cortex 44 (2008) 1326–1335

available at www.sciencedirect.com

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/cortex

Special issue: Research report

Believing in paranormal phenomena: Relations

to asymmetry of body and brain

Günter Schulter* and Ilona Papousek

Department of Psychology, University of Graz, Graz, Austria

article info abstract

Article history:
Received 29 November 2006
Reviewed 20 March 2007
Revised 28 August 2007
Accepted 29 August 2007
Published online 10 July 2008
Keywords:
Belief in paranormal phenomena
Hemispheric asymmetry
Fluctuating asymmetry
Developmental instability
The goal of this study was to investigate the possible relationship between established
measures of body and brain asymmetries and individual differences in paranormal beliefs.
In addition to behavioural measures of cerebral laterality, measures of facial features and
finger length were taken to calculate body asymmetry scores and indicators of fluctuating
asymmetry (average absolute differences between left and right body features). Both the
direction and degree of laterality measures were used. In addition to that, quantitative
measures of inconsistency of cerebral lateralization were obtained. Results indicated
that a stronger belief in paranormal phenomena was associated with fluctuating asymme-
try of finger length, and that this aspect of body asymmetry may be related to greater intra-
individual variability in the degree of ‘atypical’ functional lateralization. This
intraindividual variability index, in turn, significantly predicted strength of belief in the
paranormal. Belief in the paranormal was also higher in women than men and it was nega-
tively correlated with the education level. In sum, these findings suggest that a part of the
variance of strength of belief in paranormal phenomena can be explained by patterns of
functional hemispheric asymmetry that may be related to perturbations during fetal
development.
ª 2008 Elsevier Srl. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction tasks involving probabilistic judgments and statistical

Even though educational curriculum in the West is based on
rationality, superstitious and magical thinking is still wide-
spread (Haraldsson, 1985). It seems likely, therefore, that
believers in paranormal phenomena not only share a certain
set of beliefs, but possess psychological attributes (i.e.,
a personality or cognitive disposition), which make them
prone to search for meaningful connections among random
events (Brugger et al., 1993b; Farias et al., 2005). In fact,
believers have been consistently shown to have, for instance,
lower syllogistic reasoning ability, lower performances in
thinking, and higher scores in tests of fantasy proneness
and the propensity to find correspondences in distantly
related material (see Wiseman and Watt, 2006 for review).
Most often, belief in the paranormal has been investigated
in connection with psychosis-proneness, using scales of
‘magical ideation’, which is commonly regarded a feature of
schizotypal thinking style and includes belief in paranormal
phenomena such as telepathy, clairvoyance, and precognition
(Eckblad and Chapman, 1983). However, superstitious and
magical thinking is too prevalent among normal adults to
justify ‘pathologization’ of belief in the paranormal. Some

* Corresponding author. Department of Psychology, University of Graz, A-8010 Graz, Austria.

