A new method of administering the Grooved Pegboard Test: Performance as a function of handedness and sex P.J. Bryden * , E.A. Roy Department of Kinesiology and Physical Education, Wilfrid Laurier University, Waterloo, Ont., Canada N2L 3C5 Accepted 13 December 2004 Available online 16 February 2005 Abstract The purpose of the present study was twofold: first to examine the influences of sex and handedness on manual performance on the Grooved Pegboard Test; and secondly to provide normative data for two versions (Place and Remove tasks) of the Grooved Pegboard Test, as previous work (Bryden & Roy, 1999) had suggested that the Remove task of the Grooved pegboard may provide a purer measure of motor speed of the two hands than the standard administration of the Grooved Pegboard Test. One hundred and fifty-three (47 males and 106 females) participants completed the Grooved Pegboard Test. Individuals performed the standard ver- sion of the Grooved Pegboard Test (Place task) and a novel version of the test (Remove task). In the standard version, participants were timed on their speed for placing the pegs, while in the novel version they were timed on their speed for removing the pegs. Results confirmed previously noted hand and sex differences in the Place task of the Grooved Pegboard Test, as well as the lack of effect of handedness on performance (Bornstein, 1985; Ruff & Parker, 1993; Schmidt, Oliveira, Rocha, & Abreu-Villaca, 2000). Significant performance differences between the hands were also noted for the Remove task. Findings also indicated that the Remove task was sensitive to sex and handedness effects. Ó 2005 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. Keywords: Grooved Pegboard Test; Hand preference; Sex differences; Neuropsychological test development 1. Introduction Motor tasks are considered to be a fundamental part of any comprehensive neuropsychological evaluation, and are often used as indicators of lesion lateralization (Goldstein, 1974). It is typically assumed, for tests of manual speed or strength, that a preferred hand advan- tage greater than 10% may indicate a brain lesion ipsilat- eral to the preferred hand. In contrast, it has been assumed that a lower than 10% advantage of the pre- ferred hand may reflect brain damage contralateral to the preferred hand (Boll, 1981; Reitan & Wolfson, 1993). Early recommendations suggested that lateralized brain damage was likely if either non-preferred hand performance exceeded that of the preferred hand, or the preferred handsÕ performance was over 20% better than the non-preferred hand (e.g., Golden, 1978). How- ever, more recent research has raised serious concerns with these recommendations (Thompson, Heaton, Mat- thews, & Grant, 1987). Using such recommendations, Thompson et al. (1987) found that as many as 36% of normal left-handed individuals would be misclassified as having lateralized hemisphere dysfunction on neuro- psychological motor tasks. Likewise, approximately 20% of normal right-handed individuals would have been classified as having dominant hemisphere dysfunc- tion on the basis of performance on several motor tasks. To make matters worse, the performance differences be- tween the preferred and non-preferred hand appear to fluctuate with the particular test used (Bornstein, 1986). For example, almost one-third of normal right- www.elsevier.com/locate/b&c Brain and Cognition 58 (2005) 258–268 0278-2626/$ - see front matter Ó 2005 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.bandc.2004.12.004 * Corresponding author. Fax: +1 519 884 8829. E-mail address: pbryden@wlu.ca (P.J. Bryden).