Ncuroprychologia. Vol. 17. pp. 457 to 465. 0 Pergamon Press Ltd. 1979. Printed in Great Britain.

0028-3932:79;0901-0457202.00;0

GRAPHOLOGICAL PATTERNS AS A FUNCTION OF HANDEDNESS AND CULTURE

BENNY SHANON

Department of Psychology, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jersusalem, Israel

(Received I7 January 1979)

Abstract-American and Israeli subjects, right and left handers, males and females, were observed as they drew horizontal character elements, drew lines and faces and performed a simple manual task. The graphological patterns suggest that the writing behaviour of right handers ofeither culture is determined by biological factors, whereas left handers are influenced by environmental factors, and exhibit compromises when these are in conflict with the bio- logical ones.

A COMMON finding in lateralization research is that written material is not perceived equally well in the two visual fields. In unijateral presentations right handed Americans perceive words better in the right visual field than in the left [I, 21. These results are usually attributed to the relative advantage of the left hemisphere in the processing of verbal material. Subse- quent findings, and in particular the reversal of the effect in bilateral presentations, suggest that the perceptual asymmetry might instead be attributed to reading habits in English [3,4]. The choice between the two hypotheses is still not clear.

One approach to clarify the issue is to compare Americans and Israelis, given that Hebrew is written from right to left. Some authors [I, 51 argue that there is no difference between the two populations, others claim that the two constitute a mirror image of one another [6] and still others suggest that patterns in perception are due to both biological and cultural factors [7-91.

In this study I consider asymmetries in the production of written material rather than in its perception. A number of studies examined directionality variations in the copying of Bender-Gestalt figures. DREMAN [IO] tested American and Israeli subjects and concluded that directionality trends in drawing in right handers reflect cerebral function whereas left handers are more influenced by environmental factor. WEISS [I 1, 121 found that both Israeli and non-Israeli children copy the figures from left to right, and that this trend is stronger in right handers than it is in left handers. GOODNOW er al. [I31 also compared the copying patterns of Israeli and American children, but their findings are not clear-cut. DENNIS and RASKIN [14, 151 administered the Symbol Copying Test to children and found that right handers showed superiority in the left-to-right direction, while left handers were equally proficient in either direction. Further, both American and Israeli children were found to be faster in drawing from left-to-right, but the latter were slightly better in the right-to-left direction and made more errors in the left-to-right one. No such interaction was found for accuracy.

A review of the literature (for a summary of data see [ l6]), indicates that all studies which -

457

458 BENNY SHASOS

have been conducted so far are limited in at least one, and most often all, of the following respects. The subjects are children, the drawin g material is artificial in that it does not appear in a natural setting in the language concerned and, most important, either there is no control of handedness at all or the criteria for handedness are far from being satisfactory.

The present study addresses itself to all these issues. It examines the writing pattern of adult Americans and Israelis, right and left handers, males and females. At the focus of our investigation are character elements which share the following two features. First, they exhibit a right-left symmetry, and second, it is reasonable to assume that they are not taught to be written in one way or another. The horizontal bars which appear in lower case r and printed upper case H abide by these constraints. If graphological patterns are determined by biological factors then people of the same handedness should write these line elements in the same directionality regardless of what linguistic community they come from. Further, within each language group the patterns produced by right handers should differ from the ones produced by left handers. In contrast, if the operative factors are environmental, there should be no difference between right and left handers of the same culture, and only an overall difference between the two language groups should be found.

In order to establish a full interpretation of the graphological data several additional items were examined. These included alphanumeric characters not employed in the Ameri- can culture, geometrical figures, drawing of faces and manual movements. The different items employed in the study are specified in the Method section which follows.

METHOD

American and Israeli adults were observed as they performed the tasks noted in the Introduction. Al Americans were native speakers of English, and all Israelis were native speakers of Hebrew. All Israelis were highly practised with the reading and writing of material employing the Latin alphabet; handedness of subjects was ascertained following a series of simple manual tasks. Subjects were included in the right or left groups only if they performed all tasks with the same, respective limb. Further, right handers were asked to participate in the study only if they did not have any close blood relative (parents, siblings or offsprings) who were left handers; ambidextrous subjects were excluded as well. These criteria, it will be noted, are very stringent. In order to fill in all the cells in the design several thousand subjects has to be interviewed over a span of 4 years. Twenty subjects were tested in each cell defined by Language group, Handedness and Sex. Thus, a total of 160 samples were collected for each item.*