E-mail address: guenter.schulter@uni-graz.at (G. Schulter).
0010-9452/$ – see front matter ª 2008 Elsevier Srl. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.cortex.2007.08.022
 cortex 44 (2008) 1326–1335
facets of paranormal belief may even be associated with
subjective psychological health and beneficial personality
characteristics like extraversion (Thalbourne and Haraldsson,
1980; Goulding, 2005) or creativity (Folley and Park, 2005).
Whether such tendency to believe in the paranormal indi-
cates a normal variant or a predisposition to schizophrenia,
it seems obvious to look also for biological bases of the psycho-
logical traits that may be characteristic of believers. The most
systematic research program focused on finding neuropsycho-
logical explanations for paranormal beliefs is the laterality
model advanced by Brugger and colleagues. Brugger argues
that overactivity of the right hemisphere is the crucial feature,
supported by findings of a series of experiments that he and his
coworkers have conducted (e.g., Brugger et al., 1993b; Brugger
and Graves, 1997; see Brugger and Taylor, 2003 for review).
However, to date it is not known which cortical regions are
actually involved in generation and maintenance of para-
normal beliefs. The idea that each individual has a universal
‘left hemisphere’ or ‘right hemisphere dominance’ that can be
deduced from a single aspect of hemispheric specialization is
no longer tenable. Instead, the concept of modularity of hemi-
spheric functions has increasingly been accepted, that is, the
assumption that different processing modules can be lateral-
ized differently and independently of each other (see Papousek
and Schulter, 2006 for a summary of the respective evidence).
Similarly, attempts to reduce all functional asymmetries to
one fundamental dichotomy that globally characterizes the
competences of the hemispheres (e.g., analytic vs holistic,
rational vs emotional, etc.), that were also in keeping with these
historical views, had to be clearly abandoned, as well (Papousek
and Schulter, 2006).
Considering the well-known phenomenon that epileptic
seizures with foci within the temporal lobes can elicit para-
normal-like experiences, temporal regions may be the most
obvious region to examine. However, contributions of other
cortical regions must also be considered. For instance, regions
in the left temporal lobe and the ventromedial prefrontal cortex
were found to be involved in belief-biased reasoning, whereas
relatively greater activation of the right lateral prefrontal cortex
was associated with correct logical reasoning (Goel and Dolan,
2003). In suggestibility, which is closely related to belief in para-
normal phenomena (Raz et al., 2008, this issue), disconnection
of frontal functions from posterior and subcortical functions
seems to play a crucial role, leading to less critical evaluation
and reality testing (Gruzelier, 2006).
The first aim of the present study, therefore, was to test
whether trait aspects of functional hemispheric asymmetry
may be related to belief in paranormal phenomena, and if
so, which. Using seven behavioural laterality tests we were
able to examine several independent modules of brain lateral-
ization (Papousek and Schulter, 1999a). Usage of multiple lat-
erality tests allows us to determine which brain region may be
related to psychological traits associated with paranormal
belief and which aspect of laterality (hemispheric specializa-
tion, individual lateral preference) may be most important.
In addition, aspects of laterality were quantitatively assessed
on continuous scales, thus, measuring both direction and
degree of lateralization. Evidence suggests that individual
differences in the degree of lateralization are stable across
time and that they provide useful additional information on
1327
brain lateralization (see Papousek and Schulter, 2006 for
review). All tests were performance measures, in order to
avoid the multiple problems associated with self-report later-
ality questionnaires (Papousek and Schulter, 1999a). Predomi-
nantly on the basis of the findings demonstrated by Brugger’s
group we expected that measures indicative of lateralization
in the temporal lobes may show significant relationships to
belief in paranormal phenomena. However, asymmetry in
parietal and frontal (executive) functions may also be involved
in psychological traits that are related to paranormal belief
(e.g., Gruzelier, 2006; Taylor et al., 2002).
There is some evidence relating paranormal beliefs,
magical ideation, schizotypy, or psychotic states to inconsis-
tency of lateralization. Inconsistencies in lateralization of
different functional systems have been shown to be related
to higher magical ideation scores (Nicholls et al., 2005). In
a study investigating inconsistencies of laterality within one
functional system (e.g., motor functions), the highest magical
ideation scores were observed in subjects with increased
inconsistent lateralization (Mohr et al., 2003).
Lack of consistency among aspects of functional lateraliza-
tion, however, may just indicate weak cerebral lateralization
in a global sense (e.g., Porac, 1997). In fact, there is also
evidence that weak lateralization (irrespective of direction)
may be related to belief in paranormal phenomena. Barnett
and Corballis (2002) demonstrated a significant correlation
between magical ideation and the absolute score of the later-
ality coefficient, indicating an association of increased domi-
nance in either direction (left or right) with lower magical
ideation scores. However, only one aspect of functional later-
ality was assessed in this study, and the degree of handedness
was assessed by questionnaires, which might not be ideal in
obtaining quantitative measures (Yeo et al., 1993).
The second aim of the present study, therefore, was to
examine, whether degree of lateralization in various perfor-
mance measures of functional lateralization may be related
to belief in paranormal phenomena. For this purpose, the
absolute values of each laterality measure were related to
the extent of belief in paranormal phenomena. Our hypoth-
esis was that lower degrees of lateralization might be associ-
ated with stronger beliefs.
The examination of relationships with absolute laterality
measures at its core has to take an alternative theoretical
concept of individual variation of lateralized functions into
account: the model of developmental instability (DI). This
model postulates that the individual expression of hand prefer-
ence, but likewise of all other lateralized functions, may be seen
as the consequence of developmental instability. DI is
conceived as the degree to which environmental sources of
stress (during pre- and perinatal development) result in devia-
tions from an individual’s ontogenetic program for morpholog-
ical, physiological and also neurodevelopmental characteristics
and design. Random deviations from symmetry of bilateral
features, which are symmetrical at the population level, for
instance, may be reflecting such developmental influences.
Therefore, the impact of stressors and also an individual’s
ability to cope with them may be indicated by such deviations
from symmetry which frequently are used as measures of ‘fluc-
tuating asymmetry’ (FA; Van Valen, 1962; Moller and Swaddle,
1997).
1328 cortex 44 (2008) 1326–1335
Based on this theoretical concept, a model of individual
lateralization has been proposed postulating that individual
variation of handedness, for instance, may be a result of DI:
population-typical manifestation of genetically determined
handedness may be reflected in moderate right-handedness,
whereas DI produces deviations from the population mean
of handedness (Yeo and Gangestad, 1993; Yeo et al., 1993).
Consequently, both left-handers and extreme right-handers
should show evidence of increased fluctuating anatomic
asymmetries indicating DI. Additionally, and most impor-
tantly for theoretical concepts of brain lateralization, Yeo
et al. (1997) postulated that cerebral asymmetry of every later-
alized brain function may be affected by DI: increased devia-
tions from population-typical patterns of functional
hemispheric asymmetry in either direction may be associated
with an elevated incidence of FA. Using tests that typically
show functional asymmetries at the population level (e.g.,
dichotic listening, line bisection, or chimeric faces task),
they were able to demonstrate that measures of FA were unre-
lated to directional asymmetries, but significantly associated
with ‘atypical’ lateralization, i.e., individuals with higher FA
scores showed greater deviations from the sample mean in
either direction. Beyond functional asymmetries, Thoma
et al. (2002) used imaging techniques (MRI) to determine
