On the nature of hand-action representations evoked during written sentence comprehension

Cognition

Volumn 116, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 394-408

  Bub, Daniel N ^a   Masson, Michael E J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF VICTORIA   (Canada)

Author keywords

Hand action representations; Motor resonance; Sentence context

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CALCULATOR; COMPREHENSION; CONTROLLED STUDY; EVOKED RESPONSE; GRIP STRENGTH; HAND MOVEMENT; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; LANGUAGE PROCESSING; MOTOR PERFORMANCE; PICTURE ARCHIVING AND COMMUNICATION SYSTEM; PRIORITY JOURNAL; WRITTEN LANGUAGE; ADOLESCENT; ASSOCIATION; FEMALE; GESTURE; HAND STRENGTH; LANGUAGE; MALE; PATTERN RECOGNITION; PHYSIOLOGY; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; REACTION TIME; WRITING; YOUNG ADULT;

ADOLESCENT; COMPREHENSION; CUES; FEMALE; FORM PERCEPTION; GESTURES; HAND STRENGTH; HUMANS; LANGUAGE; MALE; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; REACTION TIME; WRITING; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 77955173739     PISSN: 00100277     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2010.06.001     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Altmann G.T.M., Mirkovic J. Incrementality and prediction in human sentence processing. Cognitive Science 2009, 33:583-609.
2. Bailey, D. (1997). When push comes to shove: A computational model of the role of motor control in the acquisition of action verbs. Ph.D. Dissertation, Computer Science Division, University of California, Berkeley.
3. Baumann M.A., Fluet M.-C., Scherberger H. Context-specific grasp movement representation in the macaque anterior intraparietal area. Journal of Neuroscience 2009, 29:6436-6448.
4. Borreggine K.L., Kaschak M.P. The action-sentence compatibility effect: It's all in the timing. Cognitive Science 2006, 30:1097-1112.
5. Bub D.N., Masson M.E.J., Cree G. Evocation of functional and volumetric gestural knowledge by objects and words. Cognition 2008, 106:27-58.
6. Cisek P. Neural representations of motor plans, desired trajectories, and controlled objects. Cognitive Processing 2005, 6:15-24.
7. Cisek P. Cortical mechanisms of action selection: The affordance competition hypothesis. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 2007, 362:1585-1599.
8. Cisek P., Kalaska J.F. Simultaneous encoding of multiple potential reach directions in dorsal premotor cortex. Journal of Neurophysiology 2002, 87:1149-1154.
9. Cisek P., Kalaska J.F. Neural correlates of reaching decisions in dorsal premotor cortex: Specification of multiple direction choices and final selection of action. Neuron 2005, 45:801-814.
10. Fagg A.H., Arbib M.A. Modeling parietal-premotor interactions in primate control of grasping. Neural Networks 1998, 11:1277-1303.
11. Feldman J., Narayanan S. Embodied meaning in a neural theory of language. Brain and Language 2004, 89:385-392.
12. Gail A., Andersen R.A. Neural dynamics in monkey parietal reach region reflect context-specific sensorimotor transformations. Journal of Neuroscience 2006, 13:9376-9384.
13. Gallese V., Lakoff G. The brain's concepts: The role of the sensory-motor system in conceptual knowledge. Cognitive Neuropsychology 2005, 22:455-479.
14. Glenberg A.M., Kaschak M.P. Grounding language in action. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 2002, 9:558-565.
15. Glover S., Rosenbaum D.A., Graham J., Dixon P. Grasping the meaning of words. Experimental Brain Research 2004, 154:103-108.
16. Goodale M.A., Milner A.D., Jakobson L.S., Carey D.P. A neurological dissociation between perceiving objects and grasping them. Nature 1991, 349:154-156.
17. Greif M.L., Kemler Nelson D.G., Keil F.C., Gutierrez F. What do children want to know about animals and artifacts? Domain-specific requests for information. Psychological Science 2006, 17:455-459.
18. Jackendoff R. Consciousness and the computational mind 1987, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
19. Jackendoff R. Foundations of language: Brain, meaning, grammar, evolution 2002, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
