). Frontal EEG asymmetry and the behavioral activation and

inhibition systems. Psychophysiology, 40(1), 106-114.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1469-8986.00011

50


Coren, S. (1994). Personality differences between left- and right-handers: An overlooked

minority group? Journal of Research in Personality, 28(2), 214-229.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/jrpe.1994.1016

Cozby, P. C., & Bates, S. C. (2012). Methods in behavioral research. (11thed.). New York,

NY: McGraw Hill.

Davidson, R. J. & Schaffer, C. E. (1983). Affect and disorders of affect (pp. 249-268). In: P.

Flor-Henry, & J. Gruzelier (Eds.), Laterality and psychopathology. Hillsdale, NJ:

Elsevier.

de la Vega, I., Dudschig, C., De Filippis, M., Lachmair, M., & Kaup, B. (2013). Keep your

hands crossed: The valence-by-left/right interaction is related to hand, not side, in an

incongruent hand–response key assignment. Acta Psychologica, 142(2), 273-277.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2012.12.011

Denny, K. (2011). Handedness and drinking behaviour. British Journal of Health

Psychology, 16(2), 386-395. http://dx.doi.org/10.1348/135910710X515705

Diego, M. A., Field, T., & Hernandez-Reif, M. (2001). CES-D depression scores are

correlated with frontal EEG alpha asymmetry. Depression and Anxiety, 13(1), 32-37.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/1520-6394(2001)13:1<32::AID-DA5>3.0.CO;2-G

Eysenck, S. B., Eysenck, H. J., & Barrett, P. (1985). A revised version of the Psychoticism

scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 6(1), 21-29.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(85)90026-1

Fazio, R., Coenen, C., & Denney, R. L. (2012). The original instructions for the Edinburgh

Handedness Inventory are misunderstood by a majority of participants. Laterality:

51


Asymmetries of Body, Brain and Cognition, 17(1), 70-77.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1357650X.2010.532801

French, C. C., & Richards, A. (1990). The relationship between handedness, anxiety and

questionnaire response patterns. British Journal of Psychology, 81(1), 57-61.


Geschwind, N., & Galaburda, A.M. (1987). Cerebral Lateralization: biological mechanisms,

associations and pathology. Cambridge, MA: MIT press.

Ghayas, S., & Adil, A. (2007). Effect of handedness on intelligence level of students. Journal

of the Indian Academy of Applied Psychology, 33(1), 85-91. Retrieved from

http://www.ebscohost.com

Goldberg, D., Bridges, K., Duncan-Jones, P., & Grayson, D. (1988). Detecting anxiety and

depression in general medical settings. BMJ : British Medical Journal, 297(6653),

897–899. Retrieved from

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1834427/pdf/bmj00306-0033.pdf

Gray, J. A. (1982). The neuropsychology of anxiety: An enquiry of the septo-hippocampal

system. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press.

Grimshaw, G. M., Bryden, M. P., & Finegan, J. K. (1995). Relations between prenatal

testosterone and cerebral lateralization in children. Neuropsychology, 9(1), 68-79.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0894-4105.9.1.68

Grimshaw, G. M., & Wilson, M. S. (2013). A sinister plot? Facts, beliefs, and stereotypes

about the left-handed personality. Laterality: Asymmetries of Body, Brain and

Cognition, 18(2), 135-151. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1357650X.2011.631546

52


Gursoy, R., Ziyagil, M. A., Sahin, S., & Dane, S. (2012). Handedness, achievement in sport

and boxing. In J. Dunham, T. Davenport, J. Dunham, T. Davenport (Eds.),

Handedness: Theories, genetics and psychology (pp. 141-155). Hauppauge, NY, US:

Nova Science Publishers.

Harburg, E., Feldstein, A., & Papsdorf, J. D. (1978). Handedness and smoking. Perceptual

and Motor Skills, 47(3, Pt 2), 1171-1174.

http://dx.doi.org/10.2466/pms.1978.47.3f.1171

Hardie, S. M., & Wright, L. (2014). Differences between left- and right-handers in

approach/avoidance motivation: Influence of consistency of handedness measures.

Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 1-10. http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00134

Harris, L. J. (2010). In fencing, what gives left-handers the edge? Views from the present and

the distant past. Laterality: Asymmetries of Body, Brain and Cognition, 15(1-2), 15-

55. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13576500701650430

Hicks, R. A., & Pellegrini, R. J. (1978). Handedness and anxiety. Cortex: A Journal Devoted

to the Study of the Nervous System and Behavior, 14(1), 119-121.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0010-9452(78)80014-8

Jorm, A. F., Christensen, H., Henderson, A. S., Jacomb, P. A., Korten, A. E., & Rodgers, B.

(1999). Using the BIS/BAS scales to measure behavioural inhibition and behavioural

activation: Factor structure, validity and norms in a large community sample.

Personality and Individual Differences, 26(1), 49-58.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(98)00143-3

53


Kercher, K. (1992). Assessing subjective well-being in the old-old: The PANAS as a measure

of orthogonal dimensions of positive and negative affect. Research on Aging, 14(2),

131-168. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0164027592142001

Li, Y., Qiao, L., Sun, J., Wei, D., Li, W., Qiu, J., & ... Shi, H. (2014). Gender-specific

neuroanatomical basis of behavioral inhibition/approach systems (BIS/BAS) in a

large sample of young adults: A voxel-based morphometric investigation.

Behavioural Brain Research, 274400-408.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bbr.2014.08.041

Li, Y., Zhang, Y., Jiang, Y., Li, H., Mi, S., Yi, G., & ... Jiang, Y. (2008). The Chinese version

of the BIS/BAS Scale: Reliability and validity. Chinese Mental Health Journal, 22(8),

613-616. Retrieved from http://www.ebscohost.com

Loffing, F., & Hagemann, N. (2012). Side bias in human performance: A review on the left-

handers' advantage in sports. In T. Dutta, M. K. Mandal, S. Kumar, T. Dutta, M. K.

Mandal, S. Kumar (Eds.), Bias in human behavior (pp. 163-182). Hauppauge, NY,

US: Nova Science Publishers.