The items employed in the study and the points examined were the following. Throat-subjects were asked to perform a simple manual movement. Specifically, they were told to pass their hand horizontally across their own throat, as if they were cutting it. The direction of the movement was observed. Straight line-subjects were asked to draw a simple horizontal line, the direction of the drawing was observed. r-subjects were asked to draw a lower case cursive !. The direction in which the bar was drawn was observed. H-subjects were asked to draw an upper case printed H. The direction in which the horizontal bar was drawn was observed. Daleth-Israeli subjects were asked to draw the printed form of the Hebrew letter Daleth, a character whose graphic shape is extremely similar to that of printed capital T except that the vertical stroke does not intersect the horizontal stroke in the middle, but more to the right. The direction in which the horizontal stroke was drawn was observed. 7-Israeli subjects were asked to draw the digit seven. In Israel, it will be noted, this character is drawn with a horizontal bar crossing it in the middle. The direction in which the bar was drawn was observed. Faces-subjects were asked to draw a face in profile.

*In point of fact, these numbers are minimal. In the course of recruiting 20 subjects per cell, some cells- notably the ones associated with right handers of either culture-were over filled. In these cases the data were normalized in the process of the statistical analysis as if they were based on a sample of 20. In other words, the results are actually even more significant than reported.

GRAPHOLOGICAL PATTERY.S AS A FUNCTION OF HASDEDNESS ASD CULTURE 459

RESULTS

The distribution of the patterns collected for the different items as a function of Language group, Handedness and Sex are presented in Table 1. The numbers in the Table, and in the text which follows, indicate the percentage of subjects from the subpopulation in question which drew the given item (except for the face) from left to right.

Table I. Writing, drawing and motor patterns for eight groups. (Numbers indicate y/, of members of each group adopting the left-to-right directionality or drawing the profile looking to the left)

Americans Israelis Right handed Left handed Right handed Left handed

Males Females Males Females Males Females Males Females

Throat 100.0 IOO.0 15.0 20.0 100.0 95.0 0.0 0.0 Line 100.0 95.0 25.0 20.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 x 100.0 100.0 100.0 90.0 45.0 60.0 60.0 70.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 10.0 5.0 10.0 0.0

Daleth 100.0 95.0 20.0 15.0 7 100.0 100.0 5.0 0.0 Profile 80.0 75.0 45.0 50.0 80.0 90.0 40.0 40.0

Throat

Almost all right handed subjects, 98.7% of them, executed the movement from left to right, whereas only 8.75 % of the left handed ones did so; this handedness effect was highly significant [F( 1,152) = SOO.O]. The difference between the two language groups was also significant: the left-to-right directionality was more prevalent with Americans than it was with Israelis [58.7.5 y0 vs 48.75 %, respectively, F(1,152) = 9.07, P < O.OOS]. Finally, an interaction between Handedness and Language groups was found: the right handers of the two cultures did not differ, but the left handers did [F( 1,152) = 5. IO, P < 0.025]. Specifically, 17.50% of the American left-handers, but none of the Israeli ones, assumed the left-to-right directionality. Neither the factor Sex nor any of its interactions were significant.

Straight line

The difference between the two handedness groups effect was striking: 98.75 % of the right handers drew the line from left-to-right and 88.75% of the left handers drew it from right to left [F( I, 152) = 589.341. The two language groups differed as well: 60.00 % of the Ameri- cats and 50.00 % of the Israelis drew the line from left to right [F( 1,152) = 7.70, P < 0.011. The Handedness by Language group interaction was significant at the 0.005 level [F( 1,152) = 12.031. Specifically, all right handed Israelis drew the line one way and all left handed Israelis drew it the other way. American right handers did not differ from the Israeli ones, but 22.50% of the American left handers drew the line from left-to-right. Neither the Sex factor, nor any of its interactions were significant.

t Overall, 80% of the American subjects drew the bar from left to right, whereas only

51.25 % of the Israelis did so [F( 1,152) = 47.64, P < O.OOl]. All right handers (Americans and Israelis alike) drew the bar from left to right, whereas left handers of the two cultures varied. American left handers exhibited an almost balanced distribution: 60.00% draw the

360 BEMY 9~x0s

bar from left to right and 40.000,/, drew it from right to left. In contrast, 97.50% of the Israeli left handers drew the bar from right to left. Neither the factor Sex, nor any of its

interactions was significant.

