Literature DB >> 20805483

Visual motion aftereffect from understanding motion language.

Alexia Toskos Dils1, Lera Boroditsky.   

Abstract

Do people spontaneously form visual mental images when understanding language, and if so, how truly visual are these representations? We test whether processing linguistic descriptions of motion produces sufficiently vivid mental images to cause direction-selective motion adaptation in the visual system (i.e., cause a motion aftereffect illusion). We tested for motion aftereffects (MAEs) following explicit motion imagery, and after processing literal or metaphorical motion language (without instructions to imagine). Intentionally imagining motion produced reliable MAEs. The aftereffect from processing motion language gained strength as people heard more and more of a story (participants heard motion stories in four installments, with a test after each). For the last two story installments, motion language produced reliable MAEs across participants. Individuals differed in how early in the story this effect appeared, and this difference was predicted by the strength of an individual's MAE from imagining motion. Strong imagers (participants who showed the largest MAEs from imagining motion) were more likely to show an MAE in the course of understanding motion language than were weak imagers. The results demonstrate that processing language can spontaneously create sufficiently vivid mental images to produce direction-selective adaptation in the visual system. The timecourse of adaptation suggests that individuals may differ in how efficiently they recruit visual mechanisms in the service of language understanding. Further, the results reveal an intriguing link between the vividness of mental imagery and the nature of the processes and representations involved in language understanding.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20805483      PMCID: PMC2941318          DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1009438107

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A        ISSN: 0027-8424            Impact factor:   11.205


  21 in total

Review 1.  Perceptual symbol systems.

Authors:  L W Barsalou
Journal:  Behav Brain Sci       Date:  1999-08       Impact factor: 12.579

2.  Brain activity evoked by inverted and imagined biological motion.

Authors:  E D Grossman; R Blake
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 1.886

3.  Temporal and spatial distance in situation models.

Authors:  M Rinck; G H Bower
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2000-12

4.  Spatial versus object visualizers: a new characterization of visual cognitive style.

Authors:  Maria Kozhevnikov; Stephen Kosslyn; Jennifer Shephard
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2005-06

5.  Motion detection and motion verbs: language affects low-level visual perception.

Authors:  Lotte Meteyard; Bahador Bahrami; Gabriella Vigliocco
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2007-11

6.  A motion aftereffect from visual imagery of motion.

Authors:  Jonathan Winawer; Alexander C Huk; Lera Boroditsky
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  2009-10-22

7.  The constructive nature of vision: direct evidence from functional magnetic resonance imaging studies of apparent motion and motion imagery.

Authors:  R Goebel; D Khorram-Sefat; L Muckli; H Hacker; W Singer
Journal:  Eur J Neurosci       Date:  1998-05       Impact factor: 3.386

8.  Duration, time constant, and decay of the linear motion aftereffect as a function of inspection duration.

Authors:  M Hershenson
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  1989-03

9.  Another means for measuring the motion aftereffect.

Authors:  R Blake; E Hiris
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  1993-07       Impact factor: 1.886

10.  Grasping ideas with the motor system: semantic somatotopy in idiom comprehension.

Authors:  Véronique Boulenger; Olaf Hauk; Friedemann Pulvermüller
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  2008-12-09       Impact factor: 5.357

View more
  18 in total

1.  Language can boost otherwise unseen objects into visual awareness.

Authors:  Gary Lupyan; Emily J Ward
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2013-08-12       Impact factor: 11.205

2.  The heterogeneity of mental representation: Ending the imagery debate.

Authors:  Joel Pearson; Stephen M Kosslyn
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2015-07-14       Impact factor: 11.205

3.  Empirically grounding grounded cognition: the case of color.

Authors:  Ben D Amsel; Thomas P Urbach; Marta Kutas
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2014-05-17       Impact factor: 6.556

Review 4.  Adaptation and visual coding.

Authors:  Michael A Webster
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2011-05-20       Impact factor: 2.240

5.  Gaining knowledge mediates changes in perception (without differences in attention): A case for perceptual learning.

Authors:  Lauren L Emberson
Journal:  Behav Brain Sci       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 12.579

Review 6.  Arguments about the nature of concepts: Symbols, embodiment, and beyond.

Authors:  Bradford Z Mahon; Gregory Hickok
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2016-08

Review 7.  The human imagination: the cognitive neuroscience of visual mental imagery.

Authors:  Joel Pearson
Journal:  Nat Rev Neurosci       Date:  2019-10       Impact factor: 34.870

8.  The critical role of mental imagery in human emotion: insights from fear-based imagery and aphantasia.

Authors:  Marcus Wicken; Rebecca Keogh; Joel Pearson
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2021-03-10       Impact factor: 5.349

9.  Unpredictive linguistic verbal cues accelerate congruent visual targets into awareness in a breaking continuous flash suppression paradigm.

Authors:  Chris L E Paffen; Andre Sahakian; Marijn E Struiksma; Stefan Van der Stigchel
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2021-03-30       Impact factor: 2.199

10.  Evolving concepts of sensory adaptation.

Authors:  Michael A Webster
Journal:  F1000 Biol Rep       Date:  2012-11-01
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.