several anatomical brain features (e.g., left and right hemi-
sphere volumes, areas of left and right planum temporale,
size of corpus callosum) and demonstrated that ‘atypical’
brain asymmetry was significantly related to a composite FA
measure relying on the relative sizes of several body features
(e.g., ears, feet, etc.).
The third research question of the present study, therefore,
concerns the possible impact of developmental instability on
belief in paranormal phenomena. Body FA was assessed by
obtaining the following measures: (1) asymmetry of finger
length of both hands, and (2) two different aspects of facial
asymmetry (see Section 2). In addition to classical measures
of fluctuating asymmetry (i.e., average absolute differences
between left and right body features), directed measures of
body asymmetry were also calculated (i.e., signed differences
between left and right body features). The direction of certain
body asymmetries may also indicate prenatal aspects of brain
development and functional asymmetry (e.g., Means and
Walters, 1982; Kimura, 1994). In contrast to the above delin-
eated expectation of negative correlations between absolute
measures of functional laterality and paranormal belief,
within the framework of the theory of developmental insta-
bility, positive correlations between body FA, absolute
measures of functional laterality, and belief in paranormal
phenomena were predicted.
However, within this theoretical context, and bearing the
modular approach in mind, it may also be expected that inde-
pendently lateralized functional systems may be affected in
different ways and to different degrees, as environmental
stressors are presumed to cause random errors in brain devel-
opment. Therefore, deviations from population-typical
patterns of functional hemispheric asymmetry as predicted
by the DI model may show up in some functional systems,
but not in others. Consequently, DI may rather affect the
intraindividual variability of functional hemisphere asymme-
tries concerning the degree of deviation from the population
mean. Such diversity may best be captured by the intraindi-
vidual variance of the unsigned (absolute) z values of each lat-
erality measure. Thus, we also examined whether fluctuating
asymmetry of the body may be related to intraindividual vari-
ability of functional brain lateralization. Similarly to the anal-
yses of body asymmetries, a measure of intraindividual
variability of directed asymmetries was analysed in addition
to the score based on absolute deviations. This directed vari-
ability measure may tap the concept of inconsistency of later-
alization described above.
2. Methods
2.1. Participants
A total of 136 participants (68 men, 68 women) recruited by
advertisements in local newspapers were paid for participa-
tion in the study. The age range was 19–51 years (M ¼ 32.7,
SD ¼ 8.7). Left-handers (Ss with negative laterality quotients
in a handedness test; see next paragraph) and subjects with
left-handed parents or siblings were excluded from the study.
There is evidence that – with respect to brain lateralization –
left-handedness is not simply the mirror image of right-
handedness, i.e., there may not be a single linear continuum
from strong left- to strong right-handedness, and that lateral-
ization of functions may be heterogenous within left-handers
(see Papousek and Schulter, 1999a, 2006). It seems useful,
therefore, to investigate cortical lateralization of functions in
right-handers and left-handers separately. No participant
was using drugs or medication. 9 participants (4 women)
had obligatory school education only (i.e., 9 years of educa-
tion), 51 (25) obligatory school education plus professional
training, 60 (32) higher school education (12–13 years), and
16 (7) a university degree (16 or more years of education). For
some analyses participants had to be dropped because of
missing data: one participant failed to complete the Belief in
Paranormal Phenomena Questionnaire, a total of 26 partici-
pants failed to complete at least one of the behavioural later-
ality tests, and digit length data were not available from three
participants.
2.2. Behavioural laterality tests
2.2.1. Handedness
Relative hand skill was assessed by a standardized paper and
pencil test (HDT; Steingrüber and Lienert, 1971; Papousek and
Schulter, 1999a, 1999b) consisting of three different tasks
which had to be performed with the left and the right hand
as quickly as possible within a given time limit; i.e., to draw
a line within small boundaries, to mark a series of squares
and a series of circles with one dot each. As only right-handers
were included in the study, the laterality coefficient [(R  L)/
(R þ L)  100] indicates the participants’ degree of right-
handedness (HAND).
2.2.2. Line bisection
In a computerized version of the classical line bisection task
10 lines were presented one after another on a computer
screen. Participants were instructed to move the cursor to
 cortex 44 (2008) 1326–1335
the center of the line and to transect it by clicking on the
mouse button (see Papousek and Schulter, 1999a for details
of this test). The distances of the transection marks from the
true center of the lines were registered by the computer
program and averaged across trials (LINE). Positive values
indicate that subjects on average bisected lines deviating to
the right end of the line, while negative values reflect transec-
tions to the left of the midpoint.
2.2.3. Ear dominance
Ear dominance was measured following a method initially
described by Efron and Yund (1974). In this test pairs of ‘dich-
otic chords’ were presented which were composed of two pure
tones of different frequencies (1650 and 1850 Hz). The two
tones of a dichotic chord were presented simultaneously,
one to each ear. With such a small frequency difference
between the dichotic tones, subjects hear a single, fused
sound image containing both frequencies, the perceived
mixture being dominated by the frequency of the tone pre-
sented to the preferred ear. The ear-frequency relationship
was always reversed for the second chord of a pair. For each
trial, participants were required to judge whether the overall
pitch of the first chord was higher or lower than that of the
second (see Papousek and Schulter, 1999a, 2002 for further
details of this test). The number of right minus left ear deci-
sions divided by the total was calculated as an index of ear
dominance (EAR). Dominance of the right ear is indicated by
positive values, participants with dominance of the left ear
show negative values.
2.2.4. Ocular dominance
Ocular dominance was determined by an apparatus devel-
oped on the basis of a classical ‘alignment test’ (sighting domi-
nance; Ruggieri et al., 1980). This test is based on the
phenomenon that it is impossible to foveate a target with
both eyes, predominantly the input from the foveating eye is
used, while the input from the other eye seems to be tempo-
rarily suppressed to avoid diplopia. The participants were
instructed to bring two luminous rods into line. The task
was performed with both eyes first, then with only the left
eye (balanced right), with both eyes again, and finally with
the right (left) eye. The basic principle of the score of this
test is that the deviation of the two rods produced by the
dominant eye is about the same as when performing the
task with both eyes, whereas the performance of the non-
dominant eye differs from this score to a considerable extent
(see Papousek and Schulter, 1999a, for details of the apparatus
and scoring procedure). Positive values indicate dominance of
the right eye, whereas left-eyed subjects show negative values
(EYE).
2.2.5. Chimeric faces test
An adapted version of the chimeric faces test described by
Levy et al. (1983) was presented on a computer screen. In
each of a total of 24 trials a pair of chimeric faces was dis-
played, with half the face showing a smiling and half a neutral
expression. The two halves were photos of the same person,
and the two faces of a trial were exact mirror images. Partici-
pants were instructed to judge which face of the pair (top or
bottom) looked happier. Right-biased (left-biased) responses
1329
were those in which the composite with the smile in the view-
er’s right (left) hemispace was judged happier. The partici-
pants’ bimanual answers were registered by the computer
program which also calculated the laterality coefficient by
subtracting the number of left-biased responses from the
number of right-biased responses, divided by the total
number of observations (CF). Positive values indicate predom-
inance of right-hemispace biases in the perception of
emotional facial expressions, negative values indicate