Luders, E., Cherbuin, N., Thompson, P. M., Gutman, B., Anstey, K. J., Sachdev, P., & Toga,

A. W. (2010). When more is less: Associations between corpus callosum size and

handedness lateralization. Neuroimage, 52(1), 43-49.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.04.016

Lust, J. M., Geuze, R. H., Van de Beek, C., Cohen-Kettenis, P. T., Bouma, A., & Groothuis,

T. G. (2011). Differential effects of prenatal testosterone on lateralization of

handedness and language. Neuropsychology, 25(5), 581-589.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0023293

54


Lyle, K. B., McCabe, D. P., & Roediger, H. I. (2008). Handedness is related to memory via

hemispheric interaction: Evidence from paired associate recall and source memory

tasks. Neuropsychology, 22(4), 523-530. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0894-

4105.22.4.523

Lyle, K. B., Chapman, L. K., & Hatton, J. M. (2013). Is handedness related to anxiety? New

answers to an old question. Laterality: Asymmetries of Body, Brain and Cognition,

18(5), 520-535. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1357650X.2012.720259

McLean, C. P., Asnaani, A., Litz, B. T., & Hofmann, S. G. (2011). Gender differences in

anxiety disorders: Prevalence, course of illness, comorbidity and burden of illness.

Journal of Psychiatric Research, 45(8), 1027-1035.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychires.2011.03.006

McManus, C. (2003). Right hand, left hand. London, United Kingdom: Orion Books.

McMeekan, E. R., & Lishman, W. A. (1975). Retest reliabilities and interrelationship of the

Annett hand preference questionnaire and the Edinburgh handedness inventory.

British Journal of Psychology, 66(1), 53-59. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-

8295.1975.tb01439.x

Merckelbach, H., de Ruiter, C., & Olff, M. (1989). Handedness and anxiety in normal and

clinical populations. Cortex: A Journal Devoted to the Study of the Nervous System

and Behavior, 25(4), 599-606. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0010-9452(89)80021-8

Mukherjee, S. (2016). Individual performance and leader’s laterality in interactive contests.

Laterality: Asymmetries of Brain, Body and Cognition, 0(0), 1-15.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1357650X.2016.1201485

55


Oldfield, R. C. (1971). The assessment and analysis of handedness: The Edinburgh inventory.

Neuropsychologia, 9(1), 97-113. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0028-3932(71)90067-4

Papadatou-Pastou, M., Martin, M., Munafò, M. R., & Jones, G. V. (2008). Sex differences in

left-handedness: A meta-analysis of 144 studies. Psychological Bulletin, 134(5), 677-

699. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0012814

Pauls, C. A., Wacker, J., & Crost, N. W. (2005). The two components of social desirability

and their relations to resting frontal brain asymmetry. Journal of Individual

Differences, 26, 29-42. http://dx.doi.org/10.1027/1614-0001.26.1.29

Penner, L. A., & Finkelstein, M. A. (1998). Dispositional and structural determinants of

volunteerism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(2), 525-537.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.74.2.525

Porac, C. (2016). Laterality: Exploring the enigma of left-handedness. Oxford, United

Kingdom: Academic Press.

Porac, C., & Buller, T. (1990). Overt attempts to change hand preference: A study of group

and individual characteristics. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 44(4), 512-521.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0084268

Prichard, E., Propper, R. E., & Christman, S. D. (2013). Degree of handedness, but not

direction, is a systematic predictor of cognitive performance. Frontiers in Psychology,

4(9), http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00009

Quilty, L. C., Oakman, J. M., & Farvolden, P. (2007). Behavioural inhibition, behavioural

activation, and the preference for familiarity. Personality and Individual Differences,

42(2), 291-303. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2006.07.007

56


Remes, O., Brayne, C., van der Linde, R., & Lafortune, L. (2016). A systematic review of

reviews on the prevalence of anxiety disorders in adult populations. Brain and

Behavior, 6(7), 1-33, http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/brb3.497

Rogers, L. J. (1999). Factors associated with exploration in marmosets: Age, gender and hand

preference. International Journal of Comparative Psychology, 12(2), 93-109.

Retrieved from http://www.ebscohost.com

Saalih al-Munajjid, S. M. (2007). The reason why the right hand is preferred over the left.

Islam Question and Answer. Retrieved from https://islamqa.info/en/82120

Schachter, S. C. (1994). Ambilaterality: Definition from handedness preference

questionnaires and potential significance. International Journal of Neuroscience,

77(1-2), 47-51. http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/00207459408986017

Smith, W. G. (2008). Does gender influence online survey participation? A record-linkage

analysis of university faculty online survey response behavior. Retrieved from

http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED501717.pdf

Somers, M., Ophoff, R. A., Aukes, M. F., Cantor, R. M., Boks, M. P., Dauwan, M., & ...

Sommer, I. E. (2015). Linkage analysis in a Dutch population isolate shows no major

gene for left-handedness or atypical language lateralization. The Journal of

Neuroscience, 35(23), 8730-8736. http://dx.doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3287-

14.2015

Spielberger, C. D., Gorsuch, R.L., Lushene, R.,Vagg, P.R., & Jacobs, G. A. (1983). Manual

for the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory STAI (Form Y) (‘self-evaluation questionnaire’).

Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.

57


Suitner, C., Maass, A, Bettinsoli, M. L., Carraro, L., & Kumar, S. (2015). Left-handers’

struggle in a rightward wor(l)d: The relation between horizontal spatial bias and effort

in directed movements. Laterality: Asymmetries of Body, Brain and Cognition, 0(0),

1-30. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1357650X.2015.1118112

Sutton, S. K., & Davidson, R. J. (1997). Prefrontal brain asymmetry: A biological substrate of

the behavioral approach and inhibition systems. Psychological Science, 8(3), 204-210.


Taylor, J. A. (1963). A personality scale of manifest anxiety. In E. J.Shoben & F. Ruch

(Eds.), Perspectives in psychology (pp. 68-74). Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman & Co.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/14156-007

Wienrich, A. M., Wells, P. A., & McManus, C. (1982). Handedness, anxiety and sex

differences. British Journal of Psychology, 73(1), 69-72.


Wilson, D. (1891). The right hand: Left-handedness. London, United Kingdom: MacMillan.

Wood, C. J., & Aggleton, J. P. (1989). Handedness in 'fast ball' sports: Do left-handers have

an innate advantage? British Journal of Psychology, 80(2), 227-240.


Wright, L., & Hardie, S. M. (2011). 'Not ready to sort it yet': Revised reinforcement

sensitivity theory (rRST) predicts left-handed behavioural inhibition during a manual

sorting task. Laterality: Asymmetries f Body, Brain and Cognition, 16(6), 753-767.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1357650X.2010.521752

58


Wright, L., & Hardie, S. M. (2012). Are left-handers really more anxious? Laterality:

Asymmetries of Body, Brain and Cognition, 17(5), 629-642.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1357650X.2011.615126

Wright, L., & Hardie, S. M. (2015). Left-handers look before they leap: Handedness

influences reactivity to novel Tower of Hanoi tasks. Frontiers in Psychology, 6

http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00058

Wright, L., Hardie, S. M., & Rodway, P. (2004). Pause before you respond: Handedness

influences response style on the Tower of Hanoi task. Laterality: Asymmetries of

Body, Brain and Cognition, 9(2), 133-147.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13576500244000265

Wright, L., Hardie, S. M., & Wilson, K. (2009). Handedness and behavioural inhibition: Left-

handed females show most inhibition as measured by BIS/BAS self-report.

