Previous studies have demonstrated that action prediction involves an internal action simulation that runs time-locked to the real action. The present study replicates and extends these findings by indicating a real-time simulation process (Graf et al., 2007), which can be differentiated from a similarity-based evaluation of internal action representations. Moreover, results showed that action semantics modulate action prediction accuracy. The semantic effect was specified by the processing of action verbs and concrete nouns (Experiment 1) and, more specifically, by the dynamics described by action verbs (Experiment 2) and the speed described by the verbs (e.g., “to catch” vs. “to grasp” vs. “to stretch”; Experiment 3). These results propose a linkage between action simulation and action semantics as two yet unrelated domains, a view that coincides with a recent notion of a close link between motor processes and the understanding of action language.
AndresM.OlivierE.BadetsA. (2008). Action, words and numbers: A motor contribution to semantic processing?.Current Directions in Psychological Science17, 313–317.
2.
BertelsonP.TisseyreF. (1968). The time course of preparation with regular and irregular foreperiods.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology20, 297–300.
3.
BlakemoreS. J.FrithC. (2005). The role of motor contagion in the prediction of action.Neuropsychologia43, 260–267.
4.
BoulengerV.RoyA. C.PaulignanY.DeprezV.JeannerodM.NazirT. A. (2006). Cross-talk between language processes and overt motor behaviour in the first 200 ms of processing.Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience18, 1606–1615.
5.
BuccinoG.BinkofskiF.FinkG. R.FadigaL.FogassiL.GalleseV. (2001). Action observation activates premotor and parietal areas in a somatotopic manner: An fMRI study.European Journal of Neuroscience13, 400–404.
6.
BuccinoG.RiggioL.MelliG.BinkofskiF.GalleseV.RizzolattiG. (2005). Listening to action-related sentences modulates the activity of the motor system: A combined TMS and behavioural study.Cognitive Brain Research24, 355–363.
7.
Calvo-MerinoB.GlaserD. E.GrèzesJ.PassinghamR. E.HaggardP. (2005). Action observation and acquired motor skills: An fMRI study with expert dancers.Cerebral Cortex15, 1243–1249.
8.
DaemsA.VerfaillieK. (1999). Viewpoint-dependent priming effects in the perception of human actions and body postures.Visual Cognition6, 665–693.
9.
FischerM. H.ZwaanR. A. (2008). Embodied language: A review of the role of the motor system in language comprehension.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology61, 825–850.
10.
FlanaganJ. R.JohanssonR. S. (2003). Action plans used in action observation.Nature424, 769–771.
11.
GalleseV.FadigaL.FogassiL.RizzolattiG. (1996). Action recognition in the premotor cortex.Brain119, 593–609.
12.
GentilucciM.BenuzziF.BertolaniL.DapratiE.GangitanoM. (2000). Language and motor control.Experimental Brain Research133, 468–490.
13.
GlenbergA. M.KaschakM. P. (2002). Grounding language in action.Psychonomic Bulletin and Review9, 558–565.
14.
GrafM.ReitznerB.CorvesC.CasileA.GieseM.PrinzW. (2007). Predicting point-light actions in real-time.NeuroImage36, T22–T32.
15.
GrushR. (2004). The emulation theory of representation: Motor control, imagery, and perception.Behavioural Brain Science27, 377–442.
16.
HaukO.JohnsrudeI.PulvermüllerF. (2004). Somatotopic representation of action words in human motor and premotor cortex.Neuron41, 301–307.
17.
HommelB.MüsselerJ.AscherslebenG.PrinzW. (2001). The theory of event coding (TEC). A framework for perception and action planning.Behavioural and Brain Sciences24, 849–937.
18.
HuynhH.FeldtL. S. (1970). Conditions under which the mean square ratios in repeated measurement designs have exact F-distributions.Journal of the American Statistical Association65, 1582–1589.
19.
IacoboniM.DaprettoM. (2006). The mirror neuron system and the consequences of its dysfunction.Nature Reviews. Neuroscience7, 942.
20.
JohanssonG. (1973). Visual perception of biological motion and a model for its analysis.Perception and Psychophysics14, 201–211.