H Overall, 76.25% of the Americans and 55.00% of the Israelis drew the middle bar from

left to right [F(1,152) = 18.87, P < O.OOl]. Some 97.50;/, of all right handers exhibited this pattern but only 33.75 % of all left handers did so[F( 1,152) = 169.73, P < O.OOl]. The Handed- ness by Language group interaction was the only significant interaction [F( 1,152) = 28.80, P < O.OOl]: All right handers, except for one American, drew the bar from left to right, whereas the left handers of the two cultures differed. The left to right pattern was exhibited by 57.50% of the American left handers, but by only 10.00% of the Israeli ones. Neither the factor Sex, nor any of its interactions was significant.

DalelIz

All but one of the right handers drew the stroke from left to right, but only 17.50 % of the

left handers did so. No other effects or interactions were found.

Israelis were observed as they drew the bar crossing the digit 7. All the right handers drew the bar from left to right, but only one of the 40 left handers did so [F(1,152) = 600.00, P c O.OOl]. No other effects or interactions were found.

Profile

Overall, 8 1.25 % of the right handers drew a face looking to the left, but only 43.7 % of the left handers did so; this effect was significant beyond the 0.001 level [F(1,152) = 27.001. No other effects or interactions were found. In particular, the incidence of left-looking faces in members of the same handedness group was comparable across the two cultures: 77.50 % vs 85.00% for American and Israeli right handers, and 47.50% vs 40.00’% for American and Israeli left handers.

DISCUSSION

The patterns observed here will be interpreted as reflecting an interaction between bio- logical and environmental influences, with biases in the differential susceptibility of different subject groups to them.

In order to outline this interaction, we shall first establish the directionality preferences which are dictated by each of these influences alone. The culturally induced directionality preferences were taken to reflect the direction imposed by the native alphabet of the cultural group in question: left to right for the Americans and right to left for the Israelis. The basic or natural directionality preferences were assessed by the examination of simple manual movements. Such movements were assumed to be free of cultural influence. As indicated by the patterns associated with “throat cutting”, right handers prefer the left-to-right direction- ality, whereas left handers prefer the right-to-left one. The same preference was noted in both Americans and Israelis, but even in this simple behavior slight cultural variations were found. Specifically, right handers of the two culture groups did not differ, but the left handers did: some American left handers, and no Israeli ones, employed the left-to-right

CRAPHOLOCICAL PATTERNS AS A FUNCTION OF HASDEDSESS AND CULTURE 461

directionality. This slight bias suggests that even very simple manual movements are not immune from cultural influence. The bias is taken to reflect the influence of writing habits in Americans, and, as will be seen in the sequel, is in line with (more pronounced) biases encountered in the graphological patterns exhibited by members of the two groups.

Drawing of the straight horizontal line was investigated because it resembles writing in its manner of execution, and at the same time was assumed to be universal enough to warrant freedom from cultural influence. The pattern associated with this behaviour was similar to the one encountered with the motor movement. Again, a small preference of the left-to-right directionality was exhibited by some left handed Americans. This preference was slightly greater than the one noted with the throat cutting, but the difference between the interactions associated with the two items was not statistically significant.

Environmental factors gain further dominance with the writing of alphanumerical characters. An identical pattern was found for all letters studied. Right handers of both cultures exhibited a categorical preference of the left-to-right directionality, left handed Israelis exhibited a categorical preference of the opposite directionality, and left handed Americans do not exhibit a preference of one directionality over the other.

By way of explaining this pattern let us compare the basic and culturally indiced direction- ality preferences associated with the different subject groups. For the American right handers and the Israeli left handers the two directionalities are on a par, but for the Israeli right handers and the American left handers they are not. These two latter groups, however, behave differently. The Americans show a compromise between the conflicting preferences, but the Israelis fully conform with the basic, biological tendency. The difference between the two groups will be attributed to a differential susceptibility of right and left handers to environmental influence. Right handers, it seems, are more resistant to such influences, and the patterns they adopt are not affected by them. Left handers are less resistant, and their performance exhibits an even-handed distribution.