Personality and Individual Differences, 46(1), 20-24.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2008.08.019

Xu, J., Kober, H., Carroll, K. M., Rounsaville, B. J., Pearlson, G. D., & Potenza, M. N.

(2012). White matter integrity and behavioral activation in healthy subjects. Human

Brain Mapping, 33(4), 994-1002. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hbm.21275

Ziyagil, M. A., Gursoy, R., Dane, Ş., & Yuksel, R. (2010). Left-handed wrestlers are more

successful. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 111(1), 65-70.

http://dx.doi.org/10.2466/04.05.19.25.PMS.111.4.65-70

59


8. Appendices.

Appendix A: Questionnaire

1. Are you aged 16 or over?

Only participants aged 16 or over are invited to partake in this questionnaire.

yes

no

2. Please specify your gender

Male Female

3. Which option best describes your preferred handedness?

Please select one.

Left

Right

Ambidextrous

60


4. Each item of this questionnaire is a statement that a person may either agree with or disagree with. For each item, indicate how much you agree or disagree with what the item says. Please respond to all the items; do not leave any blank. Choose only one response to each statement. Please be as accurate and honest as you can be. Respond to each item as if it were the only item. That is, don't worry about being "consistent" in your responses.

Choose from the following four response options:

Normal scale Inverted scale

1 = Very true for me 1= Very false for me2 = Somewhat true for me 2 = Somewhat false for me3 = Somewhat false for me 3 = Somewhat true for me4 = Very false for me 4 = Very true for me

1 2 3 4

A person's family is the most important thing in life.

Even if something bad is about to happen to me, I rarely experience fear or nervousness.

I go out of my way to get things I want.

When I'm doing well at something I love to keep at it.

I'm always willing to try something new if I think it will be fun.

How I dress is important to me.

When I get something I want, I feel excited and energized.

Criticism or scolding hurts me quite a bit.

When I want something I usually go all-out to get it.

I will often do things for no other reason than that they might be fun.

It's hard for me to find the time to do things such as get a haircut.

61


If I see a chance to get something I want I move on it right away.

I feel pretty worried or upset when I think or know somebody is angry at me.

When I see an opportunity for something I like I get excited right away.

I often act on the spur of the moment.

If I think something unpleasant is going to happen I usually get pretty "worked up."

I often wonder why people act the way they do.

When good things happen to me, it affects me strongly.

I feel worried when I think I have done poorly at something important.

I crave excitement and new sensations.

When I go after something I use a "no holds barred" approach.

I have very few fears compared to my friends.

It would excite me to win a contest.

I worry about making mistakes.

62


5. Please indicate your preferences in the use of hands in the following activities. When the preference is so strong that you would never consider using the other hand, select the field marked 'always'. If in any case you are indifferent, please select the 'either' field. Some of the activities require both hands. In these cases, the part of the task, or object, for which hand preference is wanted is indicated in brackets. Please try to answer all of the questions, and only leave a blank if you have no experience at all of the object or task.

Always Left Mostly Left Either Mostly Right Always Right

Writing

Drawing

Throwing

Scissors

Toothbrush

Knife (without fork)

Spoon

Broom (upper hand)

Striking Match (match)

Opening Box (lid)

6. If you are a University of Chester Psychology student and would like to receive 2 RPS credits, please enter your identity code in the space provided.

63


Appendix B: Participant information sheet

Handedness and Anxiety: Participant Information

You are being invited to take part in a postgraduate research investigation. The study that you

are being asked to participate in aims to examine handedness and anxiety. Please take time to

read this information sheet and consider whether or not you wish to take part.

What is the aim of the research? I am aiming to examine whether there is an association

between handedness and anxiety.

Why have I been chosen? You have been asked to participate as I aim to collect data from a

wide range of people.

What would I be asked to do if I took part? You would be asked to provide some

demographic details about yourself and to complete two questionnaires; one regarding

handedness, one regarding anxiety. These questionnaires are not diagnostic tools, but merely

designed to retrieve information.

What happens to the data collected? I will store your responses on a password protected,

secure laptop. If you do not complete the questionnaire, the data will be automatically

discarded by the software.

How is confidentiality maintained? There shall be no personal information required for the

completion of this survey. I will store your data anonymously. If you are a Psychology

student at the University of Chester, there will be opportunity to provide your identity code so

as I can allocate 2 RPS to you for completing this survey. This will not compromise your

anonymity, as I would be unable to identify your specific data among the completed

questionnaires. This will ensure I will not be able to trace your data back to you individually.

What happens if I do not want to take part or if I change my mind? There is no obligation to

participate in this study and you may leave a question unanswered if you do not wish to

answer it. You can stop the questionnaire at any time if you do not want to continue and your

64


data will be destroyed. Once the questionnaire has been completed, you will be unable to

withdraw from the study, as I would be unable to determine which questionnaire was yours.

You would not be allowed to look through the other completed questionnaires to identify

your own as this would breach the confidentiality of the other participants.

How do I provide my consent for this study? Consent for participation of this study is

demonstrated by completion of the questionnaire.

Are there any risks involved in taking part? No obvious risks have been identified with

completing this questionnaire.

Are there any benefits of taking part? If you are part of the RPS system, you will receive two

credits for taking part. You may also find the experience interesting.

What is the duration of the research? The study will take a maximum of 20 minutes.

Will the outcomes of the research be published? I will collate and analysis your data for my

postgraduate dissertation project.

If you have any questions regarding this study, please contact myself – or Dissertation

Supervisor – Dr Paul Rodway at [email protected]. Alternatively, you can contact

Head of Psychology Department – Prof. Ros Bramwell at [email protected].

If you feel you have been affected by any issues concerning this questionnaire, please contact

Student Support and Guidance at [email protected], or 01244 511550.

Alternatively, you could speak to your GP or contact the Samaritans on 116 123.

65


Appendix C: Participant debrief information

Debriefing

You have completed the survey. I would like to thank you for participating in my study, it is

highly appreciated. I hope that you have enjoyed taking part in this questionnaire and that it

has not raised any concerns or issues for you. The aim of this research is to examine if

handedness is related to levels of anxiety.

