Popular "Right Brain, Left Brain" theory debunked....

It turns out, though, that this idea of "brained-ness" might be more of a figure of speech than anything, as researchers have found that these personality traits may not have anything to do with which side of the brain you use more.

Researchers from the University of Utah found with brain imaging that people don't use the right sides of their brains any more than the left sides of their brains, or vice versa.

"It's absolutely true that some brain functions occur in one or the other side of the brain. Language tends to be on the left, attention more on the right. But people don’t tend to have a stronger left- or right-sided brain network. It seems to be determined more connection by connection," study researcher Jeff Anderson, M.D., Ph.D., said in a statement.

So, even thought it was "debunked" since both sides are used and one isn't greater than the other. It is still true that the "left" is more connected to language/identifying while the "right" is more connected to attention/awareness.

So I guess focusing on attention/awareness (what is present/happening/occur NOW) does still have its benefit for tapping into the right brain.

News Article from "The Huffington Post" - Research done by The University of Utah

I like it when research comes out that makes educational psychologists look like total arses. One thing I'm hesitant on is whether the research was specifically looking for that personality type associated with lateralization or if they were looking at lateralization as a whole. I agree that it would be very inefficient to have an inequitable amount of functioning between the two halves of the brain so it's highly unlikely that somebody is more "left brained" and another is more "right brained". Just curious as to how this affects handedness. I'm a total ambi (can separate functions concurrently between both hands so left hand can write "cat" and right hand can write "dog"). I suspect that handedness, however, may be more of a learned trait (or laziness, teacher rebuke, or no interest) in that hand preference is refined for one hand typically. Not training the muscle memory at an earlier age would make writing with the left "sloppy" for a right hander as an adult; ergo, they are "right handed".

But, if this specific research is correct, I'd like to shove some academic journals in the butts of decades of educational psychologists that focused intensely on this subject with children--on second thought, toss in the entire "creativity" movement, too. Yep yep.

reply to post by arpgme

The left versus right brain myth was debunked some time ago.

Here is an article from 2011 which discusses the scientific proof against the myth at that time:

Nine Stubborn Brain Myths That Just Won't Die, Debunked by Science

So this latest study is hardly upsetting anything from a scientific viewpoint.

It's just another nail in the coffin of the old myth, which was already debunked.

reply to post by Arbitrageur


It's not utterly tossed. As someone who was prenatally exposed to diethylstilbestrol, the research into the effects of that exposure is something that I rather follow for obvious reasons. Research on the effects of diethylstilbestrol (DES) and its possible effect on hemispheric and language lateralization, including handedness, has been ongoing. The flavor of that one is that women exposed to DES have a more "masculinising effect" on lateralization, inducing more left brain activity. Maybe I shouldn't laugh though as gender genie usually thinks I'm a guy...

hee hee.

Thanks for the article man now its the time to troll my science teacher.