Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Skip to main content

Moving stimuli guide retrieval and (in)validation of coordination simulations

  • Short Report
  • Published:
Cognitive Processing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

According to theories of embodied cognition, visual stimuli can either facilitate or impede the retrieval of language meaning as multimodal perceptual simulations. Here, we introduced a novel experimental paradigm to test the hypothesis that moving stimuli (i.e., motion-defined objects) facilitate coordination comprehension. Participants read coordination descriptions and saw two colored lines that matched the descriptions. Two figures then selected the lines either by moving jointly along them or by standing each on a different line. Moving selections yielded high validation scores in conjunction trials and low validation scores in disjunction trials, whereas stationary selections yielded mitigated scores. The results demonstrate that jointly moving stimuli, which are effective cues to visual grouping, help retrieve and validate conjunction simulations composed of dependent stimuli as well as retrieve and invalidate disjunction simulations composed of independent stimuli. These findings challenge accounts based on truth-condition satisfaction that stimuli properties cannot affect language comprehension and thereby reasoning.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.

References

  • Barsalou LW (1999) Perceptual symbol systems. Behav Brain Sci 22:577–660

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Barsalou LW, Santos A, Simmons WK, Wilson CD (2008) Language and simulation in conceptual processing. In: De Vega M, Glenberg AM, Graesser AC (eds) Symbols, embodiment, and meaning. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Braine M, Rumain B (1981) Children’s comprehension of “or”: evidence for a sequence of competencies. J Exp Child Psychol 31:46–70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bundesen C (1990) A theory of visual attention. Psychol Rev 97:523–547

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • De Neys W, Schaeken W (2007) When people are more logical under cognitive load: dual task impact on scalar implicature. Exp Psychol 54:128–133

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dumitru ML, Joergensen GH, Cruickshank AG, Altmann GTM (2013) Language-guided visual processing affects reasoning: the role of referential and spatial anchoring. Conscious Cogn 22(2):562–571

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Duncan J, Humphreys GW (1989) Visual search and stimulus similarity. Psychol Rev 96:433–458

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Egly R, Driver J, Rafal RD (1994) Shifting visual attention between objects and locations: evidence from normal and parietal lesion subjects. J Exp Psychol Gen 123:161–176

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fillenbaum S (1974) Or: some uses. J Exp Psychol 103:913–921

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glenberg AM (2007) Language and action: Creating sensible combinations of ideas. In: Gaskell G (ed) Oxford handbook of psycholinguistics. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 361–370

    Google Scholar 

  • Hannus A, van den Berg R, Bekkering H, Roerdink JBTM, Cornelissen FW (2006) Visual search near threshold: some features are more equal than others. J Vision 6:525–540

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hauk O, Johnsrude I, Pulvermüller F (2004) Somatotopic representation of action words in human motor and premotor cortex. Neuron 41:301–307

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Horn L (1972) On the semantic properties of the logical operators in English. PhD thesis, University of California at Los Angeles

  • Jiang Y, Olson IR, Chun M (2000) Organization of visual short-term memory. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn 26:683–702

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson J, Pashler H (1990) Close binding of identity and location in visual feature perception. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 16:843–856

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keenan EL, Faltz LM (1985) Boolean semantics for natural language. Reidel, Dordrecht

    Google Scholar 

  • Lamy D, Egeth H (2002) Object-based selection: the role of attentional shifts. Percept Psychophys 64:52–66

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Link G (1983) The logical analysis of plurals and mass terms: a lattice-theoretical approach. In: Baeuerle R et al (eds) Meaning, use, and interpretation of language. de Gruyter, Berlin, pp 302–323

    Google Scholar 

  • Lupyan G (2008) From chair to “chair”: a representational shift account of object labelling effects on memory. J Exp Psychol Gen 137:348–369

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Meteyard L, Bahrami B, Vigliocco G (2007) Motion detection and motion verbs: language affects low-level visual perception. Psychol Sci 18:1007–1013

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Nakayama K, He ZJ, Shimojo S (1995) Visual surface representation: a critical link between lower-level and higher-level vision. In: Kosslyn SM, Osherson DN (eds) Visual cognition, 2nd edn. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 1–70

    Google Scholar 

  • Nissen MJ (1985) Accessing features and objects: Is location special? In: Posner M, Marin O (eds) Attention and performance XI. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, pp 205–220

    Google Scholar 

  • Paris S (1973) Comprehension of language connectives and propositional logical relationships. J Exp Child Psychol 16:278–291

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poisson ME, Wilkinson F (1992) Distractor ratio and grouping processes in visual conjunction search. Perception 21:21–38

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Quinlan PT (1998) The recovery of identity and relative position from visual input: further evidence for the independence of processing of what and where. Percept Psychophys 60:303–318

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Richardson DC, Spivey MJ, Barsalou LW, McRae K (2003) Spatial representations activated during real-time comprehension of verbs. Cogn Sci 27:767–780

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sagi D, Julesz B (1985) Where and what in vision. Science 228:1217–1219

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sharot T (2012) The optimism bias: why we’re wired to look on the bright side. Constable & Robinson Ltd, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Simons DJ (1996) In sight, out of mind: when object representations fail. Psychol Sci 7:301–305

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simons M (2001) Disjunction and alternativeness. Linguist Philos 24:597–619

    Google Scholar 

  • Sperber D, Wilson D (1986/1995) Relevance: communication and cognition. Blackwell, Oxford

  • Sternberg RJ (1979) Developmental patterns in the encoding and combination of logical connectives. J Exp Child Psychol 28:469–498

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tettamanti M, Buccino G, Saccuman MC, Gallese V, Danna M, Scifo P et al (2005) Listening to action-related sentences activates fronto-parietal motor circuits. J Cogn Neurosci 17:273–281

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Treisman AM, Gelade G (1980) A feature-integration theory of attention. Cogn Psychol 12:97–136

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Treisman A, Sato S (1990) Conjunction search revisited. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 16:459–478

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Williams LG (1966) The effect of target specification on objects fixated during visual search. Percept Psychophys 1:315–318

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zohary E, Hochstein S (1989) How serial is serial processing in vision? Perception 18:191–200

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Zwaan RA, Stanfield RA, Yaxley RH (2002) Language comprehenders mentally represent the shapes of objects. Psychol Sci 13(2):168–171

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Magda L. Dumitru.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Dumitru, M.L. Moving stimuli guide retrieval and (in)validation of coordination simulations. Cogn Process 15, 397–403 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10339-014-0604-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10339-014-0604-6

Keywords