Semantic effects in word recognition are moderated by body-object interaction

Havermaet, Lisa R. Van; Wurm, Lee H.

doi:10.1075/ml.9.1.01hav

Article published In:

Semantic Considerations of Lexical Processing
[The Mental Lexicon 9:1] 2014
► pp. 1–22

Semantic effects in word recognition are moderated by body-object interaction

Lisa R. Van Havermaet | Clarke University

Lee H. Wurm | Wayne State University

A potential embodied influence in the semantic effects of Danger and Usefulness is investigated using Body-Object Interaction (BOI). Lexical decision times are influenced by ratings of Danger and Usefulness. In a frequently-found interaction, thought to be produced by activated approach-withdraw motor responses, increasing Danger ratings produce faster responses for items with lower Usefulness ratings while producing slower responses for items with higher Usefulness ratings. BOI is used to test the embodied explanation of this interaction. The same 102 words were presented in two lexical decision experiments. In both auditory and visual lexical decision, the effects of Danger and Usefulness were found to be diminished for items with higher BOI ratings. BOI moderates Danger and Usefulness effects in both auditory and visual lexical decision, in a way that suggests BOI is either the stronger or the temporally earlier effect.

Keywords: body-object interaction, auditory lexical decision, embodiment, usefulness, survival processing, visual lexical decision, lexical access, danger

Published online: 25 April 2014

https://doi.org/10.1075/ml.9.1.01hav

References (50)

Baayen, R. H. (2008a). Analyzing linguistic data: A practical introduction to statistics using R . Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

2004). Statistics in psycholinguistics: A critique of some current gold standards. Mental Lexicon Working Papers , 11, 1-45.

2008b). The languageR library, version 1.0. Retrieved from: [URL]

Baayen, R. H., Davidson, D. J., & Bates, B. M. (2008). Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items. Journal of Memory and Language , 591, 390-412.

Balota, D. A., Yap, M. J., Cortese, M. J., Hutchison, K. A., Kessler, B., Loftis, B., Neely, J. H., Nelson, D. L., Simpson, G. B., & Treiman, R. (2007). The English Lexicon Project. Behavior Research Methods , 391, 445-459.

Barsalou, L. W. (1999). Perceptual symbol systems. Behavioral and Brain Sciences , 22(4), 577-660.

2008). Grounded cognition. Annual Review of Psychology , 591, 617-645.

Bennett, S. D. R., Burnett, A. N., Siakaluk, P. D., & Pexman, P. M. (2011). Imageability and body-object interaction for 599 multisyllabic nouns. Behavior Research Methods , 4(4), 1100-1109.

Boot, I., & Pecher, D. (2008). Word recognition is affected by the meaning of orthographic neighbours: Evidence from semantic decision tasks. Language and Cognitive Processes , 23(3), 375-393.

Chen, S., & Bargh, J. A. (1999). Consequences of automatic evaluation: Immediate behavior predispositions to approach or avoid the stimulus. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin , 25(5-6), 6-224.

Forster, K. I. (2006). Early activation of category information in visual word recognition: More on the turple effect. The Mental Lexicon , 1(1), 35-58.

Forster, K. I., & Hector, J. (2002). Cascaded versus noncascaded models of lexical and semantic processing the turple effect. Memory & Cognition , 30(7), 1106-1116.

Gaskell, M. G., & Marslen-Wilson, W. D. (1997). Integrating form and meaning: A distributed model of speech perception. Language and Cognitive Processes , 121, 613-656.

Glenberg, A. M., & Kaschak, M. P. (2002). Grounding language in action. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review , 9(3), 558-565.

Harm, M. W., & Seidenberg, M. S. (2004). Computing the meanings of words in reading: Cooperative division of labor between visual and phonological processes. Psychological Review , 1111, 662-720.

Hauk, O., & Pulvermüller, F. (2004). Neurophysiological distinction of action words in the fronto-central cortex. Human Brain Mapping , 21(3), 191-201.

Havas, D. A., Glenberg, A. M., & Rinck, M. (2007). Emotion simulation during language comprehension. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review , 14(3), 436-441.

