TedTest

From the Ted Talk by Daniel M. Abrams: Why are some people left-handed?

Unscramble the Blue Letters

If you know an older left-handed porsen, chances are they had to lraen to wtire or eat with their right hand. And in many patrs of the world, it's still comomn practice to force children to use their "proper" hand. Even the word for right also means correct or good, not just in English, but many other languages, too. But if being left-handed is so wrong, then why does it happen in the first place? Today, about 1/10 of the world's population are left-handed. Archeological evidence shows that it's been that way for as long as 500,000 years, with about 10% of human reinmas shwniog the associated differences in arm lngeth and bone density, and some ancient tools and artifacts showing evidence of left-hand use. And despite what many may think, handedness is not a choice. It can be predicted even before birth based on the fetus' psotiion in the womb. So, if handedness is inborn, does that mean it's genetic? Well, yes and no. Identical twins, who have the same gnees, can have different dinmonat hands. In fact, this happens as often as it does with any other sibling pair. But the chances of being right or left-handed are determined by the handedness of your parents in surprisingly consistent ratios. If your father was left-handed but your mother was right-handed, you have a 17% chance of being born left-handed, while two righties will have a left-handed child only 10% of the time. hnddseneas seems to be determined by a roll of the dice, but the odds are set by your genes. All of this iplmeis there's a reason that evolution has produced this small proportion of liefets, and meianiantd it over the course of millennia. And while there have been several theories attempting to explain why handedness exists in the first place, or why most people are right-handed, a recent mathematical model suggests that the actual ratio reflects a balance between competitive and cooperative pressures on human evolution. The benefits of being left-handed are clearest in activities involving an opponent, like combat or competitive sports. For example, about 50% of top hitters in bblaseal have been left-handed. Why? Think of it as a surprise advantage. Because lefties are a mtiirony to begin with, both right-handed and left-handed competitors will spend most of their time encountering and piitccnarg against righties. So when the two face each other, the left-hander will be better prepared against this right-handed opponent, while the righty will be thrown off. This finghtig hypothesis, where an imbalance in the population results in an advantage for left-handed fhiertgs or aeletths, is an example of negative frequency-dependent selection. But according to the principles of evolution, groups that have a relative aangtdave tend to grow until that advantage disappears. If people were only fighting and competing throughout human eoouvlitn, natural selection would lead to more lefties being the ones that made it until there were so many of them, that it was no leongr a rare aesst. So in a purely competitive wolrd, 50% of the population would be left-handed. But haumn evolution has been shaped by cooperation, as well as competition. And cooperative psserrue pushes handedness distribution in the opposite direction. In golf, where performance doesn't depend on the opponent, only 4% of top players are left-handed, an example of the wider phenomenon of tool sharing. Just as young potential golfers can more easily find a set of right-handed cblus, many of the important instruments that have shaped society were digenesd for the right-handed majority. Because lefties are worse at using these tools, and suffer from hhgeir accident rates, they would be less successful in a purely cooperative world, eventually diipnsparaeg from the population. So by correctly predicting the distribution of left-handed people in the general ptulopoian, as well as matching data from various sports, the model indicates that the persistence of lefties as a small but stable minority reflects an equilibrium that comes from competitive and cooperative effects playing out stmnuleliosuay over time. And the most intriguing thing is what the numbers can tell us about various populations. From the skewed distribution of pnaweseds in cooperative animals, to the slightly larger percentage of lefties in competitive hunter-gatherer societies, we may even find that the awsrens to some pezlzus of early human evolution are already in our hands.