A problem with the foregoing proposal is that even though the direction of writing in Hebrew is from right to left the normative pattern associated with the drawing of horizontal strokes in the alphabet of this language is nonetheless from left to right. Hence, the assump- tion regarding the culturally induced preferences is yet in need of ratification. Specifically, one could propose an alternative hypothesis whereby the relevant cultural preference is intrinsic to the character in question rather than global to the alphabet in which it is written (i.e. determined by the directionality of writing). The Hebrew letter Daleth was introduced into the corpus in order to test this alternative. The behaviour of right handers, because it is determined by the natural biological tendency, cannot differentiate between the two hypotheses. In contrast, the behaviour of left handers is expected to differ according to the intrinsic and global hypotheses. According to the intrinsic hypothesis the situation pertain- ing for Israeli left handers in the writing of the letter Daleth should be the same as the one encountered with the Americans in the writing of horizontal line elements in English, hence a similar compromise pattern should be found. According to the global hypothesis, however, the patterns associated with the Daleth should not be different from the ones encountered with Roman letters, hence the Israeli left handers writing in their own language are expected to produce patterns comparable to the ones they, and not the Americans, produce in the writing of characters in the Roman alphabet. Additional statistical comparisons were con- ducted in order to decide between the two conflicting hypotheses. The graphological patterns generated for the Daleth were compared to those associated with the letters t and H for either Americans or Israelis. The within culture comparisons with the letter Daleth did not

show a significant Item effect for either t or H [F( 1,152) = 3.10 and 0.04, respectively; both n.s.1.

In contrast, the cross culture comparison did show significant Item, as well as Item by Handedness interactions. The respective F(l,l50) and P values were 18.89 (0.001) and 9.30 (0.001) for the t, 12.1 I (0.001) and 15.56 (0.001) for the H. The Item by Handedness interaction was significant in the comparison with t [F(l,ljZ) = 6.09, P < 0.0253 but not with H [F(1,152) = 1.48, n.s.1.

Given the marked qualitative cross-cultural differences, and in light of the small (or non-existent) quantitative within-cultural ones, I conclude against the intrinsic hypothesis. By and large, it will be noted, the pattern associated with the letter Daleth is rather similar to the one encountered with all other letters. The relative high incidence of left-to-right drawers among the Israeli left-handers is attributed to the influence of the normative pattern associated with the particular letter in question, but it is not high enough to warrant a rejection of the working hypothesis entertained here.

Another possible objection to the present proposal is the following. It could be argued that Israelis are less experienced in the drawing of Roman characters than Americans are, hence when writing them their behaviour is totally determined by the basic, biologically induced preference. Even before testing this conjecture empirically, let me note that a priori I do not see much plausibility to it. Israelis start using the Roman alphabet around the age of 10, which means that the present subjects have had an experience of IO-20 yr with this alphabet. Moreover, given that many of the Israelis (bein, 0 students) were residing at the time of the survey in the U.S.A., and in light of the fact that (even in Israel) practically all academic reading is in English, the attribution of cross cultural differences to practice seems to be unreasonable to begin with.

Yet, the practice conjecture may be tested empirically. The digit 7 was introduced into the corpus especially for this purpose. Digits, like Roman characters, are written from left-to-right, but they are acquired at the same time as the native alphabet (in this case, Hebrew) is. If practice is a significant factor, Israeli left handers should produce an even- handed distribution for 7, just as the American ones do for the t and the H. By the same token, the pattern produced by the Israelis for the digit should differ from those produced by them for the two Roman characters. Analyses ofvariance comparing these patterns held against the objection raised. The within-culture comparisons of 7 yielded no significant Item or Item by Handedness effects (in the comparison to t both F values were O.OO-the two distributions were identical, in the comparison with H both F(1,102) = 1.87, n.s.). In contrast, in the cross-culture comparisons both Item and Item by Handedness effects were highly significant. The respective F and P values were 51.66 (0.001) and 51.66 (0.001) for the r, and 31.93 (0.001) and 45.98 (0.001) for the H.

In principle, there is still another alternative hypothesis which may be raised, namely, that the biological constitution of Israelis is different from that of Americans. This is a strong, radical claim, and it has actually been put forward by ALBERT [17]. The following counts in the present data do not support this hypothesis. First, the patterns produced by the members of the two cultures for items which are not characters are highly similar; the same observa- tion will be also made in conjunction with the profiles, to be discussed below. Second, the right handers of the two cultures manifest identical patterns throughout the entire corpus: if Israelis are in some sense less lateralized than Americans are, this should not have hap- pened. Third, when even-handed distributions are encountered, they are found in the

American, not the Israeli groups.