predominance of left-hemispace biases.
2.2.6. Conjugate lateral eye movements
To assess the preferred direction of conjugate lateral eye
movements, 21 synonym questions and 21 orienting questions
were presented (see Papousek and Schulter, 1999a, for details
and rational of this test). The first eye movement between
question and response was recorded by the experimenter
who faced the subject, using the numerals on a clock face to
represent direction of eye movement, a method proposed by
Ehrlichman et al. (1974). Also following Ehrlichman et al.
(1974), a quantitative measure of the preferred direction of
lateral eye movements was calculated (CLEM), which corre-
sponds to the mean x (i.e., horizontal) coordinate of each clock
position weighted by the number of eye movements occurring
at that position. Positive values indicate dominance of right-
ward eye movements (‘rightmovers’), ‘leftmovers’ show nega-
tive values.
2.2.7. Dichotic listening
For the dichotic listening test material and procedures were
used that were in accordance with the guidelines of Hugdahl
(1995). The dichotic stimuli consisted of the CV syllables ba,
da, ga, pa, ta, and ka. Both the consonant- and the vowel-
segments of the syllables were temporally aligned between
channels. The participants marked their answers continu-
ously on a scoring form. Data were scored for each participant
as the number of correctly reported syllables for the right and
left ear input, respectively. The laterality coefficient was
calculated by subtracting the number of left ear syllables
from the number of right ear syllables divided by the total of
correctly reported syllables (DL).
Of all laterality measures absolute scores were also calcu-
lated. These scores indicate degree of lateralization irrespec-
tive of its direction (absHand,1 absLINE, absEAR, absEYE,
absCF, absCLEM, absDL).
2.3. Finger length asymmetry
Participant’s hands were photocopied (Konica Minolta 7030).
Second through fifth digit lengths were measured from these
photocopies using a vernier caliper measuring to the nearest
.05 mm. Digit lengths were measured from the basal crease
of the digit proximal to the palm to the tip of the digit. Asym-
metry of each digit was calculated as the difference between
the left and right measurements divided by their sum
[(L  R)/(L þ R)]. Finally, the composite score ‘directed asymme-
try’ of finger length (fDA) was calculated as the mean of the
1
As only right-handers were included in the present study,
absHAND is identical to HAND.
1330 cortex 44 (2008) 1326–1335
asymmetry scores of all four digits. The absolute value of this
score was used to indicate the ‘fluctuating asymmetry’ of finger
length (fFA). All digit lengths were measured independently by
two experimenters. The intraclass correlation between the
composite scores of the two experimenters was ICC ¼ .79
( p < .001). Scores of the two experimenters were averaged to
obtain the final finger length asymmetry measures.
2.4. Facial asymmetry
The procedure of measuring facial fluctuating asymmetry was
adapted from the work of Shackelford and Larsen (1997). At
first, some measures were made for calibration of the computer
program, i.e., the distance between the pupils measured by
a pupillometer and the size of the ears measured by a vernier
caliper. Two digital photos were taken of each participant,
one close-up and one showing the exact position of the ears
with the help of mirrors positioned at the sides of the head.
The photos then were analysed using a computer program in
which several points were marked manually for the following
features: pupil center of left and right eyes, outer eye (outer
closure of each eye), inner eye (inner closure of each eye), outer
point of each nostril, cheekbone (most prominent outer point of
each cheekbone), left and right corners of the mouth, jaw (most
prominent outer point of left and right jaws), lowermost point
of the chin, upper and lower ends of left and right ears. The
vertical axis was defined as the line perpendicular to and inter-
secting at the calculated midpoint of the line anchored by the
left and right pupil centers. The horizontal axis was defined
as tangent to the point of the chin. For each of the bilateral char-
acteristics the distances from the vertical axis to the feature
were determined and averaged across all features on the left
(avL) and across all features on the right side (avR). The
composite score ‘horizontal directed asymmetry’ (hDA) is defined
as the difference between the mean distances on the left and
the right side [hDA ¼ avL  avR]. In addition to that, the
composite score ‘horizontal fluctuating asymmetry’ was calcu-
lated as the absolute difference between the mean distances
on the left and the right side [hFA ¼ abs(avL  avR)]. Analogous
to the horizontal asymmetry scores, two composite vertical
asymmetry scores were calculated using the horizontal axis
as the reference axis (vDA and vFA, respectively). All reference
points were independently marked by two experimenters.
Scores based on the work of the two experimenters were highly
correlated (intraclass correlations ICC ¼ .88, p < .001 and
ICC ¼ .90, p < .001 for the horizontal and the vertical score,
respectively). For all subsequent analyses scores of the two
experimenters were averaged.
2.5. Belief in paranormal phenomena questionnaire
(BPP)
Items were in part compiled from other scales (Brugger, 1991;
Musch and Ehrenberg, 2002) and in part especially developed
for the present study, aiming at a medium item difficulty in
a normal sample and restricting the item content to belief in
paranormal phenomena, i.e., excluding the ‘experience facet’
to obtain a homogeneous scale differentiating well among
individuals of a rather heterogeneous sample. The BPP scale
comprised the following items:
1. Some people have the ability to predict the future.
2. Some people are capable of transferring thoughts to
another person (telepathy).
3. There are good spirits and also evil spirits that can influ-
ence our lives.
4. The positions of the planets at the time of birth (the horo-
scope) determine a person’s life.
5. There is life after death.
Each item had to be rated on a 5-point Likert scale ranging
from ‘I don’t believe that at all’ (0) to ‘I am firmly convinced of
that’ (4). The internal consistency reliability (Cronbach’s
alpha) of the scale in the present sample was .81. Means and
standard deviations of the five items were: M ¼ 1.6, SD ¼ 1.2
(Item 1); M ¼ 2.3, SD ¼ 1.3 (Item 2); M ¼ 1.3, SD ¼ 1.3 (Item 3);
M ¼ 1.4, SD ¼ 1.2 (Item 4); M ¼ 2.3, SD ¼ 1.4 (Item 5). The total
score of the scale showed an approximately normal distribu-
tion with a range of 0–20. Hence, the scale proved to differen-
tiate very well within the normal, nonclinical range.
Correlations with the subscales of the Eysenck Personality
Questionnaire (EPQ; Ruch, 1999) were r ¼ .02 (ns.), r ¼ .19
( p < .05), r ¼ .06 (ns.) for neuroticism, extraversion, and psy-
choticism, respectively.
2.6. Procedure
Participants were tested on three separate occasions with two
to four days between sessions. In the first session, after
informed consent was obtained, the handedness test and
the questionnaires were applied (BPP, EPQ), hands were pho-
tocopied for the calculation of finger length asymmetry, and
pupil distance and size of ears were measured and photos
taken for calculation of facial asymmetry. In the second and
in the third session the behavioural laterality tests were
applied twice (with the exception of the handedness test).2
3. Results
Test–retest correlations of the behavioural laterality scores in
the present sample were LINE: r ¼ .72 ( p < .001), EAR: r ¼ .80
( p < .001), EYE: r ¼ .83 ( p < .001), CF: r ¼ .84 ( p < .001), CLEM:
r ¼ .60 ( p < .001), and DL: r ¼ .37 ( p < .001). Therefore, with
the exception of the dichotic listening score, retest correla-
tions of all behavioural laterality scores are of sufficient
magnitude to proceed on the assumption that temporally
stable individual differences substantially contribute to the
observed asymmetry scores. Due to its low temporal stability,
DL was excluded from all subsequent analyses. Of all other
laterality measures, scores of the two sessions were averaged.
With one exception all intercorrelations among the different
behavioural laterality scores were not significant (r ¼ .01 to
r ¼ .17, ns.). The correlation between EAR and CF reached
significance (r ¼ .23, p < .05), the low size of the correlation
argues against a substantial relationship between these two
measures, however.
2
Only data directly relevant to this paper are reported here.
With regard to other research questions, additional variables
were obtained. These data will be reported elsewhere.
 cortex 44 (2008) 1326–1335 1331