Open Cloze

If you know an older left-handed ______, chances are they had to _____ to _____ or eat with their right hand. And in many _____ of the world, it's still ______ practice to force children to use their "proper" hand. Even the word for right also means correct or good, not just in English, but many other languages, too. But if being left-handed is so wrong, then why does it happen in the first place? Today, about 1/10 of the world's population are left-handed. Archeological evidence shows that it's been that way for as long as 500,000 years, with about 10% of human _______ _______ the associated differences in arm ______ and bone density, and some ancient tools and artifacts showing evidence of left-hand use. And despite what many may think, handedness is not a choice. It can be predicted even before birth based on the fetus' ________ in the womb. So, if handedness is inborn, does that mean it's genetic? Well, yes and no. Identical twins, who have the same _____, can have different ________ hands. In fact, this happens as often as it does with any other sibling pair. But the chances of being right or left-handed are determined by the handedness of your parents in surprisingly consistent ratios. If your father was left-handed but your mother was right-handed, you have a 17% chance of being born left-handed, while two righties will have a left-handed child only 10% of the time. __________ seems to be determined by a roll of the dice, but the odds are set by your genes. All of this _______ there's a reason that evolution has produced this small proportion of _______, and __________ it over the course of millennia. And while there have been several theories attempting to explain why handedness exists in the first place, or why most people are right-handed, a recent mathematical model suggests that the actual ratio reflects a balance between competitive and cooperative pressures on human evolution. The benefits of being left-handed are clearest in activities involving an opponent, like combat or competitive sports. For example, about 50% of top hitters in ________ have been left-handed. Why? Think of it as a surprise advantage. Because lefties are a ________ to begin with, both right-handed and left-handed competitors will spend most of their time encountering and __________ against righties. So when the two face each other, the left-hander will be better prepared against this right-handed opponent, while the righty will be thrown off. This ________ hypothesis, where an imbalance in the population results in an advantage for left-handed ________ or ________, is an example of negative frequency-dependent selection. But according to the principles of evolution, groups that have a relative _________ tend to grow until that advantage disappears. If people were only fighting and competing throughout human _________, natural selection would lead to more lefties being the ones that made it until there were so many of them, that it was no ______ a rare _____. So in a purely competitive _____, 50% of the population would be left-handed. But _____ evolution has been shaped by cooperation, as well as competition. And cooperative ________ pushes handedness distribution in the opposite direction. In golf, where performance doesn't depend on the opponent, only 4% of top players are left-handed, an example of the wider phenomenon of tool sharing. Just as young potential golfers can more easily find a set of right-handed _____, many of the important instruments that have shaped society were ________ for the right-handed majority. Because lefties are worse at using these tools, and suffer from ______ accident rates, they would be less successful in a purely cooperative world, eventually ____________ from the population. So by correctly predicting the distribution of left-handed people in the general __________, as well as matching data from various sports, the model indicates that the persistence of lefties as a small but stable minority reflects an equilibrium that comes from competitive and cooperative effects playing out ______________ over time. And the most intriguing thing is what the numbers can tell us about various populations. From the skewed distribution of _________ in cooperative animals, to the slightly larger percentage of lefties in competitive hunter-gatherer societies, we may even find that the _______ to some _______ of early human evolution are already in our hands.

Solution

pawedness
disappearing
advantage
genes
evolution
remains
maintained
higher
asset
minority
write
lefties
fighters
longer
puzzles
fighting
answers
learn
simultaneously
position
common
pressure
human
dominant
world
handedness
population
showing
designed
parts
implies
athletes
practicing
clubs
person
baseball
length

