In a matrimonial action in which the parties were divorced by judgment entered February 23, 1979, the defendant mother appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (O’Shaughnessy, J.), entered April 26, 1990, which, after a hearing, granted the plaintiff father’s application to modify the judgment of divorce by transferring custody of the parties’ son from the mother to the father.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.
In determining whether a custody award should be modified, the paramount issue before the court is whether the totality of the circumstances warrants a modification in the best interests of the child (see, Friederwitzer v Friederwitzer,
Further, any custody determination depends to a very great extent upon the court’s assessment of the credibility of the witnesses and of the character, temperament, and sincerity of the parties (see, Eschbach v Eschbach, supra; Klat v Klat, supra; Matter of Robert T. F. v Rosemary F., supra). Therefore, since the hearing court is in the most advantageous position to evaluate the witnesses’ testimony, the findings of the hearing court are generally accorded great respect on appeal (see, Eschbach v Eschbach, supra; Klat v Klat, supra; Matter of Robert T. F. v Rosemary F, supra), and will not be disturbed unless they lack a sound and substantial basis in the record (see, Klat v Klat, supra).
We find that the court weighed the appropriate factors and thereupon properly modified the divorce judgment to award custody to the father. The record clearly supports the court’s conclusion that the mother was unable to provide for her child’s emotional and intellectual needs, and thus, a transfer of custody was in the child’s best interests.
We have considered the mother’s remaining contention and find that it is without merit. Thompson, J. P., Balletta, Fiber and Ritter, JJ., concur.