New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Women's Better Sense of Touch Explained

Smaller fingers mean closer nerve endings and the ability to resolve finer detail

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


For pianists and guitarists, small fingers are a curse. But a study published in the Journal of Neuroscience on December 16, 2009, suggests that diminutive digits do have an advantage: they are more sensitive. The paper reports that sensory receptors called Merkel cells, which discern the texture and structure of materials pressed against the fingertip, are more closely packed on small fingers as compared with large ones. Because women tend to have smaller fingers than men, they are, in general, better able to distinguish the shapes of the things they feel. Indeed, compared with the men, the women in the study could more easily discern the orientation of thin grooves in a piece of plastic that had been pressed against their fingers.

SA Mind Vol 21 Issue 2This article was published with the title “Women's Better Sense of Touch Explained” in SA Mind Vol. 21 No. 2 (), p. 11
doi:10.1038/scientificamericanmind0510-11b

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe