Modeling to explore and challenge inherent assumptions when cultural norms have changed: a case study on left-handedness and life expectancy

Background

In 1991, Halpern and Coren claimed that left-handed people die nine years younger than right-handed people. Most subsequent studies did not find support for the difference in age of death or its magnitude, primarily because of the realization that there have been historical changes in reported rates of left-handedness.

Methods

We created a model that allowed us to determine whether the historical change in left-handedness explains the original finding of a nine-year difference in life expectancy. We calculated all deaths in the United States by birth year, gender, and handedness for 1989 (the Halpern and Coren study was based on data from that year) and contrasted those findings with the modeled age of death by reported and counterfactual estimated handedness for each birth year, 1900–1989.

Results

In 1989, 2,019,512 individuals died, of which 6.4% were reportedly left-handed based on concurrent annual handedness reporting. However, it is widely believed that cultural pressures may have caused an underestimation of the true rate of left-handedness. Using a simulation that assumed no age of death difference between left-handed and right-handed individuals in this cohort and adjusting for the reported rates of left-handedness, we found that left-handed individuals were expected to die 9.3 years earlier than their right-handed counterparts due to changes in the rate of left-handedness over time. This difference of 9.3 years was not found to be statistically significant compared to the 8.97 years reported by Halpern and Coren. When we assumed no change in the rate of left-handedness over time, the survival advantage for right-handed individuals was reduced to 0.02 years, solely driven by not controlling for gender. When we considered the estimated age of death for each birth cohort, we found a mean difference of 0.43 years between left-handed and right-handed individuals, also driven by handedness difference by gender.

Conclusion

We found that the changing rate of left-handedness reporting over the years entirely explains the originally reported observation of nine-year difference in life expectancy. In epidemiology, new information on past reporting biases could warrant re-exploration of initial findings. The simulation modeling approach that we use here might facilitate such analyses.