In order to evaluate relationships between functional hemi-

Table 2 – Standard multiple regression analysis: BPP
sphere asymmetries and belief in paranormal phenomena score on absolute measures of functional hemisphere
a standard multiple regression analysis was performed, using asymmetry
HAND, LINE, EAR, EYE, CF, CLEM, and sex of subjects as the
r b sr p
predictor variables and the BPP score as the dependent variable.
The full model was significant, F(7,101) ¼ 2.67, p < .05, R2 ¼ .16. absHAND .10 .04 .04 .656
absLINE .11 .08 .07 .425
However, only sex contributed significantly to the variance of
absEAR .19 .17 .16 .082
belief in paranormal phenomena, women scoring higher on
absEYE .01 .01 .01 .896
the BPP questionnaire then men (see Table 1). An equivalent absCF .07 .02 .02 .846
analysis was performed with the absolute laterality scores abs- absCLEM .04 .07 .07 .436
HAND,1 absLINE, absEAR, absEYE, absCF, absCLEM, indicating Sex .28 .27 .26 .005
degree of lateralization irrespective of direction, and sex as
Note: r, Pearson correlation; b, standardized regression coefficient;
independent variables. Besides the significant sex effect, this sr, semipartial correlation.
analysis yielded no significant effect, F(7,101) ¼ 2.12, p < .05,
R2 ¼ .13 (see Table 2). It can also be concluded from the statis-
tical results that neither the signed nor the absolute laterality First, a 2  2 multivariate analysis of variance was run, with
measures share some common variance that might explain fFA (median split) and sex as independent, and intraindividual
some variance of BPP. variance of directed (var-dLAT) and absolute behavioural lat-
Standard multiple regression was also utilized to assess erality scores (var-aLAT) as the dependent variables. For
the relationship between body asymmetry and belief in para- each participant var-dLAT was calculated as the standard
normal phenomena. In this analysis, fDA, fFA, hDA, hFA, vDA, deviation of his or her (z-transformed) scores in the tests
vFA, and sex were entered as the independent variables. HAND, LINE, EAR, EYE, CF, and CLEM, reflecting intraindivid-
Results indicated that these variables explain a significant ual variability in direction and degree of behavioural laterality,
amount of variance of BPP, F(7,125) ¼ 4.39, p < .001, R2 ¼ .20. relative to the sample mean. Var-aLAT indicates intraindivid-
However, in addition to sex, only fFA contributed significantly ual variability in the degree of deviation from the sample
to the variance of BPP (see Table 3). A greater degree of fluctu- mean only, and was calculated as the standard deviation of
ating asymmetry of finger length was associated with a higher absHAND, absLINE, absEAR, absEYE, absCF, and absCLEM.
BPP score. Intercorrelations between body asymmetry The multivariate test of the analysis of variance revealed
measures were significant for horizontal and vertical DA a significant main effect of fFA, F(2,128) ¼ 3.28, p < .05. The
(r ¼ .26, p < .01) and for horizontal and vertical FA (r ¼ .45, other effects were not significant (main effect sex:
p < .001). Correlations between facial and finger FA were not F(2,128) ¼ .32, ns.; interaction: F(2,128) ¼ .45, ns.). Subse-
significant (r ¼ .01 and r ¼ .07 for horizontal and vertical quently performed separate univariate F tests showed that
facial FA, respectively). only var-aLAT contributed to the significant main effect of
The hypothesis that developmental instability (indicated fFA, F(1,129)¼6.27, p < .05, but not var-dLAT (F(1,129)¼1.35,
by fFA) may determine one or several indicators of functional ns.). Individuals with a higher index of developmental insta-
hemisphere asymmetry and, therefore, may influence the bility (fFA) showed more variability in the degree of functional
tendency to believe in paranormal phenomena, can be lateralization (M ¼ .58) than individuals with lower fFA
excluded by the non-significant results of the first analyses (M ¼ .50).
regressing BPP on the signed and absolute measures of func- A second multiple regression analysis was performed,
tional hemispheric asymmetry. In order to examine the alter- using var-aLAT and sex as predictors and the BPP score as
native hypothesis that developmental instability may be the dependent variable. Sex and var-aLAT together explained
associated with greater intraindividual variability of func- about 11 percent of the variance of BPP, F(2,132) ¼ 8.51,
tional hemisphere asymmetries which, in turn, may be p < .001, R2 ¼ .11. Both var-aLAT and sex showed unique
related to BPP, two further analyses were performed. contributions to the prediction of BPP (see Table 4). The results

Table 1 – Standard multiple regression analysis: BPP Table 3 – Standard multiple regression analysis: BPP
score on functional hemisphere asymmetries score on asymmetries of the body
r b sr p r b sr p

HAND .10 .01 .01 .894 fDA .12 .03 .03 .742
LINE .11 .11 .11 .246 fFA .36 .33 .32 .000
EAR .09 .16 .16 .090 hDA .00 .08 .07 .429
EYE .08 .15 .14 .131 hFA .02 .08 .06 .375
CF .08 .08 .07 .443 vDA .07 .06 .05 .502
CLEM .16 .13 .13 .173 vFA .16 .17 .14 .091
Sex .28 .32 .29 .002 Sex .24 .18 .17 .037