Jostmann, N. B., Lakens, D., & Schubert, T. W. (2009). Weight as an embodiment of importance. Psychological Science , 20(9), 1169-1174.

Keuleers, E., & Brysbaert, M. (2010). Wuggy: A multilingual pseudoword generator. Behavior Research Methods , 42(3), 627-633.

Kryuchkova, T., Tucker, B. V., Wurm, L. H., & Baayen, R. H. (2012). Danger and usefulness are detected early in auditory lexical processing: Evidence from electroencephalography. Brain and Language , 122(2), 81-91.

Lee, S. W. S., & Schwarz, N. (2010). Dirty hands and dirty mouths: Embodiment of the moral-purity metaphor is specific to the motor modality involved in moral transgression. Psychological Science , 21(10), 1423-1425.

Marslen-Wilson, W. D., & Welsh, A. (1978). Processing interactions and lexical access during word recognition in continuous speech. Cognitive Psychology , 101, 29-63.

.

McRae, K., Cree, G. S., Seidenberg, M. S., & McNorgan, C. (2005). Semantic feature production norms for a large set of living and nonliving things. Behavior Research Methods , 371, 547-559.

McRae, K., de Sa, V. R., & Seidenberg, M. S. (1997). On the nature and scope of featural representations of word meaning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General , 1261, 99-130.

Meier, B. P., & Robinson, M. D. (2004). Why the sunny side is up: Associations between affect and vertical position. Psychological Science , 15(4), 243-247.

Myung, J.-Y., Blumstein, S. E., & Sedivy, J. C. (2006). Playing on the typewriter, typing on the piano: Manipulation knowledge of objects. Cognition , 98(3), 223-243.

Proffitt, D. R., Stefanucci, J., Banton, T., & Epstein, W. (2003). The role of effort in perceiving distance. Psychological Science , 14(2), 106-112.

Pulvermüller, F., Härle, M., & Hummel, F. (2001). Walking or talking?: Behavioral and neurophysiological correlates of action verb processing. Brain and Language , 781, 143-168.

Pulvermüller, F., Hauk, O., Nikulin, V. V., & llmoniemi, R. J. (2005). Functional links between motor and language systems. European Journal of Neuroscience , 21(3), 793-797.

Robinson, M. D. (1998). Running from William James' bear: A review of preattentive mechanisms and their contributions to emotional experience. Cognition and Emotion , 12(5), 667-696.

Siakaluk, P. D., Pexman, P. M., Aguilera, L., Owen, W. J., & Sears, C. R. (2008a). Evidence for the activation of sensorimotor information during visual word recognition: The body-object interaction effect. Cognition , 106(1), 433-443.

Siakaluk, P. D., Pexman, P. M., Sears, C. R., Wilson, K., Locheed, K., & Owen, W. J. (2008b). The benefits of sensorimotor knowledge: Body-object interaction facilitates semantic processing. Cognitive Science , 32(3), 591-605.

Strack, F., Martin, L. L., & Stepper, S. (1988). Inhibiting and facilitating conditions of the human smile: A nonobtrusive test of the facial feedback hypothesis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 54(5), 768-777.

Tabachnik, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics (5th ed.). New York: Pearson Education, Inc.

Tillotson, S. M., Siakaluk, P. D., & Pexman, P. M. (2008). Body-object interaction ratings for 1,618 monosyllabic nouns. Behavior Research Methods , 40(4), 1075-1078.

Tom, G., Pettersen, P., Lau, T., Burton, T., & Cook, J. (1991). The role of overt head movement in the formation of affect. Basic & Applied Social Psychology , 12(3), 281-289.

.

Wellsby, M., Siakaluk, P. D., Owen, W. J., & Pexman, P. M. (2011). Embodied semantic processing: The body-object interaction effect in a non-manual task. Language & Cognition , 3(1), 1-14.

Wilson, M. D. (1988). MRC Psycholinguistic Database: Machine-usable dictionary, Version 2.00. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers , 20(1), 6-10.

Wilson, M. (2002). Six views of embodied cognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review , 9(4), 625-636.

