Intentionality in motor cognition, completing the loop A short look at research of top-down effects on motor priming in the context of embodied language

Content Effects of language understanding on motor processing (recap) Possible non-embodied interpretation View from the other direction: Top-down modulation of motor priming Effect of intentionality in motor priming Motor cognition Language processing intentionality

Effects of language understanding on motor processing ACE (action sentence compatibility effect): Glenberg and Kaschak (2002) Effector specific response of the neural system: Johnsrude, & Pulvermüller, 2004 Influence of biological motion on human motor understanding Can we explain ACE with symbolic view? How intertwined are language processing and sensory-motor processing? Sensory-triggered motor priming or possible top-down modulations?

Effects of Intentional Motor Actions on Embodied Language Processing (Rueschemeyer et al., 2010). participants performed either an intentional or a passive motor task while processing words denoting manipulable and nonmanipulable objects Goal: demonstrating that the execution of motor actions has a selective effect on the semantic processing of words Hypothesis: responses to functionally manipulable words would be modulated by preceding execution of an intentional, but not of a passive action.

Method and results Go – no go task: discrimination between real Dutch words (80) and phonetical composites (20), real words were either functionally manipulable or nonmanipulable (cup vs. clock). Active movement: following the disk outline with the index finger, passive movement: placing index figer on the rotating disk Results: participants made fewer errors when processing words referring to FM objects (such as cup) as compared to NM objects (such as bookend) while performing an arbitrary, but voluntary action (F(1, 26) = 5.79, p <.05).

Top-Down Modulation of Motor Priming by Belief About Animacy (Liepelt and Brass, 2010) participants performed a motor priming task observing the identical animation showing finger lifting movements of a hand in a leather glove Hypothesis: motor priming effect would be bigger if participant believed they were interacting with human hand vs wooden hand.

Method and Results Participants had to lift either the index or the middle finger of their right hand in response to a number (1: index, 2: middle) The number was displayed together with a photograph of a right hand from a first person’s perspective on a computer scree

Discussion Comments on the studies and further suggestions Ecological validity vs. simplicity Problem of reinterpretation of the same empiric results