Action observation triggers by default a mental simulation of action unfolding in time. We assumed that this simulation is “embodied”: the body is the medium through which observer’s sensorimotor modalities simulate the observed action. The participants in two experiments observed videos, each depicting the central part of an action performed by an actress on an object (e.g., answering the phone) and soon after each video they observed a photo portraying a state of the action not observed in the video, either depicting the initial part or the final part of the whole action. Their task was to evaluate whether the photo portrayed something before (backward photo) or after the action in the video (forward photo). Results showed that evaluation of forward photos was faster than evaluation of backward photos (Experiment 1). Crucially, participants’ body posture modulated this effect: keeping the hands crossed behind the back interfered with forward simulations (Experiment 2). These results speak about the role of the observer’s body posture in processing other people’s actions.
AmbrosiniE.CostantiniM. (2017). Body posture differentially impacts on visual attention towards tool, graspable, and non-graspable objects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 43, 360–370. https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0000330
BuccinoG.BinkofskiF.FinkG. R.FadigaL.FogassiL.GallesseV.SeitzR. J.ZillesK.RizzolattiG.FreundH. J. (2001). Action observation activates premotor and parietal areas in a somatotopic manner: An fMRI study. European Journal of Neuroscience, 13, 400–404. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-9568.2001.01385.x
4.
CardellicchioP.SinigagliaC.ConstantiniM. (2013). Grasping affordances with the other’s hand: A TMS Study (2013). Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 8, 455–459. https://doi.org/10.1093/scan/nss017
5.
DaemsA.VerfaillieK. (1999). Dependent priming effects in the perception of human actions and body postures. Visual Cognition, 6, 665–693. https://doi.org/10.1080/135062899394894
6.
DutriauxL.DahiezX.GyselinckV. (2019). How to change your memory of an object with a posture and a verb. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 72, 1112–1118. https://doi.org/10.1177/1747021818785096
7.
DutriauxL.GyselinckV. (2016). Learning is better with the hands free: The role of posture in the memory of manipulable objects. PLOS ONE, 11(7), Article e0159108. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0159108
FreydJ. J. (1983). The mental representation of movement when static stimuli are viewed. Perception & Psychophysics, 33, 575–581. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03202940
11.
FreydJ. J.FinkeR. A. (1984). Representational momentum. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 10, 126–132. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.10.1.126
GalleseV. (2005). Embodied simulation: From neurons to phenomenal experience. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 4, 23–48. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11097-005-4737-z
14.
GerrieM. P.BelcherL. E.GarryM. (2006). “Mind the gap”: False memories for missing aspects of an event. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 20, 689–696. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1221
15.
GuastiM. T.PagliariniE.StucchiN. (2017). Language, reading, and motor control: Get rhythm!Biolinguistics, 11, 395–406.
16.
HalvorsonK. M.BushinskiA.HilvermanC. (2019). The role of motor context in the beneficial effects of hand gesture on memory. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 81, 2354–2364. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-019-01734-3
17.
HamiltonA.WolpertD.FrithU. (2004). Your own action influences how you perceive another person’s action. Current Biology, 14, 493–498. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2004.03.007
18.
HanniganS. L.ReinitzM. T. (2001). A demonstration and comparison of two types of inference-based memory errors. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 27, 931–940. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.27.4.931
19.
HudsonM.NicholsonT.EllisR.BachP. (2016). I see what you say: Prior knowledge of other’s goals automatically biases the perception of their actions. Cognition, 146, 245–250. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2015.09.021
20.
IanìF. (2019). Embodied memories: Reviewing the role of the body in memory processes. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 26, 1747–1766. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-019-01674-x
IanìF.BucciarelliM. (2018). Relevance of the listener’s motor system in recalling phrases enacted by the speaker. Memory, 26, 1084–1092. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658211.2018.1433214
23.
IanìF.BurinD.SalatinoA.PiaL.RicciR.BucciarelliM. (2018). The beneficial effect of a speaker’s gestures on the listener’s memory for action phrases: The pivotal role of the listener’s premotor cortex. Brain and Language, 180, 8–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2018.03.001
IanìF.MazzoniG.BucciarelliM. (2018). The role of kinematic mental simulation in creating false memories. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 30, 292–306. https://doi.org/10.1080/20445911.2018.1426588
26.
JaroszA. F.WileyJ. (2014). What are the odds? A practical guide to computing and reporting Bayes factors. The Journal of Problem Solving, 7, 2–9. https://docs.lib.purdue.edu/jps/vol7/iss1/2
27.
