Ibáñez Agustín, Kühne Katharina, Miklashevsky Alex, Monaco Elisa, Muraki Emiko, Ranzini Mariagrazia, Speed Laura J, Tuena Cosimo
Latin American Brain Health Institute (BrainLat), Universidad Adolfo Ibáñez, Santiago de Chile, Chile.
Cognitive Neuroscience Center (CNC), Universidad de San Andrés and CONICET, Buenos Aires, Argentina.
J Cogn. 2023 Oct 10;6(1):59. doi: 10.5334/joc.228. eCollection 2023.
Embodied theories of cognition consider many aspects of language and other cognitive domains as the result of sensory and motor processes. In this view, the appraisal and the use of concepts are based on mechanisms of simulation grounded on prior sensorimotor experiences. Even though these theories continue receiving attention and support, increasing evidence indicates the need to consider the flexible nature of the simulation process, and to accordingly refine embodied accounts. In this consensus paper, we discuss two potential sources of variability in experimental studies on embodiment of language: individual differences and context. Specifically, we show how factors contributing to individual differences may explain inconsistent findings in embodied language phenomena. These factors include sensorimotor or cultural experiences, imagery, context-related factors, and cognitive strategies. We also analyze the different contextual modulations, from single words to sentences and narratives, as well as the top-down and bottom-up influences. Similarly, we review recent efforts to include cultural and language diversity, aging, neurodegenerative diseases, and brain disorders, as well as bilingual evidence into the embodiment framework. We address the importance of considering individual differences and context in clinical studies to drive translational research more efficiently, and we indicate recommendations on how to correctly address these issues in future research. Systematically investigating individual differences and context may contribute to understanding the dynamic nature of simulation in language processes, refining embodied theories of cognition, and ultimately filling the gap between cognition in artificial experimental settings and cognition in the wild (i.e., in everyday life).
认知的具身理论将语言和其他认知领域的许多方面视为感觉和运动过程的结果。按照这种观点，概念的评估和使用基于以先前的感觉运动经验为基础的模拟机制。尽管这些理论持续受到关注并得到支持，但越来越多的证据表明有必要考虑模拟过程的灵活性，并相应地完善具身理论。在这篇共识论文中，我们讨论了语言具身性实验研究中两个潜在的变异性来源：个体差异和语境。具体而言，我们展示了导致个体差异的因素如何解释具身语言现象中不一致的研究结果。这些因素包括感觉运动或文化经验、意象、与语境相关的因素以及认知策略。我们还分析了从单个单词到句子和叙事的不同语境调节，以及自上而下和自下而上的影响。同样，我们回顾了最近将文化和语言多样性、衰老、神经退行性疾病、脑部疾病以及双语证据纳入具身框架的努力。我们强调在临床研究中考虑个体差异和语境对于更有效地推动转化研究的重要性，并指出在未来研究中如何正确处理这些问题的建议。系统地研究个体差异和语境可能有助于理解语言过程中模拟的动态本质，完善认知的具身理论，并最终弥合人工实验环境中的认知与现实世界（即日常生活）中的认知之间的差距。