Note: r, Pearson correlation; b, standardized regression coefficient; Note: r, Pearson correlation; b, standardized regression coefficient;
sr, semipartial correlation. sr, semipartial correlation.
1332 cortex 44 (2008) 1326–1335
Table 4 – Standard multiple regression analysis: BPP
score on variability in degree of lateralization and sex
r b sr p
var_aLAT .25 .24 .24 .005
Sex .24 .23 .23 .005
Note: r, Pearson correlation; b, standardized regression coefficient;
sr, semipartial correlation.
indicate that more intraindividual variability in the degree of
lateralization of different functions is associated with a higher
tendency to believe in paranormal phenomena. This effect
proved to be independent from the portion of variance that
is explained by the sex of subjects.
To investigate whether BPP may also be influenced by the
educational level of the participants and, hence by social
factors a one-way analysis of variance was run with educa-
tional level (obligatory school education/higher school educa-
tion/university degree) as independent and BPP score as the
dependent variable. The analysis yielded a significant main
effect of education, F(2,132) ¼ 4.68, p < .05. The mean BPP
scores of the three educational groups were M ¼ 2.02,
M ¼ 1.74, M ¼ 1.25, respectively, indicating decreasing belief
in paranormal phenomena with higher educational levels.
4. Discussion
Contrary to expectations, the results of the present study
showed no direct relationships of measures of functional hemi-
spheric asymmetry to belief in paranormal phenomena. On the
basis of the studies of Brugger’s group (e.g., Brugger and Taylor,
2003), believers were expected to be more right-lateralized,
especially in functions ascribed to temporal regions. This null
finding cannot be attributed to unspecificity or unreliability of
the laterality measures: in accordance with the concept of
modularity of hemisphere functions (Papousek and Schulter,
2006), intercorrelations among behavioural laterality scores
once again confirm independence of different quantitative
aspects of behavioural laterality which can be measured with
sufficient reliability. One explanation for the fact that previous
findings could not be replicated may be that, to date, studies
have only partly corresponded in the definition of the construct
under investigation. The most frequently used questionnaires
contain both paranormal belief and frequency of paranormal
experiences. It has not been clarified yet, whether one or the
other or both facets may be related to the right hemisphere.
However, whereas the magical ideation scale (containing both
‘belief’ and ‘experience’ items, and assessing also other schizo-
phrenia-related symptoms) were used in recent studies of
Brugger’s group (e.g., Taylor et al., 2002; Mohr et al., 2003;
Mohr et al., 2006), in earlier studies belief in paranormal
phenomena was assessed by a rating scale on which partici-
pants rated how much they believed in extrasensory percep-
tion (telepathy, clairvoyance; Brugger et al., 1993a, 1993b).
Another difference may concern the item difficulty of the
used instruments. This is related to the question whether find-
ings hold for schizotypal (i.e., schizophrenia-prone) character-
istics in a narrower sense only or also for superstitious and
magical thinking frequently seen in the normal population.
‘Difficult’ items (i.e., items in which affirmative answers reflect
very high expressions of the trait) may predominantly differen-
tiate between schizotypal and psychologically healthy individ-
uals. In opposition to that, predominantly the non-pathological
facet of paranormal belief, that may be related to personality or
cognitive dispositions also seen in normal healthy individuals,
may be measured with instruments with relatively lower item
difficulty (i.e., differentiating within the normal range). In the
questionnaire used in the present study the weaker, non-
pathological aspect clearly predominates.
Most often, belief in the paranormal has been investigated
in connection with schizophrenia or psychosis-proneness. In
fact, as hallucinations and delusions can be seen as the very
hallmarks of psychosis, paranormal experiences may be
more typical of psychosis-proneness than paranormal belief.
There is other evidence, too, that it may be sensible to differen-
tiate between paranormal belief and paranormal experiences.
Interestingly, whereas paranormal belief seems to be associ-
ated with lower reasoning performance, this obviously does
not hold for frequency of paranormal experiences (Hergovich
and Arendasy, 2005; Musch and Ehrenberg, 2002; Wierzbicki,
1985). This may suggest that individuals with better reasoning
ability may be better able to verify whether their experiences
are sufficient justification for belief in paranormal phenomena
(Hergovich and Arendasy, 2005). In addition, paranormal belief
is highly correlated with suggestibility, whereas the frequency
of paranormal experiences is not (Atkinson, 1994; Wiseman
et al., 2003). And in contrast to paranormal experiences that
are associated with epileptic seizures or stimulation of the
(right) temporal lobe, other functions that are related to belief
in paranormal phenomena, for instance, belief-biased
reasoning or suggestibility have been demonstrated to be asso-
ciated with other cortical activation patterns (Goel and Dolan,
2003; Gruzelier, 2006). Certainly, the failure to replicate the
findings of Brugger’s group could also be due to a statistical
type 2 error, especially because only small effect sizes have
to be expected when investigating correlations between func-
tional brain lateralization and a complex trait-like feature like
belief in the paranormal and, therefore, the relatively large
sample (n ¼ 136) still might have been too small to detect
such slight effects. The best way to evaluate this possibility
would be replication of the present findings (Carver, 1993;
Greenwald et al., 1996; Nickerson, 2000).
The results of the present study do not support the propo-
sition that belief in paranormal phenomena may be associ-
ated with weak functional lateralization. In none of the
laterality measures did the degree of lateralization show
a correlation to paranormal belief. In previous studies it was
suggested that a weak preference for either hand may be asso-
ciated with magical ideation or schizotypy (Barnett and
Corballis, 2002; Chapman and Chapman, 1987; Claridge
et al., 1998). However, in contrast to previous studies, in the
present study a proved performance measure of handedness
was used. Although magical ideation has been shown to be
higher in individuals with weak hand preference assessed
by questionnaires, no relationship could be found with perfor-
mance measures of handedness (Nicholls et al., 2005). There
are a series of methodological problems with handedness
(and eyedness etc.) questionnaires, and the correlation
 cortex 44 (2008) 1326–1335
between preference and performance measures is often weak
(Papousek and Schulter, 1999a).
Our quantitative measure of inconsistency of functional
lateralization (intraindividual variance of directed laterality
scores) did not show correlations to belief in paranormal
phenomena, either. Magical ideation had been demonstrated
to be related to inconsistent lateralization assessed by behav-
ioural measures in a previous study (Mohr et al., 2003).
However, in the study of Mohr et al. (2003) inconsistency of
lateralization was observed within one functional system
(whereas inconsistency among several functional systems
was assessed in the present study). Inconsistency of laterali-
zation within one functional system, in turn, may rather be
related to weaker lateralization of this system than to
different lateralization of independent functional modules.
Although on the basis of the existing evidence one could
expect belief in the paranormal to be related to degree of
handedness or inconsistency of (motor) lateralization,
a straightforward neuropsychological interpretation of the
motor lateralization findings seems difficult insofar as there
is no evidence that motor lateralization or handedness may
also be an indicator of lateralization of functions that may
be relevant to belief in paranormal phenomena. However,