21.
JolicoeurP.GluckM. A.KosslynS. M. (1984). Pictures and names—making the connection.Cognitive Psychology16, 243–275.
22.
KilnerJ. M.FristonK. J.FrithC. D. (2007). Predictive coding: An account of the mirror neuron system.Cognitive Process8, 159–166.
23.
KilnerJ. M.VargasC.DuvalS.BlakemoreS. J.SiriguA. (2004). Motor activation prior to observation of a predicted movement.Nature Neuroscience7, 1299–1301.
24.
MahonB. Z.CaramazzaA. (2005). The orchestration of sensory-motor systems: Clues from neuropsychology.Cognitive Neuropsychology22, 480–494.
25.
MartinA.ChaoL. L. (2001). Semantic memory and the brain: Structure and processes.Current Opinion in Neurobiology11, 194–201.
26.
NazirT. A.BoulengerV.RoyA.SilberB.JeannerodM.PaulignanY. (2008). Language induced motor perturbations during the execution of a reaching movement.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology61, 933–943.
27.
OldfieldR. C. (1971). Assessment and analysis of handedness—Edinburgh Inventory.Neuropsychologia9, 97–113.
28.
PrinzW. (1990). A common coding approach to perception and action.Relationships between perception and action: Current approaches. NeumannO.PrinzW.Berlin, Germany: Springer167–201.
29.
PrinzW. (1997). Perception and action planning.European Journal of Cognitive Psychology9, 129–154.
30.
PrinzW. (2006). What re-enactment earns us.Cortex42, 515–517.
31.
PulvermüllerF. (1999). Words in the brain's language.Behavioral and Brain Sciences22, 253–279.
32.
PulvermüllerF. (2005). Brain mechanisms linking language and action.Nature Reviews. Neuroscience6, 576–582.
33.
Quasthoff, U., Richter, M., & Biemann, C. (2006). Corpus Portal for Search in Monolingual Corpora. Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2006), Genoa, Italy, pp. 1799–1802.
34.
SandersA. F. (1998). Elements of human performance: Reaction processes and attention in human skillMahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
35.
Stadler, W., Schubotz, R. I., von Cramon, D. Y., Springer, A., Graf, M., & Prinz, W. (in press). Predicting and memorizing observed action: Differential premotor cortex involvement. Human Brain Mapping.
36.
TaylorL. J.ZwaanR. A. (2008). Motor resonance and linguistic focus.The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology61, 896–904.
37.
TettamantiM.BuccinoG.SaccumanM. C.GalleseV.DannaM.ScifoP. (2005). Listening to action-related sentences activates fronto-parietal motor circuits.Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience17, 273–281.
38.
ThorntonI. M. (2006). Point-light walkers and beyond.Human body perception from the inside out. KnoblichG.ThorntonI. M.GrosjeanM.ShiffrarM.New York: Oxford University Press271–304.
39.
ThorntonI. M.KnoblichG. (2006). Action perception: Seeing the world through a moving body.Current Biology16, R27–R29.
40.
ToniI.de LangeF. P.NoordzijM. L.HagoortP. (2008). Language beyond action.Journal of Physiology–Paris102, 71–79.
41.
van ElkM.van SchieH. T.BekkeringH. (2008). Semantics in action: An electrophysiological study on the use of semantic knowledge for action Journal of Physiology–Paris.102, 95–100.
42.
VerfaillieK.DaemsA. (2002). Representing and anticipating human actions in vision.Visual Cognition9, 217–232.
43.
WilsonM.KnoblichG. (2005). The case for motor involvement in perceiving conspecifics.Psychological Bulletin131, 460–473.
44.
WolpertD. M.FlanaganJ. R. (2001). Motor prediction.Current Biology11, R729–R732.
45.
ZwaanR. A.MaddenC. J.YaxleyR. H.AveyardM. E. (2004). Moving words: Dynamic mental representations in language comprehension.Cognitive Science28, 611–619.
46.
ZwaanR. A.TaylorL. J. (2006). Seeing, acting, understanding: Motor resonance in language comprehension.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General135, 1–11.
