Search

After viewing an image representing an action on an object, we recognize the forward states of the seen action faster than the backward states. The present study exploits a variant of a new experimental paradigm to investigate cognitive mechanisms underlying this effect. Participants viewed a series of still photos of unfolding actions on objects, each followed by a photo depicting either one of three (instead of two of the original paradigm) different and temporally distant moments after the image or one moment before the image, along with photos of different actions. Experiment 1 revealed the classical forward effects in this new context: when the task was to judge whether the action in the second photo was the same as in the first photo, evaluations were faster for all forward photos than for backward photos. In Experiment 2, we examined the role of participants' attention to the object alongside the role of attention to action kinematics in triggering these "forward effects" by manipulating participants' attentional focus. As the results showed, evaluations were faster for all forward photos when the focus was on the action kinematics, but when the focus was on the object, evaluations were faster only for the last forward photo showing the final action state. These results seem to suggest that focusing on the object triggers a representation of the action goal and thus modulates the mental simulation underlying action anticipation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In three experiments, we investigated explicit and implicit knowledge about the location of letters on the QWERTY keyboard in young students, and the mechanisms involved. Participants completed a verbal report task in which they were asked to locate the 21 letters of the Italian alphabet on a blank QWERTY keyboard (explicit memory). Subsequently, they carried out a motor production task, i.e., typing letters on a blank keyboard (implicit memory). Consistent with previous studies and several theories emphasizing the importance of implicit knowledge in typing, results showed that explicit knowledge about the QWERTY keyboard is systematically worse than procedural knowledge (Experiment 1). These two types of knowledge, however, are related. Second, we showed that explicit memory for letter position was affected when participants were engaged in a secondary task that required hands/arms movements. Specifically, loading participants' sensorimotor resources led to a decrease in explicit memory performance when the secondary task required hand/arm movements (hand/arms tapping) compared to when it required legs-feet movements (control condition). This result suggests that explicit knowledge is modulated by sensorimotor simulation (Experiment 2). Third, compared to a purely verbal response, pointing to the key on the keyboard did not improve explicit memory accuracy (Experiment 3). Taken together, the results indicate that sensorimotor simulation, and not just gestures, modulates the accessibility to explicit mental representations of verbal/spatial material, like letters on a keyboard. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Based on the assumption that spatial reasoning relies on the construction of mental models of the states of affairs described in the premises, and on evidence that sensory-motor imagery can enhance cognitive abilities, we hypothesised that imagining moving the objects mentioned in the premises to the specific spatial locations should favour spatial reasoning. The results of Experiment 1 confirmed the prediction: when participants imagined moving the objects mentioned in the premises (dynamic-engagement condition), they drew accurate inferences faster compared with participants who merely read the premises (static-non-engagement condition). Experiment 2 was in part a replication of Experiment 1 but included two additional experimental conditions to control for possible effects of self-engagement in reasoning: in one condition, participants imagined that someone else was moving the objects (dynamic-non-engagement condition), and in the other condition, participants imagined that they were observing the objects (static-engagement condition). The results revealed an interaction between motor imagery and engagement in decreasing response times to spatial problems. We discuss the practical implications of the current results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This review aims at exploring the role of the body and its sensorimotor processes in memory. Recent theories have suggested that memories can profitably be seen as mental simulations consisting in the reactivation of sensorimotor patterns originally associated with events at encoding, rather than amodal mental representations. The sensorimotor model of memory (SMM) claims that the body is the medium where (and through which) sensorimotor modalities actually simulate the somatosensory components of remembered events, and predicts that memory processes can be manipulated through manipulation of the body. The review analyzes experimental evidence in favor of the SMM and the claim that the body is at stake in memory processes. The review then highlights how, at the current state of research, the majority of this evidence concerns the effect of body manipulations on memory processes rather than memory representations. It considers the need for a more circumstantial outline of the actual extent to which the body is capable of affecting memory, specifically on some important areas still unexplored, such as the sense of recollection. Resulting strengths and limitations of the SMM are discussed in relation to the more general debate on the embodied cognition. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Classical studies on enactment have highlighted the beneficial effects of gestures performed in the encoding phase on memory for words and sentences, for both adults and children. In the present investigation, we focused on the role of enactment for learning from scientific texts among primary-school children. We assumed that enactment would favor the construction of a mental model of the text, and we verified the derived predictions that gestures at the time of encoding would result in greater numbers of correct recollections and discourse-based inferences at recall, as compared to no gestures (Exp. 1), and in a bias to confound paraphrases of the original text with the verbatim text in a recognition test (Exp. 2). The predictions were confirmed; hence, we argue in favor of a theoretical framework that accounts for the beneficial effects of enactment on memory for texts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper omitted a reference: Dutriaux, L., & Gyselinck, V. (2016). Learning is better with the hands free: The role of posture in the memory of manipulable objects. PLOS ONE, 11(7), e0159108. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0159108 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]