Flexible recruitment of semantic richness: Context modulates body-object interaction effects in lexical-semantic processing

Frontiers in Human Neuroscience

Volumn , Issue MARCH 2012, 2012, Pages 1-7

  Tousignant, Cody ^a   Pexman, Penny M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY   (Canada)

Author keywords

Body object interaction; Lexical semantic; Semantic categorization task; Semantic richness; Task effects

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BODY MOVEMENT; BODY OBJECT INTERACTION; COGNITION; CONTROLLED STUDY; DECISION MAKING; FACILITATION; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; KNOWLEDGE; NEUROMODULATION; NEUROPHYSIOLOGICAL RECRUITMENT; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SEMANTIC RICHNESS; SEMANTICS; TASK PERFORMANCE; VISUAL DISCRIMINATION; WORD RECOGNITION;

EID: 84859034842     PISSN: 16625161     EISSN: 16625161     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3389/fnhum.2012.00053     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Balota, D. A., Cortese, M. J., Sergent-Marshall, S. D., Spieler, D. H., and Yap, M. J. (2004). Visual word recognition of single-syllable words. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 133, 283-316.
2. Balota, D. A., Yap, M. J., Cortese, M. J., Hutchison, K. I., Kessler, B., Loftis, B., Neely, J. H., Nelson, D. L., Simpson, G. B., and Treiman, R. (2007). The English Lexicon Project. Behav. Res. Methods 39, 445-459.
3. Barsalou, L. W. (1982). Context-independent and context-dependent information in concepts. Mem. Cognit. 10, 82-93.
4. Barsalou, L. W. (2008). Grounded cognition. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 59, 617-645.
5. Boulenger, V., Hauk, O., and Pulvermüller, F. (2009). Grasping ideas with the motor system: semantic somatotopy in idiom comprehension. Cereb. Cortex 19, 1905-1914.
6. Buchanan, L., Westbury, C., and Burgess, C. (2001). Characterizing semantic space: neighborhood effects in word recognition. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 8, 531-544.
7. Caramazza, A., and Mahon, B. Z. (2003). The organization of conceptual knowledge: the evidence from category-specific semantic deficits. Trends Cogn. Sci. 7, 354-361.
8. Collins, A. M., and Loftus, E. F. (1975). A spreading-activation theory of semantic processing. Psychol. Rev. 82, 407-428.
9. Davis, C. J. (2005). N-Watch: a program for deriving neighborhood size and other pshycolinguistic statistics. Behav. Res. Methods 37, 65-70.
10. Fodor, J. A. (1975). The Language of Thought. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
11. Grondin, R., Lupker, S. J., and McRae, K. (2009). Shared features dominate semantic richness effects for concrete concepts. J. Mem. Lang. 60, 1-19.
12. Hargreaves, I. S., White, M., Pexman, P. M., Pittman, D., and Goodyear, B. G. (2012). The question shapes the answer: the neural correlates of task differences reveal dynamic semantic processing. Brain Lang. 120, 73-78.
13. Hino, Y., Pexman, P. M., and Lupker, S. J. (2006). Ambiguity and relatedness effects in semantic tasks: are they due to semantic coding? J. Mem. Lang. 55, 247-273.
14. Hoenig, K., Sim, E-J., Bochev, V., Herrnberger, B., and Kiefer, M. (2008). Conceptual flexibility in the human brain: dynamic recruitment of semantic maps from visual, motor, and motion-related areas. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 20, 1799-1814.
15. Kiefer, M., and Pulvermüller, F. (2012). Conceptual representations in mind and brain: theoretical developments, current evidence and future directions. Cortex. (in press).
16. Kucera, H., and Francis, W. N. (1967). Computational Analysis of Present-Day American English. Providence: Brown University Press.
17. Pexman, P., Hargreaves, I., Siakaluk, P., Bodner, G., and Pope, J. (2008). There are many ways to be rich: effects of three measures of semantic richness on visual word recognition. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 15, 161-167.
18. Pexman, P. M., Holyk, G. G., and Monfils, M-H. (2003). Number-of-features effects and semantic processing. Mem. Cognit. 31, 842-855.
19. Pexman, P. M., Lupker, S. J., and Hino, Y. (2002). The impact of feedback semantics in visual word recognition: number-of-features effects in lexical decision and naming tasks. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 9, 542-549.
20. Raposo, A., Moss, H. E., Stamatkis, E. A., and Tyler, L. K. (2009). Modulation of motor and premotor cortices by actions, action words, and action sentences. Neuropsychologia 47, 388-396.
21. Schneider, W., Eschman, A., and Zuccolotto, A. (2002). E-Prime Reference Guide. Sharpsburg, PA: Psychology Software Tools, Inc.
22. Siakaluk, P. D., Pexman, P. M., Aguilera, L., Owen, W. J., and Sears, C. R. (2008a). Evidence for the activation of sensorimotor information during visual word recognition: the body-object interaction effect. Cognition 106, 433-443.
23. Siakaluk, P. D., Pexman, P. M., Sears, C., Wilson, K., Locheed, K., and Owen, W. J. (2008b). The benefits of sensorimotor knowledge: body-object interaction facilitates semantic processing. Cogn. Sci. 32, 591-605.
24. Tillotson, S. M., Siakaluk, P. D., and Pexman, P. M. (2008). Body-object interaction ratings for 1,618 monosyllabic nouns. Behav. Res. Methods 40, 1075-1078.
25. Wellsby, M., Siakaluk, P. D., Owen, W. J., and Pexman, P. M. (2011). Embodied semantic processing: the body-object interaction effect in a non-manual task. Lang. Cogn. 3, 1-14.
26. Willems, R. M., and Casasanto, D. (2011). Flexibility in embodied language understanding. Front. Psychol. 2:116. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00116
27. Wilson, M. D. (1988). The MRC Psycholinguistic Database: Machine Readable Dictionary, Version 2. Behav. Res. Methods Instrum. Comput. 20, 6-11.
28. Yap, M. J., Tan, S. E., Pexman, P. M., and Hargreaves, I. S. (2011). Is more always better? Effects of semantic richness on lexical decision, speeded pronunciation, and semantic classification. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 18, 742-750.
29. Zeno, S. M., Ivens, S. H., Millard, R. T., and Duvvuri, R. (1995). The Educator's Word Frequency Guide. United States of America: Touchstone Applied Science Associates, Inc.