Should you wish to contact myself or my supervisor at any time regarding the present study,

please use the contact information provided below. If you have been affected by any part of

this questionnaire, please contact Student Support and Guidance at

[email protected], or 01244 511550. Alternatively, you could speak to your GP

or contact the Samaritans on 116 123.

Contact Information:

Researcher:

Supervisor: Paul Rodway [email protected]

Head of Psychology Department: Ros Bramwell [email protected]

66


Appendix D: Ethics application form

WORKING TITLE: Handedness and Anxiety: Is there a difference when the scales are reversed?

A. Applicant & Personnel

Applicant: Email: @chester.ac.uk Tel: 07796070539Applicant status: Staff ☐ Postgraduate Research ☐ Postgraduate Taught x Undergraduate☐ Module Number:Click here to enter text.

Supervisor, if applicant is a student: Dr. Paul Rodway Email: [email protected]

Additional personnel 1:Click here to enter text. Email:Click here to enter text.Role: Click here to enter text. Tel: Click here to enter text.Additional personnel 2: Click here to enter text. Email:Click here to enter text.Role: Click here to enter text. Tel: Click here to enter text.Attach details of any additional personnel

B. SUBMISSION TYPE

1. What is the submission type? X First submission to this or any other committee☐Resubmission of a rejected application by this committeeAttach previous submissionSummarise the changes made to the application since it was last considered by this committee, with reference to the committee’s comments:Click here to enter text.☐First submission to this committee; has been submitted to another committee. Give details of the previous submission. Include committee name, date of submission and outcome. Click here to enter text.Attach previous submission Go to Section C☐Revised submission intended to replace an application approved by this committeeGive details of the previous submission date and any changes that have been made.Attach previous submissionClick here to enter text.

C. FUNDING

2. Is the project subject to external funding? X No Go to Section D☐YesIs funding secured?☐No Provide details: Click here to enter text.

☐Yes Funding body and mailing address:Click here to enter text.

Grant number, if applicable: Click here to enter text.Named PI:Click here to enter text.

D. NATURE OF RESEARCH

67

UNIVERSITY OF CHESTER, DEPARTMENT OF PSYCHOLOGYAPPLICATION FOR ETHICAL APPROVAL


3. Are you a member of staff applying for approval for a student related research exercise? X No Go to Section E ☐Yes Module code and nameClick here to enter text.i. Will the student/s be collecting data unsupervised and outside of lecture/lab time ☐No Go to

Section E☐Yes Provide details of how ethical standards will be maintained Attach necessary documentation.Click

here to enter text.

E. RESEARCH PLAN & METHODOLOGY

Provide a detailed description of the proposed research. You should expect to write a paragraph on each section. Please note that there is a requirement to show that the project is well formulated in terms of drawing on relevant literature and is methodologically, analytically and scientifically sound.

4. Rationale/background (theoretical justification for conducting the research): Existing literature reports a link between left handedness and higher levels of anxiety than right handed people (Wright & Hardie, 2012; Beaton, Kaack & Corr, 2015). Investigations into state anxiety suggest that non-right handed people report higher behavioural inhibition than right handed people. This relationship has been examined by using the BIS/BAS scale (Carver & White, 1994). The literature also suggests that females are naturally more anxious than males (Wienrich, Wells & McManus, 1982). Other research suggests that handedness can influence spatial perception. Casasanto (2009) reports that right handed people associate the rightward spatial area with positivity and the leftward area with negativity, whereas this association is reversed for left handed people.

5. Aims and objectives (expected and desired outcomes of the research; expected impact of the research): The intention of this study is to examine whether left handed people exhibit more state anxiety than right handed people. A secondary goal is to analyse whether the direction of the scale of the BIS/BAS questionnaire will make a difference to the way in which participants answer.

6. Research questions/hypotheses (what you expect to learn): Based on prior research, it is hypothesised that left handed females will exhibit higher levels of state anxiety than the other participants. It is also hypothesised that the left handed participants will favour the items on the left side of the scale of the BIS/BAS questionnaire, whereas right handed participants will favour the items on the right, thus resulting in an observable difference when the scale is reversed.

7. Procedure (provide a summary of how you will conduct the research. More detailed responses should be given in the appropriate sections of the form, you may refer to them here):The method of data collection will be in the form of an online questionnaire, which will be created by esurvey. Participants will be presented with the information sheet which will allow them to make an informed choice on whether they wish to take

68


part. If they choose to do so, the initial questions will collect demographic information, consisting of gender and hand preference. Participants will then be presented with the BIS/BAS questionnaire, followed by the Edinburgh Handedness Inventory (Oldfield, 1971). Participants who are psychology students at the University of Chester will enter their RPS identity code in the space provided after completing the questionnaire. Finally, participants will be presented with a debrief sheet, thanking them for their time and also reminding them of contact details for myself and supervisor. Please see appendix 1 for full questionnaire.

8. Proposed timetable for research (include deadlines for data collection and contingency plans) : Data collection will take six weeks, which will commence at the beginning of May and finish in June. This will allow sufficient time for data analysis and interpretation.

9. Describe any risk of physical harm or psychological distress to participants, however minor, in the recruitment process, during data collection or post data collection. Provide details of how you will minimise and manage any issues. You must include details of your debrief procedures here: There is a very low risk that participants will be affected by questionnaire material as it does not contain information of a sensitive nature. Participants do not have to partake in the questionnaire if they choose to decline after reading the information sheet. Participants are also able to stop the questionnaire at any time should they wish. Details of contact and support are provided at the beginning and end of the questionnaire.

10. Is there any deception involved in the study? X No ☐ Yes Justify use of deception and provide debrief details:

F. SAMPLE SIZE, PARTICIPANTS AND RECRUITMENT

If you are utilising internet mediated data collection methods you must consult the relevant guidelines, consider them in this section and make your procedure clear, particularly for questions 20-24.

11. Who do you intend to recruit for participation in your study?☐No recruitment ☐Pre-existing data ☐Media/online-media based research (eg: forums)☐Other Explain: Click here to enter text. X Human participants ☐Non-human animal subjects OR Both non-human animal subjects and human participantsIf during the course of the research the costs to the individual animal/s rose above that expected,

describe the point at which you would remove the animal from the research.Click here to enter text.

Once the animal has been removed from the research describe how any distress and harm caused will be dealt with. Click here to enter text.

