Does the perceptual system for looking at the world overlap with the conceptual system for thinking about it? We conducted two experiments (N = 403) to investigate this question. Experiment 1 showed that when people make simple semantic judgments on words, interference from a concurrent visual task scales in proportion to how much visual experience they have with the things the words refer to. Experiment 2 showed that when people make the same judgments on the very same words, interference from a concurrent manual task scales in proportion to how much manual (but critically, not visual) experience people have with those same things. These results suggest that the meanings of frequently visually experienced things are represented (in part) in the visual system used for actually seeing them, that this visually represented information is a functional part of conceptual knowledge, and that the extent of these visual representations is influenced by visual experience.
AllportD. A. (1985). Distributed memory, modular subsystems and dysphasia. In NewmanS.EpsteinR. (Eds.), Current perspectives in dysphasia (pp. 207–244). Edinburgh, Scotland: Churchill Livingstone.
2.
AlmeidaJ.MahonB. Z.CaramazzaA. (2010). The role of the dorsal visual processing stream in tool identification. Psychological Science, 21, 772–778. doi:10.1177/0956797610371343
3.
AmselB. D.UrbachT. P.KutasM. (2014). Empirically grounding grounded cognition: The case of color. NeuroImage, 99, 149–157. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2014.05.025
4.
BarrD. J.LevyR.ScheepersC.TilyH. J. (2013). Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language, 68, 255–278. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2012.11.001
5.
BarsalouL. W. (1999). Perceptual symbol systems. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 577–660. doi:10.1017/s0140525x99002149
6.
BarsalouL. W. (2016). On staying grounded and avoiding quixotic dead ends. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 23, 1122–1142. doi:10.3758/s13423-016-1028-3
7.
BatesD.MächlerM.BolkerB.WalkerS. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1). doi:10.18637/jss.v067.i01
8.
BonnerM. F.GrossmanM. (2012). Gray matter density of auditory association cortex relates to knowledge of sound concepts in primary progressive aphasia. The Journal of Neuroscience, 32, 7986–7991. doi:10.1523/jneurosci.6241-11.2012
9.
BrysbaertM.WarrinerA. B.KupermanV. (2014). Concreteness ratings for 40 thousand generally known English word lemmas. Behavior Research Methods, 46, 904–911. doi:10.3758/s13428-013-0403-5
10.
BürknerP. C. (2017). brms: An R package for Bayesian multilevel models using Stan. Journal of Statistical Software, 80(1). doi:10.18637/jss.v080.i01
11.
ChaoL. L.MartinA. (2000). Representation of manipulable man-made objects in the dorsal stream. NeuroImage, 12, 478–484. doi:10.1006/nimg.2000.0635
12.
ChrysikouE. G.CasasantoD.Thompson-SchillS. L. (2017). Motor experience influences object knowledge. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 146, 395–408. doi:10.1037/xge0000269
13.
ConnellL.LynottD.DreyerF. (2012). A functional role for modality-specific perceptual systems in conceptual representations. PLOS ONE, 7(3), Article e33321. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0033321
14.
EdmistonP.LupyanG. (2017). Visual interference disrupts visual knowledge. Journal of Memory and Language, 92, 281–292. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2016.07.002
15.
FaulF.ErdfelderE.LangA.-G.BuchnerA. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 175–191.
16.
GainottiG. (2000). What the locus of brain lesion tells us about the nature of the cognitive defect underlying category-specific disorders: A review. Cortex, 36, 539–559. doi:10.1016/s0010-9452(08)70537-9
17.
GainottiG. (2015). Inborn and experience-dependent models of categorical brain organization. A position paper. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 9, Article 2. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2015.00002
18.
GoldbergR. F.Thompson-SchillS. L. (2009). Developmental “roots” in mature biological knowledge. Psychological Science, 20, 480–487. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02320.x
19.
GoodaleM. A.MilnerA. D. (1992). Separate visual pathways for perception and action. Trends in Neurosciences, 15, 20–25. doi:10.1016/0166-2236(92)90344-8
20.
HelbigH. B.SteinwenderJ.GrafM.KieferM. (2010). Action observation can prime visual object recognition. Experimental Brain Research, 200, 251–258. doi:10.1007/s00221-009-1953-8
21.
JaegerT. F. (2008). Categorical data analysis: Away from ANOVAs (transformation or not) and towards logit mixed models. Journal of Memory and Language, 59, 434–446. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2007.11.007
22.
