PowerPoint Presentation

Can Language Force Your Hand?Priming Image SchemasTo Influence Motor Responses

EMBODIMENT

BACKGROUNDLANGUAGE INPUT AFFECTS MOTOR OUTPUT.

LANGUAGE INPUT AFFECTS MOTOR OUTPUT.

LakoffLANGUAGE INPUT AFFECTS MOTOR OUTPUT.

Lakoff, PulvermuellerLANGUAGE INPUT AFFECTS MOTOR OUTPUT.

Lakoff, Pulvermueller, TurnerLANGUAGE INPUT AFFECTS MOTOR OUTPUT.

Lakoff, Pulvermueller, Turner, CoulsonLANGUAGE INPUT AFFECTS MOTOR OUTPUT.

Lakoff, Pulvermueller, Turner, Coulson, BergenLANGUAGE INPUT AFFECTS MOTOR OUTPUT.

Lakoff, Pulvermueller, Turner, Coulson, Bergen,CooperiderLANGUAGE INPUT AFFECTS MOTOR OUTPUT.

Lakoff, Pulvermueller, Turner, Coulson, Bergen,Cooperider, OakleyLANGUAGE INPUT AFFECTS MOTOR OUTPUT.

Lakoff, Pulvermueller, Turner, Coulson, Bergen,Cooperider, Oakley, SpiveyLANGUAGE INPUT AFFECTS MOTOR OUTPUT.

Lakoff, Pulvermueller, Turner, Coulson, Bergen,Cooperider, Oakley, Spivey, CasasantoLANGUAGE INPUT AFFECTS MOTOR OUTPUT.

Lakoff, Pulvermueller, Turner, Coulson, Bergen,Cooperider, Oakley, Spivey, Casasanto, CasasantoLANGUAGE INPUT AFFECTS MOTOR OUTPUT.

Lakoff, Pulvermueller, Turner, Coulson, Bergen,Cooperider, Oakley, Spivey, Casasanto, Casasanto, ParrillLANGUAGE INPUT AFFECTS MOTOR OUTPUT.

Lakoff, Pulvermueller, Turner, Coulson, Bergen,Cooperider, Oakley, Spivey, Casasanto, Casasanto, Parrill, TobinLANGUAGE INPUT AFFECTS MOTOR OUTPUT.

Lakoff, Pulvermueller, Turner, Coulson, Bergen,Cooperider, Oakley, Spivey, Casasanto, Casasanto, Parrill, Tobin, FeistLANGUAGE INPUT AFFECTS MOTOR OUTPUT.

Lakoff, Pulvermueller, Turner, Coulson, Bergen,Cooperider, Oakley, Spivey, Casasanto, Casasanto, Parrill, Tobin, Feist, Matlock

Action-Sentence Compatibility Effect Glenberg & Kaschak (2002)

Image Schema Orientation of VerbsRichardson, Spivey, Barsalou, & McRae (2003)Spivey, Richardson, Gonzalez-Marquez (2005)

Continuous Eye and Hand-trackingGold & Shadlen (2000) decision formationSpivey, Grosjean, & Knoblich (2005)Richardson & Matlock (2007) fictive motion

Action-Sentence Compatibility Effect Glenberg & Kaschak (2002)

Image Schema Orientation of VerbsRichardson, Spivey, Barsalou, & McRae (2003)Spivey, Richardson, Gonzalez-Marquez (2005)

Continuous Eye and Hand-trackingGold & Shadlen (2000) decision formationSpivey, Grosjean, & Knoblich (2005)Richardson & Matlock (2007) fictive motion

Action-Sentence Compatibility Effect Glenberg & Kaschak (2002)

Image Schema Orientation of VerbsRichardson, Spivey, Barsalou, & McRae (2003)Spivey, Richardson, Gonzalez-Marquez (2005)

Continuous Eye and Hand-trackingGold & Shadlen (2000) decision formationSpivey, Grosjean, & Knoblich (2005)Richardson & Matlock (2007) fictive motion

Action-Sentence Compatibility Effect Glenberg & Kaschak (2002)

Image Schema Orientation of VerbsRichardson, Spivey, Barsalou, & McRae (2003)Spivey, Richardson, Gonzalez-Marquez (2005)

Continuous Eye and Hand-trackingGold & Shadlen (2000) decision formationSpivey, Grosjean, & Knoblich (2005)Richardson & Matlock (2007) fictive motion

DESIGNSTATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCEVSECOLOGICAL VALIDITY

CONTROLLEDUNNATURALUNCONTROLLEDNATURAL

CONTROLLEDUNNATURALUNCONTROLLEDNATURAL

CONTROLLEDUNNATURALUNCONTROLLEDNATURAL

CHALLENGING GOAL

LOOKING FOR PERTURBATIONSEXPERIMENT 1: METHOD & RESULTS2 (pitch) x 3 (event directionality) within-subject design.

2 levels in the pitch condition: (CASASANTO et al, 2003), (RUSCONI et al, 2005)high (up, right)low

3 levels in event directionality condition : (SPIVEY, RICHARDSON, GONZALEZ-MARQUEZ, 2005)upward motion verbsrightward motion verbssymmetrical motion verbs

Example : Upward motion condition

1.The curtain was lifting for the play2.The bird was flying toward the treetops3.The balloon was floating into the clouds

LOWHIGH

SUBJECTS

Over 18Various levels of English proficiency31 (-1)

The order of the stimuli was randomized across participants.

Pitch (hi/lo) by event orientation (y axis)Pitch-by-event orientation interaction (p