Witherell, D., Wurm, L. H., Seaman, S. R., Brugnone, N. A., & Fulford, E. T. (2012). Danger and usefulness effects as a function of concept ancientness. The Mental Lexicon , 7(2), 183-209.

Wurm, L. H. (2007). Danger and usefulness: An alternative framework for understanding rapid evaluation effects in perception? Psychonomic Bulletin & Review , 14(6), 1218-1225.

2012). Auditory and visual processing of pseudowords are affected by their connotations of danger and usefulness. Presented at the 53rd annual meeting of the Psychonomic Society, Minneapolis, MN, November 15-18. Abstracts of the Psychonomic Society, 17, 4.

Wurm, L. H., & Ross, S. E. (2001). Conditional root uniqueness points: Psychological validity and perceptual consequences. Journal of Memory and Language , 45(1), 39-57.

Wurm, L. H., & Seaman, S. R. (2008). Semantic effects in naming and perceptual identification, but not in delayed naming: Implications for models and tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition , 34(2), 381-398.

Wurm, L. H., & Vakoch, D. A. (2000). The adaptive value of lexical connotation in speech perception. Cognition and Emotion , 14(2), 177-191.

Wurm, L. H., Vakoch, D. A., Seaman, S. R., & Buchanan, L. (2004). Semantic effects in auditory word recognition. Mental Lexicon Working Papers , 11, 47-62.

Wurm, L. H., Whitman, R. D., Seaman, S. R., Hill, L., & Ulstad, H. M. (2007). Semantic processing in auditory lexical decision: Ear-of-presentation and sex differences. Cognition and Emotion , 21(7), 1470-1495.

Yap, M. J., Pexman, P. M., Wellsby, M., Hargreaves, I. S., & Huff, M. J. (2012). An abundance of riches: Cross-task comparisons of semantic richness effects in visual word recognition. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience , 6, 72.

Zhong, C.-B., & Leonardelli, G. J. (2008). Cold and lonely: Does social exclusion literally feel cold? Psychological Science , 19(9), 838-842.

Zhong, C.-B., & Liljenquist, K. (2006). Washing away your sins: Threatened morality and physical cleansing. Science , 313(5792), 1451-1452.

Cited by (7)

Cited by seven other publications

Order by:

Lalancette, Audrey, Élisabeth Garneau, Alice Cochrane & Maximiliano A. Wilson

2024. Body–object interaction ratings for 3600 French nouns. Behavior Research Methods 56:7 ► pp. 8009 ff.

Miceli, A., E. Wauthia, L. Lefebvre, G.T. Vallet, L. Ris & I. Simoes Loureiro

2022. Differences related to aging in sensorimotor knowledge: Investigation of perceptual strength and body object interaction. Archives of Gerontology and Geriatrics 102 ► pp. 104715 ff.

Heard, Alison, Christopher R. Madan, Andrea B. Protzner & Penny M. Pexman

2019. Getting a grip on sensorimotor effects in lexical–semantic processing. Behavior Research Methods 51:1 ► pp. 1 ff.

Pexman, Penny M., Emiko Muraki, David M. Sidhu, Paul D. Siakaluk & Melvin J. Yap

2019. Quantifying sensorimotor experience: Body–object interaction ratings for more than 9,000 English words. Behavior Research Methods 51:2 ► pp. 453 ff.

ALONSO, MARÍA ÁNGELES, EMILIANO DÍEZ, ANTONIO M. DÍEZ-ÁLAMO & ANGEL FERNANDEZ

2018. Body–object interaction ratings for 750 Spanish words. Applied Psycholinguistics 39:6 ► pp. 1239 ff.

Van Havermaet, Lisa R. & Lee H. Wurm

2017. Effects of Danger, Usefulness, and Body-Object Interaction in picture naming. The Mental Lexicon 12:1 ► pp. 51 ff.

Wurm, Lee H.

2015. Auditory and visual processing of novel stimuli are affected by subjective connotations of Danger and Usefulness. The Mental Lexicon 10:1 ► pp. 1 ff.

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 25 october 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.