KuznetsovaA.BrockhoffP. B.ChristensenR. H. B. (2017). lmerTest package: Tests in linear mixed effects models. Journal of Statistical Software, 82(13). doi:10.18637/jss.v082.i13
23.
MahonB. Z.CaramazzaA. (2008). A critical look at the embodied cognition hypothesis and a new proposal for grounding conceptual content. Journal of Physiology, Paris, 102(1), 59–70. doi:10.1016/j.jphysparis.2008.03.004
24.
MathesonH. E.WhiteN.McMullenP. A. (2014). Testing the embodied account of object naming: A concurrent motor task affects naming artifacts and animals. Acta Psychologica, 145, 33–43. doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2013.10.012
25.
MatuschekH.KlieglR.VasishthS.BaayenH.BatesD. (2017). Balancing Type I error and power in linear mixed models. Journal of Memory and Language, 94, 305–315. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2017.01.001
26.
MeteyardL.CuadradoS. R.BahramiB.ViglioccoG. (2012). Coming of age: A review of embodiment and the neuroscience of semantics. Cortex, 48, 788–804. doi:10.1016/j.cortex.2010.11.002
27.
OstarekM.HuettigF. (2017). A task-dependent causal role for low-level visual processes in spoken word comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 43, 1215–1224. doi:10.1037/xlm0000375
28.
OstarekM.JoosenD.IshagA.de NijsM.HuettigF. (2019). Are visual processes causally involved in “perceptual simulation” effects in the sentence-picture verification task?Cognition, 182, 84–94. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2018.08.017
29.
PobricG.JefferiesE.Lambon RalphM. A. (2010). Category-specific versus category-general semantic impairment induced by transcranial magnetic stimulation. Current Biology, 20, 964–968. doi:10.1016/j.cub.2010.03.070
30.
R Core Team. (2018). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Retrieved from http://www.R-project.org
31.
ReyA. E.RiouB.ValletG. T.VersaceR. (2017). The automatic visual simulation of words: A memory reactivated mask slows down conceptual access. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 71(1), 14–22. doi:10.1037/cep0000100
32.
ShebaniZ.PulvermüllerF. (2013). Moving the hands and feet specifically impairs working memory for arm- and leg-related action words. Cortex, 49, 222–231. doi:10.1016/j.cortex.2011.10.005
33.
SongJ. H.JiangY. (2006). Visual working memory for simple and complex features: An fMRI study. NeuroImage, 30, 963–972. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2005.10.006
34.
TrumppN. M.KlieseD.HoenigK.HaarmeierT.KieferM. (2013). Losing the sound of concepts: Damage to auditory association cortex impairs the processing of sound-related concepts. Cortex, 49, 474–486. doi:10.1016/j.cortex.2012.02.002
35.
UngerleiderL. G.MishkinM. (1982). Two cortical visual systems. In IngleD. J.GoodaleM. A.MansfieldR. J. W. (Eds.), Analysis of visual behavior (pp. 549–586). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
36.
VermeulenN.MermillodM.GodefroidJ.CorneilleO. (2009). Unintended embodiment of concepts into percepts: Sensory activation boosts attention for same-modality concepts in the attentional blink paradigm. Cognition, 112, 467–472. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2009.06.003
37.
VukovicN.FeurraM.ShpektorA.MyachykovA.ShtyrovY. (2017). Primary motor cortex functionally contributes to language comprehension: An online rTMS study. Neuropsychologia, 96, 222–229. doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2017.01.025
38.
WagenmakersE.-J.LodewyckxT.KuriyalH.GrasmanR. (2010). Bayesian hypothesis testing for psychologists: A tutorial on the Savage–Dickey method. Cognitive Psychology, 60, 158–189. doi:10.1016/j.cogpsych.2009.12.001
39.
WittJ. K.KemmererD.LinkenaugerS. A.CulhamJ. (2010). A functional role for motor simulation in naming tools. Psychological Science, 21, 1215–1219. doi:10.1177/0956797610378307
40.
WolkD. A.SchacterD. L.BermanA. R.HolcombP. J.DaffnerK. R.BudsonA. E. (2005). Patients with mild Alzheimer’s disease attribute conceptual fluency to prior experience. Neuropsychologia, 43, 1662–1672. doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2005.01.007
YeeE.DruckerD. M.Thompson-SchillS. L. (2010). fMRI-adaptation evidence of overlapping neural representations for objects related in function or manipulation. NeuroImage, 50, 753–763. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.12.036
43.
YeeE.Thompson-SchillS. L. (2016). Putting concepts into context. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 23, 1015–1027. doi:10.3758/s13423-015-0948-7
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