both degree of handedness and belief in paranormal
phenomena might be manifestations of certain processes
occurring during brain development. Fluctuating asymmetry
may be a more direct indicator of such processes.
In fact, the main results of the present study relate to fluctu-
ating asymmetry. Whereas no associations of directed body
asymmetry scores to BPP were observed, a significant relation-
ship between BPP and an index of fluctuating asymmetry was
demonstrated: a greater degree of FA of finger length was asso-
ciated with a stronger belief in paranormal phenomena. Both
scores of facial FA, however, were not related to BPP. Although
in several studies on fluctuating asymmetry the use of
a composite measure of FA is recommended as a more valid
index of DI (Yeo et al., 1997; Gangestad and Thornhill, 1999),
composite indices may sometimes disguise differential
patterns of relationships of different aspects of body FA.
Although it was shown that fluctuating asymmetries of
different individual traits are correlated, such correlations
were usually very small (r ¼ .01 and r ¼ .07 in the present
study; estimated mean values are about r ¼ .03; Gangestad
and Thornhill, 1999). Body asymmetries are regarded as random
fluctuations, i.e., the underlying processes are believed to
randomly affect different features of the body. However, as
body and brain development proceed according to a certain
time schedule, at certain points in fetal growth stress may result
in deviations of certain features of body and brain that covary to
some extent. Such covariations may possibly underlie the spec-
ificity of finger FA with respect to its relation to BPP. That
different components of DI may be specifically related to partic-
ular aspects of cerebral lateralization was already proposed by
Yeo et al. (1997). However, confirmation from DI studies that
were designed for that particular purpose would be needed for
such an interpretation of the present findings.
As was stressed in a recent review on FA and DI (Dongen,
2006), a question of even greater significance concerns the
mechanisms underlying DI, and how these respective mecha-
nisms and processes may map to the observable phenotype.
1333
Specifically, which brain features and processes may affect
cognition in general and belief in paranormal phenomena in
particular during fetal growth? Thoma et al. (2005), studying
possible mechanisms underlying the negative association
between developmental instability and intellectual abilities,
recently concluded that DI may compromise aspects of brain
organization resulting, for instance, in a less efficient design,
entailing less effective and slower information processing.
Results of the present study suggest that possible mediating
mechanisms may be related to the lateralization of functions.
In their model on determinants of individual variation in cere-
bral lateralization, Yeo and colleagues (Yeo and Gangestad,
1993; Yeo et al., 1993, 1997) postulated a relationship of
increased deviations from population-typical patterns of
functional hemispheric asymmetry in either direction with
an elevated incidence of body FA. Moreover, increased body
FA was found to be associated with greater deviations from
typical anatomical asymmetries of brain structures (Thoma
et al., 2002). In the present study, however, atypical lateraliza-
tion, indicated by the absolute z values of several laterality
measures, did not predict degree of belief in paranormal
phenomena.
Based on the assumption of independence of lateralization
of different functions, and also on the assumption of random
effects of environmental stressors on direction and extent of
functional asymmetries, we assumed that DI may affect the
intraindividual variability of functional hemispheric asymme-
tries. With the intraindividual variance of both the directed
and absolute behavioural laterality scores as the dependent
measures in a multivariate analysis of variance, we first were
able to demonstrate a relationship of FA to the variance of the
absolute scores, but not to variability of directed asymmetry
measures. This result is only partially in line with the model
proposed by Yeo and colleagues (Yeo et al., 1997), which predicts
higher FA scores to be associated with higher absolute scores in
all laterality measures, but not with greater intraindividual vari-
ability of laterality measures. However, taking into account
both the assumption that different hemispheric functions are
independently lateralized (modularity approach of hemispheric
functions; Papousek and Schulter, 2006), and the assumption
that not all lateralized functions may be equally affected by
the random effects of environmental stress, increased intrain-
dividual variability of (z-standardized) laterality measures
may even be a more plausible result: if some functions are
affected showing high scores (i.e., atypical lateralization) and
others are not affected, with near-zero values indicating near-
average, i.e., typical lateralization, an increase in the overall
intraindividual variance of functional hemispheric asymme-
tries has to be expected.
More central to the aim of the present study, we were also
able to show that high variability of absolute laterality
measures predicted stronger belief in paranormal phenomena
in a multiple regression analysis. Therefore, higher inconsis-
tency in degree of lateralization of different functions may
be caused by one brain mechanism mediating the relationship
between developmental instability and belief in paranormal
phenomena. Nevertheless, the important question why
inconsistency of atypical lateralization may be related to
stronger belief in paranormal phenomena is left unanswered
and must remain the subject of further research.
1334 cortex 44 (2008) 1326–1335
A similar amount of variance of BPP as was explained by
intraindividual variability in atypical lateralization was
explained by sex. Independently of each other, each of these
two variables predicted about 5 percent of the variance in
BPP. Higher scores of magical ideation or related constructs
like self-transcendence, esoteric beliefs, and religiosity in
women than men were observed in several other studies, too
(Farias et al., 2005; Goulding, 2004; Hood et al., 1996; Kaasinen
et al., 2005; Kirk et al., 1999; Nicholls et al., 2005), although not
all investigators found a sex difference (e.g., Goulding, 2005;
Mohr et al., 2001; Mohr et al., 2003). As there also seem to be
quite strong cultural influences in belief in the paranormal
and related constructs (Farmer et al., 2003), it seems likely
that this finding may reflect a non-biological factor that, like
education, influences belief in paranormal phenomena beyond
the effects of biologically substantiated psychological traits.
Acknowledgements
This research was supported by the Austrian Science Fund
(FWF Project Nr. 13619). We thank Dr. Sohee Park, Vanderbilt
University, Nashville, TN, for helpful discussions and editorial
assistance.
references
Atkinson RP. Relationships of hypnotic susceptibility to
paranormal beliefs and claimed experiences: implications for
hypnotic absorption. American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 37:
34–40, 1994.
Barnett KJ and Corballis MC. Ambidexterity and magical ideation.
Laterality, 7: 75–84, 2002.
Brugger P. ASW: Außersinnliche Wahrnehmung oder Ausdruck
subjektiver Wahrscheinlichkeit?. [Extra-sensory perception or
effect of subjective probability?] Zeitschrift für Parapsychologie
und Grenzgebiete der Psychologie, 33: 76–102, 1991.
Brugger P, Gamma A, Muri R, Schäfer M, and Taylor KI. Functional
hemispheric asymmetry and belief in ESP: towards
a ‘‘neuropsychology of belief’’. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 77:
1299–1308, 1993a.
Brugger P and Graves RE. Right hemispatial inattention and
magical ideation. European Archive of Psychiatry and Clinical
Neuroscience, 247: 55–57, 1997.
Brugger P, Regard M, Landis T, Cook N, Krebs D, and
Niederberger J. Meaningful patterns in visual noise: effects of
lateral stimulation and the observer’s belief in ESP.
Psychopathology, 26: 261–265, 1993b.
Brugger P and Taylor KI. Extrasensory perception or effect of