Original Text

If you know an older left-handed person, chances are they had to learn to write or eat with their right hand. And in many parts of the world, it's still common practice to force children to use their "proper" hand. Even the word for right also means correct or good, not just in English, but many other languages, too. But if being left-handed is so wrong, then why does it happen in the first place? Today, about 1/10 of the world's population are left-handed. Archeological evidence shows that it's been that way for as long as 500,000 years, with about 10% of human remains showing the associated differences in arm length and bone density, and some ancient tools and artifacts showing evidence of left-hand use. And despite what many may think, handedness is not a choice. It can be predicted even before birth based on the fetus' position in the womb. So, if handedness is inborn, does that mean it's genetic? Well, yes and no. Identical twins, who have the same genes, can have different dominant hands. In fact, this happens as often as it does with any other sibling pair. But the chances of being right or left-handed are determined by the handedness of your parents in surprisingly consistent ratios. If your father was left-handed but your mother was right-handed, you have a 17% chance of being born left-handed, while two righties will have a left-handed child only 10% of the time. Handedness seems to be determined by a roll of the dice, but the odds are set by your genes. All of this implies there's a reason that evolution has produced this small proportion of lefties, and maintained it over the course of millennia. And while there have been several theories attempting to explain why handedness exists in the first place, or why most people are right-handed, a recent mathematical model suggests that the actual ratio reflects a balance between competitive and cooperative pressures on human evolution. The benefits of being left-handed are clearest in activities involving an opponent, like combat or competitive sports. For example, about 50% of top hitters in baseball have been left-handed. Why? Think of it as a surprise advantage. Because lefties are a minority to begin with, both right-handed and left-handed competitors will spend most of their time encountering and practicing against righties. So when the two face each other, the left-hander will be better prepared against this right-handed opponent, while the righty will be thrown off. This fighting hypothesis, where an imbalance in the population results in an advantage for left-handed fighters or athletes, is an example of negative frequency-dependent selection. But according to the principles of evolution, groups that have a relative advantage tend to grow until that advantage disappears. If people were only fighting and competing throughout human evolution, natural selection would lead to more lefties being the ones that made it until there were so many of them, that it was no longer a rare asset. So in a purely competitive world, 50% of the population would be left-handed. But human evolution has been shaped by cooperation, as well as competition. And cooperative pressure pushes handedness distribution in the opposite direction. In golf, where performance doesn't depend on the opponent, only 4% of top players are left-handed, an example of the wider phenomenon of tool sharing. Just as young potential golfers can more easily find a set of right-handed clubs, many of the important instruments that have shaped society were designed for the right-handed majority. Because lefties are worse at using these tools, and suffer from higher accident rates, they would be less successful in a purely cooperative world, eventually disappearing from the population. So by correctly predicting the distribution of left-handed people in the general population, as well as matching data from various sports, the model indicates that the persistence of lefties as a small but stable minority reflects an equilibrium that comes from competitive and cooperative effects playing out simultaneously over time. And the most intriguing thing is what the numbers can tell us about various populations. From the skewed distribution of pawedness in cooperative animals, to the slightly larger percentage of lefties in competitive hunter-gatherer societies, we may even find that the answers to some puzzles of early human evolution are already in our hands.

Frequently Occurring Word Combinations

ngrams of length 2

collocation	frequency
human evolution	3

Important Words

accident
activities
actual
advantage
ancient
animals
answers
archeological
arm
artifacts
asset
athletes
attempting
balance
baseball
based
benefits
birth
bone
born
chance
chances
child
children
choice
clearest
clubs
combat
common
competing
competition
competitive
competitors
consistent
cooperation
cooperative
correct
correctly
data
density
depend
designed
determined
dice
differences
direction
disappearing
disappears
distribution
dominant
early
easily
eat
effects
encountering
english
equilibrium
eventually
evidence
evolution
exists
explain
face
fact
father
fighters
fighting
find
force
general
genes
genetic
golf
golfers
good
groups
grow
hand
handedness
hands
happen
higher
hitters
human
hypothesis
identical
imbalance
implies
important
inborn
instruments
intriguing
involving
languages
larger
lead
learn
lefties
length
long
longer
maintained
majority
matching
mathematical
means
millennia
minority
model
mother
natural
negative
numbers
odds
older
opponent
pair
parents
parts
pawedness
people
percentage
performance
persistence
person
phenomenon
place
players
playing
population
populations
position
potential
practice
practicing
predicted
predicting
prepared
pressure
pressures
principles
produced
proportion
purely
pushes
puzzles
rare
rates
ratio
ratios
reason
reflects
relative
remains
results
righties
righty
roll
selection
set
shaped
sharing
showing
shows
sibling
simultaneously
skewed
slightly
small
societies
society
spend
sports
stable
successful
suffer
suggests
surprise
surprisingly
tend
theories
thrown
time
today
tool
tools
top
twins
wider
womb
word
world
worse
write
wrong
years
young