Andres Michael, Finocchiaro Chiara, Buiatti Marco, Piazza Manuela
Psychological Sciences Research Institute, Université Catholique de Louvain, Place Cardinal Mercier 10, 1348 Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium; Center for Mind/Brain Sciences, University of Trento, Corso Bettini 31, 38068 Rovereto, Italy.
Department of Psychology and Cognitive Science, University of Trento, Corso Bettini 31, 38068 Rovereto, Italy.
Cognition. 2015 Jan;134:174-84. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2014.10.004. Epub 2014 Nov 6.
Electrophysiological and brain imaging studies show a somatotopic activation of the premotor cortex while subjects process action verbs. This somatotopic motor activation has been taken as an indication that the meaning of action verbs is embedded in motor representations. However, discrepancies in the literature led to the alternative hypothesis that motor representations are activated during the course of a mental imagery process emerging only after the meaning of the action has been accessed. In order to address this issue, we asked participants to decide whether a visually presented verb was concrete or abstract by pressing a button or a pedal (primary task) and then to provide a distinct vocal response to low and high sounds played soon after the verb display (secondary task). Manipulations of the visual display (lower vs. uppercase), verb imageability (concrete vs. abstract), verb meaning (hand vs. foot-related), and response effector (hand vs. foot) allowed us to trace the perceptual, semantic and response stages of verb processing. We capitalized on the psychological refractory period (PRP), which implies that the initiation of the secondary task should be delayed only by those factors that slow down the central decision process in the primary task. In line with this prediction, our results showed that the time cost resulting from the processing of abstract verbs, when compared to concrete verbs, was still observed in the subsequent response to the sounds, whereas the overall advantage of hand over foot responses did not influence sound judgments. Crucially, we also observed a verb-effector compatibility effect (i.e., foot-related verbs are responded faster with the foot and hand-related verbs with the hand) that contaminated the performance of the secondary task, providing clear evidence that motor interference from verb meaning occurred during the central decision stage. These results cannot be explained by a mental imagery process that would deploy only during the execution of the response to verb judgments. They rather indicate that the motor activation induced by action verbs accompanies the lexico-semantic processes leading to response selection.
电生理和脑成像研究表明,当受试者处理动作动词时,运动前区皮层会出现躯体定位激活。这种躯体定位运动激活被视为动作动词的意义嵌入运动表征的一个指标。然而,文献中的差异导致了另一种假设,即运动表征是在动作意义被获取之后才出现的心理意象过程中被激活的。为了解决这个问题,我们要求参与者通过按下按钮或踏板来判断视觉呈现的动词是具体的还是抽象的(主要任务),然后对动词呈现后不久播放的低音和高音提供不同的语音反应(次要任务)。对视觉显示(小写与大写)、动词可想象性(具体与抽象)、动词意义(与手相关与与脚相关)和反应效应器(手与脚)的操作,使我们能够追踪动词处理的感知、语义和反应阶段。我们利用了心理不应期(PRP),这意味着次要任务的启动应该只被那些减慢主要任务中心决策过程的因素所延迟。与这一预测一致,我们的结果表明,与具体动词相比,处理抽象动词所产生的时间成本在随后对声音的反应中仍然可以观察到,而手部反应相对于脚部反应的总体优势并没有影响对声音的判断。至关重要的是,我们还观察到了一种动词 - 效应器兼容性效应(即与脚相关的动词用脚反应更快,与手相关的动词用手反应更快),这种效应干扰了次要任务的表现,提供了明确的证据表明动词意义的运动干扰发生在中心决策阶段。这些结果不能用仅在对动词判断的反应执行过程中才会展开的心理意象过程来解释。它们反而表明,动作动词引起的运动激活伴随着导致反应选择的词汇语义过程。