69


If you are working with both human and non-human animal participants and during the course of the research the costs to the individual animal/s rose above that expected and were removed from the research is there any likely distress caused to the human participant? Explain and give details of how you will minimise harm and distress:Click here to enter text.

☐Combination of the following: Check all that apply☐Pre-existing data ☐Media/online-media based ☐ Other Explain: Click here to enter text.☐Human participants ☐Non-human animal subjects OR Both non-human animal subjects and human participants

12. What is the sample size for your study? (If you are a UG or PGT student you should discuss this with your supervisor.. If you are using pre-existing data or online/media based research, give details of the type and size of sample eg: number of participants; number, type and extract length of interviews/case studies/articles/programmes/films). This study aims to include full data sets of one hundred participants, with at least thirty left handed people as part of the sample.

13. Was a statistical/power analysis conducted to determine the adequate sample?☐Yes give detailsClick here to enter text. X No describe how you determined the sample size (where appropriate you should refer to Section E)Sample size is based on prior research, such as Beaton, Kaack and Corr (2015) who tested ninety-two participants.

14. Where will the proposed recruitment and/or data collection take place?(If you are using pre-existing data/on line/media based research you should still indicate a location and consider related health and safety issues and issues of data protection and storage in relevant sections of this form).Check all that apply☐A University of Chester campus Give details: Click here to enter text. X Online (including RPS) Before you continue, consult BPS guidelines for internet mediated research and you must provide appropriate details in relevant sections. E.g. participant information; informed consent; withdrawal procedures etc. ☐Other site(s)Give details: Click here to enter text.

15. Have health and safety issues been adequately considered?Click here to enter text.☐I am a UG or PGT student using pre-existing data and I have attended the recommended health and safety briefing.☐YesOffice use only: Confirmation of attendance Y □ N □☐No Explain why & provide details of alternative arrangements & considerations Click here to enter text.X I am a UG or PGT student collecting data from human participants and/or non-human animal subjects and I have attended the recommended Health and Safety briefing.X YesConfirmation of attendance Y □ N □☐No Explain why and provide details of alternative arrangements and considerations Click here to enter text.☐I am a member of staff/PGR student and I have attached a risk assessment form. Attach suitable documentary evidence of permission. If you have not attached documentary evidence explain why. Click here to enter text.

16. Is permission to recruit potential participants/subjects required from an organisation other than the University of Chester? ☐Yes Explain: Click here to enter text.Attach suitable documentary evidence of permission. If you have

not attached documentary evidence explain why. Click here to enter text.

70


X No Explain: I will not be recruiting from an organisation, other than University of Chester.

17. Will participants fall into any of the following special groups?

☐Schoolchildren (under 16 yrs of age) ☐People with learning or communication difficulties☐Patients/clients☐People in custody☐People engaged in illegal activities (e.g. drug-taking)If any of the above boxes are checked consult BPS guidelines on the protection of vulnerable persons. If you are a student, consult with your supervisor before continuing with your application.X None of the above Go to Q18

If you are working with vulnerable persons, ascertain whether it is necessary to obtain satisfactory DBS clearance (or equivalent for overseas students) for all applicants who will be in contact with vulnerable persons, then check one of the following:☐DBS clearance obtained and shown to supervisor. ☐DBS clearance is not necessary Explain: Click here to enter text.Attach suitable documentary evidence. If you have not attached evidence explain why:Click here to enter text.

18. Describe how your sample will be identified and how you obtained contact information. I am following the Ethics Guidelines for Recruiting via Social Media. I will be utilising Facebook. See appendix 2. I will also be advertising this survey on the RPS system.

19. Indicate the types of recruitment to be used and attach copies of all materials. If you have not attached evidence

explain why: See below and appendix 1 and 2. Check all that apply

Do you need permission to contact potential participants and/or display material?X No ☐Yes Explain and give details:Click here to enter text.

☐I am using pre-existing/online/on-line media based data Go to Section G☐I am using non-human animal subjects and I have completed Q18. Go to Section G☐I am using human and non-human animal subjects and I have completed Q18 and provided information below. X RPS Ensure you have the required number of credits ☐Letters/emails to potential participants X Social media Ensure you have consulted BPS guidelines for internet mediated research and you must provide appropriate details in relevant sections.☐Flyers/posters/brochures☐Verbal script (face-to-face or telephone recruitment)☐Websites☐Powerpoint presentation☐Newspaper/magazine advertisements ☐Radio/tv advertisements ☐OtherClick here to enter text.

20. Indicate if this research exclude any persons from the participation or analysis stage on the basis of:☐Gender ☐Ethnicity ☐Age ☐Sexual orientation ☐Mental health issues ☐Specific learning difficulties ☐Physical factors (e.g. physical ability, visual acuity, language/accent, handedness etc) ☐Other Click here to enter text.

a) If you are excluding any participants on the basis of any of the above categories, please justify their exclusion and discuss how any issues of distress and/or embarrassment

71


arising from the exclusion will be minimised, monitored and managed during this process. Click here to enter text.

No exclusions apply X Go to Q21

21. Will potential participants be asked any screening questions to determine whether they will be recruited? X No Go to Q22☐Yes Explain and describe how you will minimise, monitor and manage any issues of distress and embarrassment: Click here to enter text.

22. How will informed consent be sought? Participant information sheet and completion of the questionnaire.

23. How will anonymity and confidentiality be maintained during recruitment and data collection? Participants will include no identifying information on their questionnaire. Participants hailing from the University of Chester will sign up for the questionnaire through the RPS system, who will then be sent a link for the survey. After completion, 2 RPS points will be assigned to the participant via their identity code - which only allows the researcher to allocate earned points - it does not allow any personal identifying information to be available to the researcher.

24. How will participants be able to withdraw from data collection? By not completing the questionnaire.

Is there a time limit for withdrawal? Explain: Yes, withdrawal after completion of the questionnaire will not be possible as I will not know which data set belongs to which participant. What will happen to any partially collected data? Explain: It will be disregarded by the software.

25. What is the time commitment expected of participants? A maximum of twenty minutes, including ethics processes and debriefing.

26. Indicate the type and amount of compensation participants will receive. ☐None Amount value: Click here to enter text.. ☐Money: ☐Gift certificate: ☐Travel Expenses: X Other: Explain: 2 RPS credits, if registered for RPS. Gratitude if not.

72


27. Indicate where the following information will be available to participants. Attach documentary evidence.

Check all that apply.