GRAPHOLOGICAL PATTERM AS A FL’SCTION OF H.4sDEDSESS ASD CXLTURE 463

To summarize, then, the graphological patterns collected here support an interactive model stipulating that:

(A) The natural directionalities associated with right and left handers are different: left-to-right and right-to-left, respectively.

(B) The culturally induced directionalities associated vvith English and Hebrew writing are different: left-to-right and right-to-left, respectively.

(C) The behaviour exhibited by right-handers is fully determined by the natural, biological tendencies whereas left-handers are susceptible to environmental influence. Specifically, in case of conflict between the biological and environmental factors left, but not right, handers will manifest a compromise in their behaviour.

It is interesting to note that the very same model accounts also for the distribution of hand positions in writing exhibited by the right- and left-handers of the two cultural communities examined here [IS]. In discussing these positions I have commented on the relationship between the present even-handed distribution exhibited by left handers and the common observation regarding lesser asymmetries in the performance of left-handers in general [19]. The latter claim is normally taken as indicative of the lesser degree of cerebral compart- mentalization manifested in left, as compared to, right handers. Both the previous and the present studies suggest that taken by itself, lack of asymmetry in behaviour cannot be regarded as reflecting biological constitution: American left handers exhibit even-handed distribution, but Israeli ones do not. It will be noted, however, that the interactive model proposed, with the stipulation of the differential susceptibility of the two handedness groups to environmental influence, need not counter current thinking regarding the lesser degree of lateralization in left-handers. In fact, the differential susceptibility noted may be causally due to the differences in cerebral organization. A direct proof of such association awaits further research (but see [20]). Finally, it is interesting to note that the present postulate (C) is in line with a proposal made by ANNETT [21] on the basis of an analysis of the distributions of manual asymmetry in the European population. Annett proposes that hand-preference in humans is determined as a whole by both genetic and cultural factors; the genetic factor, however, is operative in the transmission of right-, but not left-handedness.

The present corpus also includes the drawing of faces in profile. This item was introduced in view of the following interesting findings reported by LEVY [El. Levy presented right handed American subjects with pictures and found that they showed aesthetic preference to probes in which the important content, or the greater compositional load, was on the right. The present patterns associated with the drawing of faces are consistent with Levy’s findings and also shed further light on them. Right-handers of both cultures have drawn the faces looking to the left: i.e. with the figurative load to the right. Assuming that aesthetic judg- ments and production preferences are reflective of the same underlying mechanisms, the lack of cultural difference noted here indicates that Levy’s results are not due, as might be logic- ally argued, to the scanning habits of her subjects (Americans scanning from left to right, i.e. towards their perceptual centre of the figure). In addition the present data show that no left-handers exhibit a preference of one pattern of face drawing over the other. This result, again free from cultural influence, is in line with the commonly held view regarding lesser asymmetry in the behaviour of left-handers, a view which has already been discussed above.

Ackrto~/e4~enre,lts_Thanks are extended to the following persons for their invaluable help in the collec- tion of the data: Nili Ardon, Shmuel Bernstein, Bonnie Kat;, Thomas Heggestad, Thomas~Turner, Dorit Shanon and in particular Naomi Shanon. I am also grateful to Yaakov Karni and Meir Perlov for their help in the statistical analysis of the data and for their comments.

464 BENSY SHASON

REFERENCES I. BURTOS, M. I., GOODGLASS, H. and SHAI, A. Differential recognition of tachistoscopically presented

English and Hebrew words in right and left visual fields. Percept. Alotor Skills 21, 431~37, 19fjj. 2. MCKEEVER, W. F. and H~LISG, M. D. Bilateral tachistoscope word recognition as a function of hemi_

sphere stimulated and inter-hemispheric transfer time. illuropsycholugia 9, 281-288, 1971. 3. HARCUM, E. R. and FINI(EL, M. E. Explanation of Mishkin and Forgay’s result as a directional-reading

conflict. Can. J. Psychol. 17, X4-231, 1963. 4. WHITE, M. J. Laterality differences in perception: a review. Psychological Bl,ll. 72, 387-504, 1969. 5. BRAISE, L. G. Asymmetries of pattern recognition observed in Israelis. .!‘ellropsycho/ogia 6, 73-88, 1968. 6. ORBACH, J. Retinal locus as a factor in recognition of visually perceived words. An,. J. Psychol. 65,

