Search

Several theoretical approaches suggest that language comprehension and action observation rely on similar mental simulations. Granted that these two simulations partially overlap, we assumed that simulations stemming from action observations are more direct than those stemming from action phrases. The implied prediction was that simulation from action observation should prevail on simulation from action phrases when their effects are contrasted. The results of three experiments confirmed that, when at encoding the phrases were paired with pictures of actions whose kinematics was incongruent with the implied kinematics of the actions described in the phrases, memory for action phrases was impaired (Experiment 1). However, the reverse was not true: when the pictures were paired with phrases representing actions whose kinematics were incongruent with the kinematics of the actions portrayed in the pictures, memory for pictures portraying actions was not impaired (Experiment 2). Also, in line with evidence that simulations from action phrases and those from action observation partially overlap, when their effects were not contrasted their products were misrecognized. In our experiments, when action phrases only presented at recognition described actions depicted in pictures seen at encoding, they were misrecognized as had already been read at encoding (Experiment 1); further, when pictures only presented at recognition portrayed actions described in phrases presented at encoding, they were misrecognized as seen at encoding (Experiment 2). A third experiment excluded the possibility that the pattern of findings was simply a consequence of better memory for pictures of actions as opposed to memory for action phrases (Experiment 3). The implications of our results in relation to the literature on simulation in language comprehension and action observation are discussed., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Memory for action phrases improves in the listeners when the speaker accompanies them with gestures compared to when the speaker stays still. Since behavioral studies revealed a pivotal role of the listeners' motor system, we aimed to disentangle the role of primary motor and premotor cortices. Participants had to recall phrases uttered by a speaker in two conditions: in the gesture condition, the speaker performed gestures congruent with the action; in the no-gesture condition, the speaker stayed still. In Experiment 1, half of the participants underwent inhibitory rTMS over the hand/arm region of the left premotor cortex (PMC) and the other half over the hand/arm region of the left primary motor cortex (M1). The enactment effect disappeared only following rTMS over PMC. In Experiment 2, we detected the usual enactment effect after rTMS over vertex, thereby excluding possible nonspecific rTMS effects. These findings suggest that the information encoded in the premotor cortex is a crucial part of the memory trace., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Seeing a person preparing to perform an action and later remembering having seen subsequent phases of the action, but not previous phases. This is what a theory on the role of the motor system in the creation and recovery of memories predicts can happen. We investigate memory for action after viewing an image representing an actor acting on a series of everyday objects. The participants in one experiment viewed a series of still photos of unfolding actions on objects (e.g., blowing the nose), and 15 minutes later they were asked to complete a recognition task. At recognition, participants viewed photos representing temporally distant moments, backward or forward in time compared to the original, along with the same photos seen at encoding. Results showed that participants tended to accept forward photos more than backward photos. In a pilot study, we explored the role of the temporal distance between encoding and recognition. Results showed that when 3 days elapsed between the encoding and recognition phases, participants did not tend to accept forward photos more than backward photos.

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]

The embodied approach states that memory traces are retrieved, at least in part, through a sensorimotor simulation of the original events, i.e., during retrieval we use our body and its sensorimotor pathways to simulate what happened during encoding. Thus, body manipulations that are incongruent with the motor elements involved at encoding should modulate memory performance. To test this hypothesis, we devised two experiments. In Experiment 1, participants had to observe (observation task) or observe and also perform an action on (enactment task) a series of objects. At recognition, they recognised the enacted objects faster and more accurately than the observed ones. Crucially, in Experiment 2, we manipulated body posture during recognition: one group was asked to hold their hands/arms in front of them (non-interfering group), and the other group was asked to block their hands/arms behind their back (interfering group). The results on reaction times, but not those on accuracy, showed a critical interaction: while the noninterfering group recognised enacted objects faster than observed objects, this advantage disappeared for the interfering group. This suggests that adopting a posture inconsistent with action at encoding could influence the time needed to correctly recognise the objects, but not the accuracy of the recognition. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Memory for series of action phrases improves in listeners when speakers accompany each phrase with congruent gestures compared to when speakers stay still. Studies reveal that the listeners’ motor system, at encoding, plays a crucial role in this enactment effect. We present two experiments on gesture observation, which explored the role of the listeners’ motor system at recall. The participants listened to the phrases uttered by a speaker in two conditions in each experiment. In the gesture condition, the speaker uttered the phrases with accompanying congruent gestures, and in the no-gesture condition, the speaker stayed still while uttering the phrases. The participants were then invited, in both conditions of the experiments, to perform a motor task while recalling the phrases proffered by the speaker. The results revealed that the advantage of observing gestures on memory disappears if the listeners move at recall arms and hands (same motor effectors moved by the speaker, Experiment 1a), but not when the listeners move legs and feet (different motor effectors from those moved by the speaker, Experiment 1b). The results suggest that the listeners’ motor system is involved not only during the encoding of action phrases uttered by a speaker but also when recalling these phrases during retrieval. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A well-established literature reveals that a speaker’s gestures have beneficial effects on the listener’s memory for speech. A main assumption of our investigation is that gestures improve memory through the exploitation of the listener’s motor system. We tested this prediction in four experiments in which the participants listened to action sentences uttered by a speaker who either stayed still or accompanied the speech with congruent gestures. The results revealed that when the listeners observed gestures their memory for speech improved (Experiment 1), but loading up the listeners’ motor system during gestures observation cancelled the beneficial effect when the motor task involved the same effectors used by the speaker (arms and hands, Experiments 2–3). The beneficial effect of gestures persisted when the motor task involved different effectors (legs and feet, Experiment 4). These results support the assumption of a main involvement of the motor system in the beneficial effect of observed gestures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents the study on whether gestural information uptake is a deterministic process. The study reportedly involved several experiments and an analysis of the role of unrelated speech gestures which are not relevant to the speech they accompany. The results revealed that gestural information uptake is non-deterministic.