Info

rmati

on.

shee

t

Lett

er

Emai

l

Emai

l inf

o.pa

ge

Cons

ent

Form

Pow

erPo

int

N/A

Brief details about the purpose of the study x ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

Contact details for further information x ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

Explanation of how and why participant has been chosen x ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

Notification that materials/interviews are not diagnostic tools/therapy or used for staff review/development purposes

x ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

Explanation participation is voluntary x ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

Details of any incentives or compensation x ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

Details of how consent will be obtained x ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

If research is observational, consent to being observed ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ x

Details of procedure so participants are informed about what to expect

x ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

Details of time commitments expected x ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

Details of any stimuli used x ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

Explanation of right to withdraw and right to withdraw procedure

x ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

Option for omitting questions participant does not wish to answer

x ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

Procedure regarding partially completed questionnaires or interviews

x ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

With interviews, information regarding time limit for withdrawal

x ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

Details of any advantages and benefits of taking part x ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

Details of any disadvantages and risks of taking part x ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

Information that data will be treated with full confidentiality and that, if published, those data will not be identifiable as theirs

x ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

Debriefing details x ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

Dissemination information x ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

73


Further information (relevant literature; support networks etc)

x ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

If you have checked n/a for any of the above, provide further details: My research is not observational. There are no disadvantages for the participant to partake in this study. Debriefing details are included on the debrief sheet at the end of the questionnaire. Please see appendix 1.

Ensure you have provided further details regarding the above in the relevant sections of the form and attached any necessary documentation. If you have not attached the necessary documentation explain why:

G. DATA COLLECTION

28. Indicate the types of data collection methods that will be used Attach copies of all materials (where appropriate

Check all that apply

☐I am using pre-existing data and have indicated all the original methods of data collection below. X Online/online-media based research answer 28(a) and (b)☐Observations Diaries/Journals completed by researcher attach any instructions given to participants and any multi-media stimuli answer 28(a) and (b)☐Observations Diaries/Journals completed by participants attach any instructions given to participant and any multi-media stimuli answer 28(a) and (b) X Questionnaires/Surveys attach version of questionnaire that will be used in study, answer 28(a) and (b)

☐Individual interviews attach list of questions/topics and any multi-media stimuli, answer 28(a) and (b)☐Focus groups attach list of questions/topics and any multi-media stimuli, answer 28(a) and (b)☐Biological specimens (e.g. blood, urine)Go to Q29☐Biomedical devices (e.g. Biopac)Go to Q29☐Cognitive measures (e.g. Reaction time, accuracy, recognition) attach copies of stimuli and answer 28 (a) and (b☐Multimedia stimuli attach original material (where appropriate) URL links or other relevant information and answer 28 (a) and (b)☐Video/DVD ☐Online/video gaming footage ☐Web sites/On-line forums☐Written text (e.g. newspapers, magazine, books, transcriptions, scenarios, vignettes)☐Audio (e.g. radio broadcasts, recordings) ☐Still images☐Stimuli made from recordings of other persons that are not in the public domain (e.g. personal photographs, video/audio recordings) If stimuli are identifiable, obtain consent for their use attach evidence of consent

a) Does the content of the material contain anything that could cause distress or alarm and/or involve sex, violence, substance abuse, profanity, impudence or other types of mature content? Fully consider the suitability of the stimuli and the possible impact on the participant/researcher attach original material (where appropriate) URL links or other relevant information l X NoBriefly describe the content: The questionnaire consists of the Edinburgh Handedness Inventory (Oldfield, 1971) and Carver and White's (1994) BIS/BAS questionnaire. See appendix 1.

☐Yes Is the material from a source that has been given a universally acceptable certification OR has the source been considered by an appropriate agency with regard to suitability for audiences in terms of its ability to cause distress or alarm and/or in terms of content issues involving sex, violence, substance abuse, profanity, impudence and other types of mature content? (eg: material used by multi national media

74


organisations and widely accessible by general audiences)☐Yes Provide details and justify the use of the material. Explain how your will minimise, monitor and manage any issues of distress to the participant and/or researcherClick here to enter text.☐No/not sure Explain, provide details and justify the use of the material. Explain how you will minimise, monitor and manage any issues of distress to the participant and/or researcher.

b) Once data collection is complete what action will be taken to ensure that participants and/or researchers leave the research in a positive frame of mind? Participants will be thanked again for their participation, told the nature of the study and informed of where to find further support and information.

29. How will you collect your data? Check all that apply☐ I am conducting an experiment Provide full procedural details Click here to enter text.☐I am using observations/diaries/journals Provide full procedural details Click here to enter text. X I am conducting surveys/interviews/focus groups Provide full procedural details The method of data collection will be in the form of an online questionnaire. Participants will be presented with the information sheet which will allow them to make an informed choice on whether they wish to take part. If they choose to do so, the initial questions will collect demographic information, consisting of gender and hand preference. Participants will then be presented with the BIS/BAS questionnaire, followed by the Edinburgh Handedness Inventory (Oldfield, 1971). Should the participant hail from the University of Chester's Psychology Department, they will be provided with a space in which to enter their identity code, which will allow me to correctly allocate RPS points after submitting their completed questionnaire. Finally, participants will be presented with a debrief sheet, thanking them for their time and also reminding them of contact details for myself and supervisor. Please see appendix 1 for full questionnaire. X I am conducting internet based research Provide full procedural details See above. Additionally, the website used to create the questionnaire is found at https://www.esurveycreator.co.uk☐ I am conducting media based research Provide full procedural details Click here to enter text.☐ I am using pre-existing data. Provide full details of how the data was originally collected making specific reference to key ethical considerations of management of harm & distress, consent, anonymity & confidentialityClick here to enter text.

75


30. Will you make any recordings of human participants?(interview/focus groups, observations, images of participants' bodies)☐YesGo to question 31 X No Go to section H

31. What will be recorded? Check all that apply☐Interview ☐Focus Group ☐Images of participants’ bodies ☐Observations ☐Other Explain: Click here to enter text.

32. How will the data be recorded? Check all that apply☐Video ☐Audio ☐Photographs ☐Written transcripts ☐Other Explain: Click here to enter text.

33. Can participants’ identities be determined from the recording? (If the recording is a facial photograph/video or audio recording of a voice, the correct answer is ‘yes’.)☐ No☐ Yes Describe how you will protect privacy and anonymity during transcription and analysis. Click here to enter text.

34. Will the recordings be destroyed? NOTE: Participants must consent to their recordings being retained/archived.☐ Yes Explain how and when Click here to enter text.☐No Justify retaining the recordings and attach evidence of consent: Click here to enter text.

