Few Believe the World Is Flat: How Embodiment Is Changing the Scientific Understanding of Cognition

Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology

Volumn 69, Issue 2, 2015, Pages 165-171

  Glenberg, Arthur M ^a  

^a ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

cognitive neuroscience; embodied cognition; goals; language; perception and action

Indexed keywords

COGNITION; COMPREHENSION; EMOTION; HUMAN; PERCEPTION; PHYSIOLOGY; THINKING;

COGNITION; COMPREHENSION; EMOTIONS; HUMANS; PERCEPTION; THINKING;

EID: 84944458875     PISSN: 11961961     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/cep0000056     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. Adriano, A., Diéz, E., Fernandez, A. (2014). Finger-monitoring configurations affect Arabic-number processing in left hemisphere. In P. Bernardis, C. Fantoni, & W. Gerbino (Eds.), Proceedings of the Trieste Symposium on Perception and Cognition (pp. 84-87). Trieste, Italy: Edizioni Università di Trieste.
2. Andres, M., Seron, X., Olivier, E. (2007). Contribution of hand motor circuits to counting. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 19, 563-576. http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/jocn.2007.19.4.563
3. Arrighi, R., Cartocci, G., Burr, D. (2011). Reduced perceptual sensitivity for biological motion in paraplegia patients. Current Biology, 21, R910-R911.
4. Atkinson, R., Shiffrin, R. (1968). Human memory: A proposed system and its control processes. In K. Spence & J. T. Spence (Eds.), The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 2, pp. 89-195). New York, NY: Academic Press.
5. Barsalou, L. W. (1999). Perceptual symbol systems. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 577-609.
6. Blakemore, S. J., Goodbody, S. J., Wolpert, D. M. (1998). Predicting the consequences of our own actions: The role of sensorimotor context estimation. The Journal of Neuroscience, 18, 7511-7518.
7. Bub, D. N., Masson, M. E. J. (2012). On the dynamics of action representations evoked by names of manipulable objects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 141, 502-517. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0026748
8. Clark, A. (2013). Whatever next Predictive brains, situated agents, and the future of cognitive science. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 36, 181-204. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X12000477
9. Collins, A. M., Quillian, M. R. (1969) Retrieval time from semantic memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 8, 240-247.
10. Eder, A. B., Rothermund, K., De Hower, J., Hommel, B. (2014). Directive and incentive functions of Affetive action consequences: An ideomotor approach. Psychological Research. Advance Online Publication. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00426-014-0590-4
11. Gallese, V., Keysers, C., Rizzolatti, G. (2004). A unifying view of the basis of social cognition. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8, 396-403. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2004.07.002
12. Glenberg, A. M. (2008). Embodiment for education. In P. Calvo & A. Gomila (Eds.), Handbook of cognitive science: An embodied approach (pp. 355-372). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
13. Glenberg, A. M., Gallese, V. (2012). Action-based language: A theory of language acquisition, comprehension, and production. Cortex: A Journal Devoted to the Study of the Nervous System and Behavior, 48, 905-922. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2011.04.010
14. Glenberg, A. M., Kaschak, M. P. (2002). Grounding language in action. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9, 558-565. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/BF03196313
15. Glenberg, A. M., Mehta, S. (2009). Constraints on covariation: It's not meaning. Italian Journal of Linguistics. Retrieved from http://psychology-dev.clas.asu.edu/sites/default/files/Glenberg%20% 26%20Mehta,%202009.pdf
16. Glenberg, A. M., Robertson, D. A. (2000). Symbol grounding and meaning: A comparison of high-dimensional and embodied theories of meaning. Journal of Memory and Language, 43, 379-401. http://dx.doi .org/10.1006/jmla.2000.2714
17. Glenberg, A. M., Sato, M., Cattaneo, L. (2008). Use-induced motor plasticity affects the processing of abstract and concrete language. Current Biology, 18, R290-R291. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2008.02 .036
18. Glenberg, A. M., Sato, M., Cattaneo, L., Riggio, L., Palumbo, D., Buccino, G. (2008). Processing abstract language modulates motor system activity. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 61, 905-919. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17470210701625550
19. Grush, R. (2004). The emulation theory of representation: Motor control, imagery, and perception. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 27, 377-396. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X04000093
20. Harnad, S. (1990) The symbol grounding problem. Physica D, 42, 335-346.
21. Hauk, O., Johnsrude, I., Pulvermüller, F. (2004). Somatotopic representation of action words in human motor and premotor cortex. Neuron, 41, 301-307. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0896-6273(03)00838-9
22. Havas, D. A., Glenberg, A. M., Gutowski, K. A., Lucarelli, M. J., Davidson, R. J. (2010). Cosmetic use of botulinum toxin: Affects processing of emotional language. Psychological Science, 21, 895-900. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0956797610374742
23. Kintsch, W. (1988) The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension: A construction-integration model. Psychological Review, 95, 163-182.
24. Kontra, C., Lyons, D., Fischer, S., Beilock, S. (in press). Physical experience enhances science learning. Psychological Science.
25. Landauer, T. K., Dumais, S. T. (1997). A solution to Plato's Problem: The latent semantic analysis theory of acquisition, induction, and representation of knowledge. Psychological Review, 104, 211-240.