555-562.1952. 7. ORBACH, J. Differential recognition of Hebrew and English words in right and left visual fields as a

function of cerebral dominance and reading habits. iVeeurops~cholog;a 5, 127-134, 1967. 8. CARMON. A. and NACHSOS, I. Hemifield differences in binocular fusion. Percept. ,Ilotor Skills 36, 175-

184, 1973. 9. CARYON, A., KLIENER, M. and NACHSOY, I. Visual hemifield effects in dichoptic presentation of digits.

Newopsychologiu 13, X9-295, 1975. 10. DRES~AN, S. B. Directionality trends as a function of handedness and of reading and writing habits. Atn.

J. Psychol. 87, 247-253, 1974. Il. WEISS, A. A. Directionality in four Bender-Gestalt figures. Percept. ,Lfotor .S/iills 29, 59-62, 1969. I?. WEISS, A. A. Directionality in four Bender-Gestalt figures-?. Percept. Motor Skills 32, 412-414, 1971. 13. G~~Dso\v, J., FRIEDMAN, S. L., BERSBAL’M, M. and LEHMAN. E. B. Direction and sequence in copying:

The effect of learning to write in English and Hebrew. J. Cross-Cultural Psychol. 4, 263-287, 1973. 14. DESNIS, W. Handrwiting conventions as determinants of human figure drawing. J. Consdt. Psychol. 22,

293-295, 1958. 15. DENNIS, W. and RASKIN, E. Further evidence concerning the effect of handwriting habits upon the loca-

tion of drawings. J. Consr~lf. Psychol. 24, 548-549, 1960. 16. DRESIAN, S. B. A review of directionality trends in the horizontal dimension as a function of innate and

environmental factors. J. Gen. Psychol. 96, 125-134, 1977. 17. ALBERT. M. L. Cerebral dominance and reading habits. Nature 256 (5516), 403-404, 1975. IS. SHASON, B. Hand positions in writing in Americans and Israelis. Neuropsychologia 16, 587-591. 1979. 19. H~CAEN, H. and SANGUET, J. Cerebral dominance in left-handed subjects. Cortex 7, 18-48, 1971. 20. LEVY, J. and REID, M. Variations in cerebral organization as a function of handedness, hand posture in

writing, and sex. J. Exp. Psychol. Gem 107, 119-144, 1978. 21. ANNETT, M. The distribution of manual asymmetry. Br. J. Psychol. 63, 343-358, 1972. 22. LEVY, J. Lateral dominance and aesthetic preference. Nerrropsychologia 14. 431-445, 1976.

On a etudi6 des sujets americains et israeliens, droitiers

et qauchers, hommes et femmes, lorsqu’ils traqaient des dlements hori-

zontaux de caracteres d’imprimerie, dessinaient des liqnes et des vi-

sages et accomplissaient une tdche manuelle simple. Les patterns qra-

pholoqiques observ@s suqqerent que le comportement de l’dcrlture des

droitiers de l’une et l’autre culture est determine par des facteurs

bioloqiques tandis que celui des qauchers est influence par des fac-

tears d’enviror,nement: quand ces facteurs entrent en conflit avec les

facteurs bioloqiques, le comportement des qauchers traduit alors des

conpromis.

GRAPHOLOGICAL PATTERSS AS .A FUSCTIOS OF HASDEDSESS ASD CULTURE 465

Deutschsprachige Zusammenfassung:

Es wurden amerikanische und israelische Versuchsperaonen

(Rechts- und Linkshander, mannliche und weibliche Personen)

beobachtet, wlhrend sie horizontale Schriftzeichenelemente,

Linien und Cesichter zeichneten und eine einfache manuelle

Aufgabe durchfiihrten. Das graphische Muster spricht dafilr,

da0 das Schreibverhalten beider Kulturen durch biologische

Faktoren deteminiert ist, wahrend Linkshdnder durch Faktoren

der Umgebung beeinfluf3t werden und Kompromlsse aufweisen,

wenn sie in Konflikt mit den biologischen Faktoren geraten.