35. Will the recordings be used outside of this research study? NOTE: Participants must consent to all outside uses of their recordings.☐Yes Answer Question 36and attach evidence of consent

☐No Go to Section H

36. How will the recordings be used outside of this research study? Check all that apply☐ Shared with other researchers not listed on this application: Explain: Click here to enter text.☐ Used for research dissemination (conferences, journals, media publications, consultancy)Click here to enter text.☐ Used for educational purposes (e.g. training, teaching): Explain: Click here to enter text.☐ Used within a commercial/public organisation: Explain: Click here to enter text.☐ OtherExplain: Click here to enter text.

37. When the recordings are used outside of this research study, will they contain identifiable information (e.g. names, facial photographs/video, unmodified voices)?☐No☐Yes

Will disclosure of participants’ identity outside this research study reasonably place participants at risk for criminal or civic liability or be damaging to participants’ financial standing, employability or reputation?

☐Yes Explain why it is necessary to disclose participants’ identity: Click here to enter text.

76


☐ No Go to Section H

H. DATA ANALYSIS

38. Describe your methods of data analysis: A between subjects quantitative survey will be conducted, with the independent variables being; handedness (left/right), gender (male/female), and the direction of scale (rightward/leftward). The dependent variable will be the anxiety scores as measured by the BIS/BAS scale. Data will be analysed using a 2x2x2 unrelated Analysis of Variance (ANOVA), with the alpha level set at 0.05.

I. DATA PROTECTION AND STORAGE

39. Where and in what form will the research materials be stored? Describe fully the storage process during collection, analysis and archiving and consider issues of security.: Data will be stored electronically on my personal, password protected laptop. There will be no identifying information in the electronic data file.

40. Will the research materials be destroyed on completion of the project?

☐YesExplain how and when: Click here to enter text. X No Explain why the materials need to be maintained: The data needs to be stored indefinitely.

41. Will the research materials include any identifying information (e.g. names, telephone numbers)?

X No ☐YesDescribe the type of information and justify why it will be retained:Click here to enter text. Will the identifying information be deleted?

☐Yes State when and justify the retention of the information until this time: Click here to enter text.☐ No Justify the retention of the information: Click here to enter text.

J. DISSEMINATION42. How will the research results be shared?

X Academic assessment (e.g. dissertation; assignment report) Explain and give details: Research Dissertation for PS7112☐Academic dissemination (e.g. Journal publication; conferences) (If you are an UG or PGT student you must

discuss this with your supervisor before checking this box).Explain and give details:Click here to enter text.☐Non-Academic dissemination (e.g. printed/online article) (If you are an UG or PGT student you must discuss this with your supervisor before checking this box).Explain and give details:Click here to enter text.☐Academic learning & teaching (e.g. class based research exercise) Explain and give details:Click here

to enter text.

77


☐Consultancy (If you are an UG or PGT student you must discuss this with your supervisor before checking this box).Explain and give details:Click here to enter text.☐Commercial/public sector. (If you are an UG or PGT student you must discuss this with your supervisor before

checking this box).Explain and give details:Click here to enter text.☐Other (If you are an UG or PGT student you must discuss this with your supervisor before checking this box).Explain and give details:Click here to enter text.

43. How will privacy and confidentiality be maintained during dissemination? All data are anonymous, so there will be nil chance of personal disclosure.

44. Are there any specific considerations about sharing the research? (eg: Is the data from friends and family and potentially embarrassing/upsetting for someone who reads it? Is the data relating to employee satisfaction/wellbeing and likely to be seen by senior staff?).No.

78


YOU HAVE NOW COMPLETED THE APPLICATION FORM. PLEASE READ AND SIGN THE FOLLOWING DECLARATION:

I confirm that I have familiarised myself with the regulatory codes and codes of conduct and ethics relevant to my area of research, including those of relevant professional organisations and ensure that the research which I propose is designed to comply with such codes. I have familiarised myself with the following:Department of Psychology Ethical Approval for Research: Procedural Guidelines.University of Chester Research Governance Handbook BPS Code of Ethics BPS Code of Human Research EthicsBPS Guidelines for Internet-mediated Research BPS Research Guidelines and Policy Documents

I confirm I understand that:All applications must be submitted according to the guidelines set out, assessed by at least 2 reviewers and are subject to discussion by departmental ethics committee. Data collection is not permitted until applications have been approved. Collecting data without ethical approval is a serious breach of the BPS Code of Ethics.Any change of plans to the research after the approval MUST be discussed by ethics committee. chair’s action may be taken for minor changes.

Print the completed form off onto BLUE paper with the appendices on white paper. Handwritten applications are not accepted. Submit to the department office by the agreed deadline. Applications submitted after this deadline will not be processed until the following committee meeting. If you are a member of staff or a PGR student, in addition to 2 paper copies you MUST submit an electronic version to [email protected].

DATE: 21/03/2016

PRINT NAME:

SIGNATURE:_________________________________________________________

NOTES ON THE ROLE AND FUNCTION OF THE DEPARTMENT OF PSYCHOLOGY ETHICS COMMITTEE. All decisions of the committee are based on the application form and reviewers comments ONLY.

Forms should be as detailed and clear as possible. Verbal discussions are not considered as part of the application or review process.

The review process strictly adheres to the University of Chester Research Governance Handbook and the BPS Code of Ethics.

79

UNIVERSITY OF CHESTER DEPARTMENT OF PSYCHOLOGYAPPLICATION TO DEPARTMENTAL ETHICS COMMITTEE


The decision of the committee is final. If you are a UG, PGT or PGR student you should discuss the decision of the committee with your supervisor. If you are a member of staff you may contact the chair of the committee for further clarification.

80


81


Appendix 1

Handedness and Anxiety Questionnaire

Handedness and Anxiety: Participant Information

You are being invited to take part in a postgraduate research investigation. The study that

you are being asked to participate in aims to examine handedness and anxiety. Please take

time to read this information sheet and consider whether or not you wish to take part.

What is the aim of the research? I am aiming to examine whether there is an association

between handedness and anxiety.

Why have I been chosen? You have been asked to participate as I aim to collect data from a

wide range of people.

What would I be asked to do if I took part? You would be asked to provide some

demographic details about yourself and to complete two questionnaires; one regarding

handedness, one regarding anxiety. These questionnaires are not diagnostic tools, but

merely designed to retrieve information.

What happens to the data collected? I will store your responses on a password protected,

secure laptop. If you do not complete the questionnaire, the data will be automatically

discarded by the software.

How is confidentiality maintained? There shall be no personal information required for the

completion of this survey. I will store your data anonymously. If you are a Psychology

student at the University of Chester, there will be opportunity to provide your identity code so

as I can allocate 2 RPS to you for completing this survey. This will not compromise your

anonymity, as I would be unable to identify your specific data among the completed

questionnaires. This will ensure I will not be able to trace your data back to you individually.