subjective probability. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 10:
221–246, 2003.
Carver RP. The case against statistical significance testing,
revisited. Journal of Experimental Education, 61: 287–292, 1993.
Chapman JP and Chapman LJ. Handedness of hypothetically
psychosis-prone subjects. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 96:
89–93, 1987.
Claridge G, Clark K, Davis C, and Mason O. Schizophrenia risk and
handedness: a mixed picture. Laterality, 3: 209–220, 1998.
Dongen SV. Fluctuating asymmetry and developmental
instability in evolutionary biology: past, present and future.
Journal of Evolutionary Biology, 19: 1727–1743, 2006.
Eckblad M and Chapman LJ. Magical ideation as an indicator of
schizotypy. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 51:
215–255, 1983.
Efron R and Yund EW. Dichotic competition of simultaneous tone
bursts of different frequency – I. Dissociation of pitch from
lateralization and loudness. Neuropsychologia, 12: 249–256,
1974.
Ehrlichman H, Weiner SL, and Baker AH. Effects of verbal and
spatial questions on initial gaze shifts. Neuropsychologia, 12:
265–277, 1974.
Farias M, Claridge G, and Lalljee M. Personality and cognitive
predictors of new age practices and beliefs. Personality and
Individual Differences, 39: 979–989, 2005.
Farmer A, Mahmood A, Redman K, Harris T, Sadler S, and
McGuffin P. A sib-pair study of the temperament and
character inventory scales in major depression. Archives of
General Psychiatry, 60: 490–496, 2003.
Folley BS and Park S. Verbal creativity and schizotypal personality
in relation to prefrontal hemispheric laterality: a behavioral
and near-infrared optical imaging study. Schizophrenia
Research, 80: 271–282, 2005.
Gangestad SW and Thornhill R. Individual differences in
developmental precision and fluctuating asymmetry: a model
and its implications. Journal of Evolutionary Biology, 12: 402–416,
1999.
Goel V and Dolan RJ. Explaining modulation of reasoning by
belief. Cognition, 87: B11–B22, 2003.
Goulding A. Schizotypy models in relation to subjective health
and paranormal beliefs and experiences. Personality and
Individual Differences, 37: 157–167, 2004.
Goulding A. Healthy schizotypy in a population of paranormal
believers and experients. Personality and Individual Differences,
38: 1069–1083, 2005.
Greenwald AG, Gonzales R, Harris RJ, and Guthrie D. Effect sizes
and p values: what should be reported and what should be
replicated. Psychophysiology, 33: 175–183, 1996.
Gruzelier JH. Frontal functions, connectivity and neural efficiency
underpinning hypnosis and hypnotic susceptibility.
Contemporary Hypnosis, 23: 15–32, 2006.
Haraldsson E. Representative national surveys of psychic
phenomena: Iceland, Great Britain, Sweden, USA and Gallup’s
multinational survey. Journal of the Society for Psychical Research,
53: 145–158, 1985.
Hergovich A and Arendasy M. Critical thinking ability and belief
in the paranormal. Personality and Individual Differences, 38:
1805–1812, 2005.
Hood R, Spilka B, Hunsberger B, and Gorsuch R. The Psychology of
Religion. An Empirical Approach. New York, London: The
Guilford Press, 1996.
Hugdahl K. Dichotic listening: Probing temporal lobe functional
integrity. In Davidson RJ, and Hugdahl K (Eds), Brain
Asymmetry. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1995: 123–156.
Kaasinen V, Maguire RP, Kurki T, Brock A, and Rinne JO. Mapping
brain structure and personality in late adulthood. NeuroImage,
24: 315–322, 2005.
Kimura D. Body asymmetry and intellectual pattern. Personality
and Individual Differences, 17: 53–60, 1994.
Kirk KM, Eaves LJ, and Martin NG. Self-transcendence as
a measure of spirituality in a sample of older Australian twins.
Twin Research, 2: 81–87, 1999.
Levy J, Heller W, Banich MT, and Burton LA. Asymmetry of
perception in free viewing of chimeric faces. Brain and
Cognition, 2: 404–419, 1983.
Means LW and Walters RE. Sex, handedness and asymmetry of
hand and foot length. Neuropsychologia, 20: 715–719, 1982.
Mohr C, Graves RE, Gianotti LRR, Pizzagalli D, and Brugger P.
Loose but normal: a semantic association study. Journal of
Psycholinguistic Research, 30: 475–483, 2001.
 cortex 44 (2008) 1326–1335
Mohr C, Landis T, and Brugger P. Lateralized semantic priming:
modulation by levodopa, semantic distance, and participants’
magical beliefs. Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment, 2: 71–84,
2006.
Mohr C, Thut G, Landis T, and Brugger P. Hands, arms, and minds:
interactions between posture and thought. Journal of Clinical
and Experimental Neuropsychology, 25: 1000–1010, 2003.
Moller AP and Swaddle JP. Asymmetry, Developmental Stability and
Evolution. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997.
Musch J and Ehrenberg K. Probability misjudgment, cognitive
ability, and belief in the paranormal. British Journal of
Psychology, 93: 169–177, 2002.
Nicholls ME, Orr CA, and Lindell AK. Magical ideation and its
relation to lateral preference. Laterality, 10: 503–515, 2005.
Nickerson R. Null hypothesis significance testing: a review of
an old and continuing controversy. Psychological Methods, 5:
241–301, 2000.
Papousek I and Schulter G. Quantitative assessment of five
behavioural laterality measures: distribution of scores and
intercorrelations among right-handers. Laterality, 4: 345–362,
1999a.
Papousek I and Schulter G. EEG correlates of behavioural
laterality: right-handedness. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 89:
403–411, 1999b.
Papousek I and Schulter G. EEG correlates of behavioural
laterality: ear dominance. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 94:
355–362, 2002.
Papousek I and Schulter G. Individual differences in functional
asymmetries of the cortical hemispheres. Revival of laterality
research in emotion and psychopathology. Cognition, Brain,
Behavior, 10: 269–329, 2006.
Porac C. Eye preference patterns among left-handed adults.
Laterality, 2: 305–316, 1997.
Raz A, Hines T, Fossella J, and Castro D. Paranormal experience
and the COMT dopaminergic gene: a preliminary attempt to
associate phenotype with genotype using an underlying brain
theory. Cortex, 44: 1336–1341, 2008.
Ruch W. Die revidierte Fassung des Eysenck Personality
Questionnaire und die Konstruktion des deutschen EPQ-R
1335
bzw. EPQ-RK. Zeitschrift für Differentielle und Diagnostische
Psychologie, 20: 1–24, 1999.
Ruggieri V, Cei A, Ceridono D, and Bergerone C. Dimensional
approach to the study of sighting dominance. Perceptual and
Motor Skills, 51: 247–251, 1980.
Shackelford TK and Larsen RJ. Facial asymmetry as an indicator
of psychological, emotional, and physiological distress. Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology, 72: 456–466, 1997.
Steingrüber H and Lienert G. Hand-Dominanz-Test. Göttingen:
Hogrefe, 1971.
Taylor KI, Zach P, and Brugger P. Why is magical ideation related
to leftward deviation on an implicit line bisection task. Cortex,
38: 247–252, 2002.
Thalbourne MA and Haraldsson E. Personality characteristics
of sheep and goats. Personality and Individual Differences, 1:
180–185, 1980.
Thoma RJ, Yeo RA, Gangestad SW, Halgren E, Sanchez NM, and
Lewine JD. Cortical volume and developmental instability are
independent predictors of general intellectual ability.
Intelligence, 33: 27–38, 2005.
Thoma RJ, Yeo RA, Gangestad SW, Lewine JD, and Davis JT. Fluctuating
asymmetry and the human brain. Laterality, 7: 45–58, 2002.
Van Valen L. A study of fluctuating asymmetry. Evolution, 16:
125–142, 1962.
Wierzbicki M. Reasoning errors and belief in the paranormal.
Journal of Social Psychology, 125: 489–494, 1985.
Wiseman R, Greening E, and Smith M. Belief in the paranormal
and suggestion in the seance room. British Journal of Psychology,
94: 285–297, 2003.
Wiseman R and Watt C. Belief in psychic ability and the
misattribution hypothesis: a qualitative review. British Journal
of Psychology, 97: 323–338, 2006.
Yeo RA and Gangestad SW. Developmental origins of variation in
human hand preference. Genetica, 89: 281–296, 1993.
Yeo RA, Gangestad SW, and Daniel WF. Hand preference and
developmental instability. Psychobiology, 21: 161–168, 1993.
Yeo RA, Gangestad SW, Thoma R, Shaw P, and Repa K.
Developmental instability and cerebral lateralization.
Neuropsychology, 11: 552–561, 1997.