On the conceptualization and measurement of handedness

Human handedness has long been classified in binary terms, yet such categorical distinctions increasingly appear at odds with both conceptual and empirical advances in psychological research. This commentary examines some of the challenges facing laterality researchers in reconceptualizing handedness. First, it considers the practical tension involved in measuring handedness as a continuous variable: though this affords greater precision it imposes a time and attentional burden on participants, particularly in studies where handedness is not a primary interest. Second, it explores how technology is changing handedness, with the decline of handwriting and the rise of bimanual digital devices challenging the validity of the most commonly used short measure of handedness: writing hand. Third, it argues that rather than abandoning categorical classification altogether, researchers could consider a more nuanced model that offers greater ability to distinguish differences in handedness than binary conceptualizations, whilst still retaining the intuitive benefits and ease of measurement of the categorical approach. By refining how we categorize handedness rather than abandoning categorization altogether, researchers can recognize both the complexity of the construct and the realities of empirical work.