Strozyk Jessica Vanessa, Dudschig Carolin, Kaup Barbara
Fachbereich Psychologie, University of Tübingen, Schleichstr. 4, 72076, Tübingen, Germany.
Psychol Res. 2019 Apr;83(3):406-418. doi: 10.1007/s00426-017-0900-8. Epub 2017 Aug 2.
Theories of embodiment state that people mentally simulate the described situations and events during language comprehension. While several studies have provided evidence that these simulations exist, it is still unclear whether they are functionally relevant for comprehension. To investigate this question, we studied the effects of a secondary task on the processing of hand- and foot-related nouns. The secondary task occupied either the hand or the foot system, thereby impeding hand- or foot-related simulations, respectively. Participants performed a lexical decision task by responding to the presented nouns with their left hand or foot, depending on the color of the words, while withholding their response to pseudowords. In half of the experimental blocks, participants performed a simultaneous tapping task with their right hand (Experiment 1) or foot (Experiment 2). If simulations are functionally relevant for comprehension, the secondary task should affect the processing of hand words to a larger degree than the processing foot words in Experiment 1 and vice versa in Experiment 2. In both experiments, hand responses were faster for hand words than foot words, whereas the opposite was true for foot responses. This finding indicates that participants indeed simulated the words' meanings. Importantly, there was no difference between the influence of the hand tapping and the foot tapping task on lexical decision times to hand and foot words, indicating that experiential simulation might just be an optional by-product of language processing.
具身理论认为,人们在语言理解过程中会在脑海中模拟所描述的情境和事件。虽然多项研究已提供证据表明这些模拟是存在的,但它们在功能上是否与理解相关仍不明确。为了探究这个问题,我们研究了一项次要任务对与手和脚相关名词加工的影响。该次要任务分别占用手部或脚部系统,从而分别阻碍与手或脚相关的模拟。参与者根据单词颜色用左手或脚对呈现的名词执行词汇判断任务,同时不对伪词做出反应。在一半的实验块中,参与者用右手(实验1)或脚(实验2)同时执行敲击任务。如果模拟在功能上与理解相关,那么在实验1中,次要任务对与手相关单词加工的影响应比对与脚相关单词加工的影响更大,而在实验2中则相反。在两个实验中,与手相关的单词用手做出反应比用脚更快,而与脚相关的单词用脚做出反应则相反。这一发现表明参与者确实模拟了单词的含义。重要的是,手部敲击任务和脚部敲击任务对与手和脚相关单词的词汇判断时间的影响没有差异,这表明经验模拟可能只是语言加工的一个可选副产品。