JärvilehtoT.NurkkalaV. M.KoskelaK. (2009). The role of anticipation in reading. Pragmatics & Cognition, 17, 509–526. https://doi.org/10.1075/pc.17.3.02jar
28.
JASP Team. (2017). JASP (Version 0.8.2) [Computer software].
29.
JeannerodM. (2001). Neural simulation of action: A unifying mechanism for motor cognition. NeuroImage, 14, 103–109. https://doi:10.1006/nimg.2001.0832
30.
KilnerJ. M.FristonK. J.FrithC. D. (2007). Predictive coding: An account of the mirror neuron system. Cognitive Processing, 8, 159–166. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10339-007-0170-2
31.
LakensD. (2013). Calculating and reporting effect sizes to facilitate cumulative science: A practical primer for t-tests and ANOVAs. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, Article 863. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00863
32.
McDonoughK. L.CostantiniM.HudsonM.BachP. (2020). Affordance matching predictively shapes the perceptual representation of others’ ongoing actions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 46(8), 847–859. https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0000745
33.
MichaelJ.SandbergK.SkewesJ.WolfT.BlicherJ.OvergaardM.FrithC. D. (2014). Continuous theta-burst stimulation demonstrates a causal role of premotor homunculus in action understanding. Psychological Science, 25, 963–972. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797613520608
34.
PingR. M.Goldin-MeadowS.BeilockS. L. (2014). Understanding gesture: Is the listener’s motor system involved?Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 143, 195–204. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032246
35.
PozzoT.PapaxanthisC.PetitJ. L.SchweighoferN.StucchiN. (2006). Kinematic features of movement tunes perception and action coupling. Behavioural Brain Research, 169, 75–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbr.2005.12.005
36.
PrinzW. (1990). A common coding approach to perception and action. In NeumannO.PrinzW. (Eds.), Relationships between perception and action (pp. 167–201). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-75348-0_7
37.
ReedC. L.FarahM. J. (1995). The psychological reality of the body schema: A test with normal participants. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 21, 334–343. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.21.2.334
38.
RizzolattiG.FogassiL.GalleseV. (2001). Neurophysiological mechanisms underlying the understanding and imitation of action. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 2, 661–670. https://doi.org/10.1038/35090060
39.
RizzolattiG.SinigagliaC. (2010). The functional role of the parieto-frontal mirror circuit: Interpretations and misinterpretations. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 11, 264–272. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn2805
40.
RouderJ. N.SpeckmanP. L.SunD.MoreyR. D.IversonG. (2009). Bayesian t tests for accepting and rejecting the null hypothesis. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16, 225–237. https://doi.org/10.3758/PBR.16.2.225
41.
SakreidaK.SchubotzR. I.WolfenstellerU.von CramonD. Y. (2005). Motion class dependency in observers’ motor areas revealed by functional magnetic resonance imaging. Journal of Neuroscience, 25, 1335–1342. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4170-04.2005
42.
SiriguA.DuhamelJ. R. (2001). Motor and visual imagery as two complementary but neurally dissociable mental processes. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 13, 910–919. https://doi.org/10.1162/089892901753165827
43.
TanjiJ.EvartsE. V. (1976). Anticipatory activity of motor cortex neurons in relation to direction of an intended movement. Journal of Neurophysiology, 39, 1062–1068. https://doi.org/10.1152/jn.1976.39.5.1062
44.
UrgesiC.MaieronM.AvenantiA.TidoniE.FabbroF.AgliotiS. M. (2010). Simulating the future of actions in the human corticospinal system. Cerebral Cortex, 20, 2511–2521. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhp292
45.
VargasC. D.OlivierE.CraigheroL.FadigaL.DuhamelJ. R.SiriguA. (2004). The influence of hand posture on corticospinal excitability during motor imagery: A transcranial magnetic stimulation study. Cerebral Cortex, 14, 1200–1206. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhh080
WheatonK. J.ThompsonJ. C.SyngeniotisA.AbbottD. F.PuceA. (2004). Viewing the motion of human body parts activates different regions of premotor, temporal, and parietal cortex. NeuroImage, 22, 277–288. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2003.12.043
48.
WilsonM. (2001). Perceiving imitatible stimuli: Consequences of isomorphism between input and output. Psychological Bulletin, 127, 543–553. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.127.4.543
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.