20. Kaschak M.P., Borreggine K.L. Temporal dynamics of the action-sentence compatibility effect. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 2008, 61:883-895.
21. Keil F.C. The acquisition of natural kind and artifact terms. Language learning and concept acquisition 1986, 133-153. Ablex, Norwood, NJ. W. Demopoulos, A. Marras (Eds.).
22. Kemler Nelson D.G., Chan Egan L., Holt M.B. When children ask, " What is it?" what do they want to know about artifacts?. Psychological Science 2004, 15:384-389.
23. Kintsch W. Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition 1998, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England.
24. Larkin J.H. Display-based problem solving. Complex information processing 1989, 319-432. Erlbaum, Hillsale, NJ. D. Klahr, K. Kotovsky (Eds.).
25. Lindemann O., Stenneken P., Van Schie H.T., Bekkering H. Semantic activation in action planning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 2006, 32:633-643.
26. Long D.L., Oppy B.J., Seely M.R. Individual differences in the time course of inferential processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 1994, 20:1456-1470.
27. Malt B.C., Johnson E.C. Do artifact concepts have cores?. Journal of Memory and Language 1992, 31:195-217.
28. Masson M.E.J., Bub D.N., Newton-Taylor M. Language-based access to gestural components of conceptual knowledge. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 2008, 71:869-882.
29. Masson M.E.J., Bub D.N., Warren C.M. Kicking calculators: Contribution of embodied representations to sentence comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language 2008, 59:256-265.
30. Miller G.A., Johnson-Laird P.N. Language and perception 1976, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England.
31. Myung J.-Y., Blumstein S.E., Sedivy J.C. Playing on the typewriter, typing on the piano: Manipulation knowledge of objects. Cognition 2006, 98:223-243.
32. Myung J.-Y., Blumstein S.E., Yee E., Sedivy J.C., Thompson-Schill S.L., Buxbaum L.J. Impaired access to manipulation feature in apraxia: Evidence from eyetracking and semantic judgment tasks. Brain & Language 2010, 112:101-112.
33. Ohlsson S. Anchoring language in reality: Observations on reference and representation. Discourse Processes 1999, 28:93-105.
34. Sakata H., Taira M., Kusunoki M., Murata A., Tanaka Y. The TINS lecture. The parietal association cortex in depth perception and visual control of hand action. Trends in Neurosciences 1997, 20:350-357.
35. Searle J.R. Intentionality: An essay in the philosophy of mind 1983, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
36. Seidenberg M.S., Tanenhaus M.K., Leiman J.M., Bienkowski M. Automatic access of the meanings of ambiguous words in context: Some limitations of knowledge-based processing. Cognitive Psychology 1982, 14:489-537.
37. Simon H.A. The functional equivalence of problem solving skills. Cognitive Psychology 1975, 7:266-268.
38. Smith L., Jones S., Landau B. Naming in young children: A dumb mechanism?. Cognition 1996, 60:143-171.
39. Tabossi P. Accessing lexical ambiguity in different types of sentential context. Journal of Memory and Language 1988, 27:324-340.
40. Taylor L.J., Zwaan R.A. Action in cognition: The case of language. Language and Cognition 2009, 1:45-58.
41. Till R.E., Mross E.F., Kintsch W. Time course of priming for associate and inference words in a discourse context. Memory & Cognition 1988, 16:283-298.
42. Ulrich R., Miller J. Effects of truncation on reaction time analysis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 1994, 123:34-80.
43. Yee E., Drucker D.M., Thompson-Schill S.L. fMRI-adaptation evidence of overlapping neural representations for objects related in function or manipulation. NeuroImage 2010, 50:753-763.
44. Zwaan R.A., Madden C.J., Yaxley R.H., Aveyard M.E. Moving words: Dynamic mental representations in language comprehension. Cognitive Science 2004, 28:611-619.
45. Zwaan R.A., Stanfield R.A., Yaxley R.H. Language comprehenders mentally represent the shapes of objects. Psychological Science 2002, 13:168-171.
46. Zwaan R.A., Taylor L. Seeing, acting, understanding: Motor resonance in language comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 2006, 135:1-11.