26. Landy, D., Brookes, D., Smout, R. (2014). Abstract numeric relations and the visual structure of algebra. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 40, 1404-1418. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0036823
27. Mahon, B. Z. (2015). The burden of embodied cognition. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 69, 172-178.
28. Mahon, B. Z., Caramazza, A. (2008). A critical look at the embodied cognition hypothesis and a new proposal for grounding conceptual content. Journal of Physiology-Paris, 102(1-3), 59-70.
29. Marsh, E. R., Glenberg, A. M. (2010). The embodied statistician. Frontiers in Psychology, 1, 184. http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2010 .00184
30. Masson, M. E. J. (2015). Toward a deeper understanding of embodiment. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 69, 159-164.
31. Mechsner, F., Kerzel, D., Knoblich, G., Prinz, W. (2001). Perceptual basis of bimanual coordination. Nature, 414, 69-73.
32. Möhring, W., Frick, A. (2013). Touching up mental rotation: Effects of manual experience on 6-month-old infants' mental object rotation. Child Development, 84, 1554-1565. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12065
33. Nemirovsky, R., Rasmussen, C., Sweeney, G., Wawro, M. (2012). When the classroom floor becomes the complex plane: Addition and multiplication as ways of bodily navigation. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 21, 287-323. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2011.611445
34. Newell, A., Simon, H. A. (1976). Computer Science as Empirical Inquiry: Symbols and Search. Communications of the ACM, 19, 113-126.
35. Osiurak, F., Badets, A. (2014). Pliers, not fingers: Tool-action effect in a motor intention paradigm. Cognition, 130, 66-73. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2013.09.005
36. Pickering, M. J., Garrod, S. (2013). An integrated theory of language production and comprehension. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 36, 329-347. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X12001495
37. Proffitt, D. R. (2006). Embodied perception and the economy of action. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1, 110-122. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6916.2006.00008.x
38. Proffitt, D. R., Linkenauger, S. A. (2013). Perception viewed as a phenotypic expression. In W. Prinz, M. Beisert, & A. Herwig (Eds.), Tutorials in action science (pp. 171-197). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
39. Rakison, D. H., Krogh, L. (2010). Does causal action facilitate causal perception in infants younger than 6 months of age Developmental Science, 15, 43-53.
40. Rizzolatti, G., Craighero, L. (2004). The mirror-neuron system. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 27, 169-192. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.neuro.27.070203.144230
41. Rizzolatti, G., Sinigaglia, C. (2010). The functional role of the parietofrontal mirror circuit: Interpretations and misinterpretations. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 11, 264-274. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nrn2805
42. Rueschemeyer, S.-A., Glenberg, A. M., Kaschak, M. P., Mueller, K., Friederici, A. D. (2010). Top-down and bottom-up contributions to understanding sentences describing objects in motion. Frontiers in Psychology, 1, 183. http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2010.00183
43. Sato, M., Cattaneo, L., Rizzolatti, G., Gallese, V. (2007). Numbers within our hands: Modulation of corticospinal excitability of hand muscles during numerical judgment. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 19, 684-693. http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/jocn.2007.19.4.684
44. Searle, J. R. (1980) Minds, brains and programs. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 3, 417-424.
45. Shapiro, L. (2011). Embodied cognition. New York, NY: Routledge.
46. Soliman, T., Gibson, A., Glenberg, A. M. (2013). Sensory motor mechanisms unify psychology: The embodiment of culture. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 885. http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00885
47. Sommerville, J. A., Woodward, A. L., Needham, A. (2005). Action experience alters 3-month-old infants' perception of others' actions. Cognition, 96(1), B1-B11. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2004 .07.004
48. Stanfield, R. A., Zwaan, R. A. (2001). The effect of implied orientation derived from verbal context on picture recognition. Psychological Science, 12, 153-156.
49. Tucker, M., Ellis, R. (1998). On the relations between seen objects and components of potential actions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24, 830-846.
50. Urrutia, M., Gennari, S. P., de Vega, M. (2012). Counterfactuals in action: An fMRI study of counterfactual sentences describing physical effort. Neuropsychologia, 50, 3663-3672. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j .neuropsychologia.2012.09.004
51. van der Hoort, B., Guterstam, A., Ehrsson, H. H. (2011). Being Barbie: The size of one's own body determines the perceived size of the world. PLoS ONE, 6(5), e20195. http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone .0020195
52. Witt, J. K., Proffitt, D. R., Epstein, W. (2004). Perceiving distance: A role of effort and intent. Perception, 33, 577-590. http://dx.doi.org/10.1068/p5090
53. Wolpert, D. M., Doya, K., Kawato, M. (2003). A unifying computational framework for motor control and social interaction. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series B, Biological Sciences, 358, 593-602. http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2002.1238
54. Wolpert, D. M., Kawato, M. (1998). Multiple paired forward and inverse models for motor control. Neural Networks, 11, 1317-1329. http://dx .doi.org/10.1016/S0893-6080(98)00066-5
55. Yee, E., Chrysikou, E. G., Hoffman, E., Thompson-Schill, S. L. (2013). Manual experience shapes object representations. Psychological Science, 24, 909-919. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0956797612464658