What happens if I do not want to take part or if I change my mind? There is no obligation to

participate in this study and you may leave a question unanswered if you do not wish to

answer it. You can stop the questionnaire at any time if you do not want to continue and your

data will be destroyed. Once the questionnaire has been completed, you will be unable to

82


withdraw from the study, as I would be unable to determine which questionnaire was yours.

You would not be allowed to look through the other completed questionnaires to identify your

own as this would breach the confidentiality of the other participants.

How do I provide my consent for this study? Consent for participation of this study is

demonstrated by completion of the questionnaire.

Are there any risks involved in taking part? No obvious risks have been identified with

completing this questionnaire.

Are there any benefits of taking part? If you are part of the RPS system, you will receive two

credits for taking part. You may also find the experience interesting.

What is the duration of the research? The study will take a maximum of 20 minutes.

Will the outcomes of the research be published? I will collate and analysis your data for my

postgraduate dissertation project.

If you have any questions regarding this study, please contact myself – or Dissertation

Supervisor – Dr Paul Rodway at [email protected]. Alternatively, you can contact

Head of Psychology Department – Prof. Ros Bramwell at [email protected].

If you feel you have been affected by any issues concerning this questionnaire, please

contact Student Support and Guidance at [email protected], or 01244 511550.

Alternatively, you could speak to your GP or contact the Samaritans on 116 123.

83


1. Are you aged 16 or over?

Only participants aged 16 or over are invited to partake in this questionnaire.

yes

no

If the participant answers no, they will be directed to the end of the survey.

2. Please specify your gender

Male Female

3. Which option best describes your preferred handedness?

Please select one.

Left

Right

Ambidextrous

If the participant identifies as left handed, they will be directed to question 4. If they identify

as right handed, they will be directed to question 5. This direction will be switched half way

through data collection to provide a sample of both right and left handers for each scale

direction.

84


4. This question is open to the self-identified left handed and ambidextrous participants

for the first part of data collection.

Each item of this questionnaire is a statement that a person may either agree with or

disagree with. For each item, indicate how much you agree or disagree with what the item

says. Please respond to all the items; do not leave any blank. Choose only one response to

each statement. Please be as accurate and honest as you can be. Respond to each item as

if it were the only item. That is, don't worry about being "consistent" in your responses.

Choose from the following four response options:

1 = Very true for me

2 = Somewhat true for me

3 = Somewhat false for me

4 = Vary false for me

1 2 3 4A person's family is the most important thing in life.

Even if something bad is about to happen to me, I rarely experience fear or nervousness.I go out of my way to get things I want.

When I'm doing well at something I love to keep at it.

I'm always willing to try something new if I think it will be fun.

How I dress is important to me.

When I get something I want, I feel excited and energized.

Criticism or scolding hurts me quite a bit.

When I want something I usually go all-out to get it.

I will often do things for no other reason than that they might be fun.It's hard for me to find the time to do things such as get a haircut.If I see a chance to get something I want I move on it right away.I feel pretty worried or upset when I think or know somebody is angry at me.When I see an opportunity for something I like I get excited right away.I often act on the spur of the moment.

If I think something unpleasant is going to happen I usually get pretty "worked up."I often wonder why people act the way they do.

85


When good things happen to me, it affects me strongly.

I feel worried when I think I have done poorly at something important.I crave excitement and new sensations.

When I go after something I use a "no holds barred" approach.I have very few fears compared to my friends.

It would excite me to win a contest.

I worry about making mistakes.

5. This question is the same question as page 5, but with the scale reversed. This

question is open to self-identified right handed participants for the first half of data

collection. Availability of this question will switch for the second half of data collection

to provide a sample of both scales for both left and right handers alike.

1 = Very false for me

2 = Somewhat false for me

3 = Somewhat true for me

4 = Very true for me

86


6. Please indicate your preferences in the use of hands in the following activities. When

the preference is so strong that you would never consider using the other hand,

select the field marked 'always'. If in any case you are indifferent, please select the

'either' field.

Some of the activities require both hands. In these cases, the part of the task, or

object, for which hand preference is wanted is indicated in brackets.

Please try to answer all of the questions, and only leave a blank if you have no

experience at all of the object or task.

Always Left Mostly Left Either Mostly Right Always Right

Writing

Drawing

Throwing

Scissors

Toothbrush

Knife (without fork)

Spoon

Broom (upper

hand)

Striking Match

(match)

Opening Box (lid)

7. If you are a University of Chester Psychology student and would like to receive 2

RPS credits, please enter your identity code in the space provided.

87


Debriefing

You have completed the survey. I would like to thank you for participating in my study, it is

highly appreciated. I hope that you have enjoyed taking part in this questionnaire and that it

has not raised any concerns or issues for you. The aim of this research is to examine if

handedness is related to levels of anxiety.

Should you wish to contact myself or my supervisor at any time regarding the present study,

please use the contact information provided below. If you have been affected by any part of

this questionnaire, please contact Student Support and Guidance at

[email protected], or 01244 511550. Alternatively, you could speak to your GP

or contact the Samaritans on 116 123.

Contact Information:

Researcher:

Supervisor: Paul Rodway [email protected]

Head of Psychology Department: Ros Bramwell [email protected]

88


Appendix 2

Recruiting Participants via Social Media.

Facebook will be the chosen social media site for recruiting participants.

The link to the questionnaire will be posted alongside the message advertising it because

there are no materials of a sensitive nature included in the questionnaire. This will allow me

to gather more data sets as participants will be more likely to partake if the link is there, as

messaging me directly for the link not only takes more effort, meaning that only a certain

type of person will participate (Cozby & Bates, 2012), but they may also be concerned about

anonymity compromises.

The message used to advertise my questionnaire will read as follow:

Hello. I am a postgraduate Psychology student conducting research for my

dissertation. I am aiming to examine whether there is an association

between handedness and anxiety. This questionnaire should take no more

than twenty minutes to complete. The link is below should you wish to take

part. Thank you in advance.

I will ensure that my sample is aged 16 and over by including a check box on the

questionnaire that will only allow them to continue if they confirm they are 16 or over. Should

participants answer no to the question of being 16 or over, the survey will direct them to the

end of the questionnaire.

89


90


91


92


93


94


95


Appendix E: Ethics amendment form

96


97


98


99


100


101


102


103


104


Appendix F: SPSS outputs – CD attached to rear cover

105