Previous studies using intermodal semantic priming have found that gestures improve language memory. In the present study, we ask whether the inherent characteristics of representative gestures (iconic gestures) facilitate word memory, or it is simply the semantic content shared with the words. Two analogous experiments were carried out presenting iconic gestures, pictures, or null primes to target words (nouns and action verbs). In Experiment 1, participants performed a free word recall task. In Experiment 2, the task was one of recognition. The results showed that participants recalled (Experiment 1) an equivalent number of words preceded by gestures or pictures compared with words alone, with no prime. However, a significantly higher number of words were recognised (Experiment 2) when they were primed by iconic gestures compared with the other two conditions, an advantage also found in reaction times (RTs) and both effects being larger in verbs than in nouns. These findings are discussed regarding the differences between recall and recognition processes as well as the particular characteristics of representative gestures.
BaayenR. H.DavidsonD. J.BatesD. M. (2008). Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items. Journal of Memory and Language, 59, 390–412. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2007.12.005
2.
BaddeleyA. D. (1997). Human memory: Theory and practice. psychology press.
BaddeleyA. (2012). Working memory: Theories, models, and controversies. Annual Review of Psychology, 63, 1–29.
5.
BaddeleyA. D.AllenR. J.HitchG. J. (2011). Binding in visual working memory: The role of the episodic buffer. Neuropsychologia, 49(6), 1393–1400.
6.
BaddeleyA. D.HitchG. (1974). Working memory. In BowerG. H. (Ed.), Psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 8, pp. 47–89). Academic Press.
7.
BaddeleyA. D.HitchG. J.AllenR. J. (2009). Working memory and binding in sentence recall. Journal of Memory and Language, 61(3), 438–456.
8.
BarrD. J.LevyR.ScheepersC.TilyH. J. (2013). Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language, 68(3), 255–278.
9.
BatesD.MächlerM.BolkerB.WalkerS. (2014). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. arXiv preprint arXiv:1406.5823. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01
10.
BatesD. M. (2005). Fitting linear mixed models in R. R News, 5, 27–30.
11.
BernardisP.SalillasE.CaramelliN. (2008). Behavioural and neuropsychological evidence of semantic interaction between iconic gestures and words. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 25, 1114–1128.
12.
CabelloF.BertolaE. (2015). Características formales y transparencia de los símbolos pictográficos de ARASAAC. Revista de Investigación En Logopedia, 5(1), 60–70.
13.
ClarkJ. M.PaivioA. (1991). Dual coding theory and education. Educational Psychology Review, 3(3), 149–210.
14.
CohenR. L.OtterbeinN. (1992). The mnemonic effect of speech gestures: Pantomimic and non-pantomimic gestures compared. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 4(2), 113–139.
15.
CohenR. L.StewartM. (1982). How to avoid developmental effects in free recall. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 23(1), 9–15.
16.
CuticaI.BucciarelliM. (2008). The deep versus the shallow: Effects of co-speech gestures in learning from discourse. Cognitive Science, 32(5), 921–935.
17.
CuticaI.BucciarelliM. (2013). Cognitive change in learning from text: Gesturing enhances the construction of the text mental model. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 25(2), 201–209.
18.
DreyfusH. L. (1996). The current relevance of Merleau-Ponty’s phenomenology of embodiment. The Electronic Journal of Analytic Philosophy, 4(4), 1–16.
19.
DriskellJ. E.RadtkeP. H. (2003). The effect of gesture on speech production and comprehension. Human Factors, 45(3), 445–454.
20.
FeyereisenP. (2006). Further investigation on the mnemonic effect of gestures: Their meaning matters. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 18(2), 185–205.
21.
GentnerD. (1982). Why nouns are learned before verbs: Linguistic relativity versus natural partitioning. In KuczajS. A. (Ed.), Language development: Language, thought, and cul-ture (pp. 301–334). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. ED219724.
22.
GibbsR. W.Jr. (2005). Embodiment and cognitive science. Cambridge University Press.
23.
GimenesG.PennequinV.SorelO. (2013). Division of the articulatory loop according to sensory modality using double dissociation. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 25(7), 808–815.
24.
GlenbergA. M. (2010). Embodiment as a unifying perspective for psychology. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, 1(4), 586–596.
25.
Goldin-MeadowS.WagnerS. M. (2005). How our hands help us learn. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9(5), 234–241.
HostetterA. B. (2011). When do gestures communicate? A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 137(2), 297–315.
28.
HostetterA. B.AlibaliM. W. (2008). Visible embodiment: Gestures as simulated action. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 15(3), 495–514.
29.
HuntR. R.EinsteinG. O. (1981). Relational and item-specific information in memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 20(5), 497–514.
30.
HuppJ. M.GingrasM. C. (2016). The role of gesture meaningfulness in word learning. Gesture, 15(3), 340–356.
31.
IanìF.BucciarelliM. (2017). Mechanisms underlying the beneficial effect of a speaker’s gestures on the listener. Journal of Memory and Language, 96, 110–121.
32.
IanìF.BucciarelliM. (2018). Relevance of the listener’s motor system in recalling phrases enacted by the speaker. Memory, 26(8), 1084–1092.
33.
JacobyL. L.TothJ. P.YonelinasA. P. (1993). Separating conscious and unconscious influences of memory: Measuring recollection. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 122(2), 139–154.
34.
KartalkanatH.GöksunT. (2020). The effects of observing different gestures during storytelling on the recall of path and event information in 5-year-olds and adults. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 189, Article 104725.
35.
KellyS.HealeyM.ÖzyürekA.HollerJ. (2015). The processing of speech, gesture, and action during language comprehension. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 22(2), 517–523.
36.
KellyS. D.BarrD. J.ChurchR. B.LynchK. (1999). Offering a hand to pragmatic understanding: The role of speech and gesture in comprehension and memory. Journal of Memory and Language, 40, 577–592.
37.
KellyS. D.CreighP.BartolottiJ. (2010). Integrating speech and iconic gestures in a Stroop-like task: Evidence for automatic processing. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 22(4), 683–694.
38.
KendonA. (1980). Gesticulation and speech: Two aspects of the process of utterance. The Relationship of Verbal and Nonverbal Communication, 25(1980), 207–227.
39.
KendonA. (1982). The study of gestures: Some observation on its history. Recherches Sémiotiques, 2, 45–62.
40.
KimJ.GabrielU.GygaxP. (2019). Testing the effectiveness of the Internet-based instrument PsyToolkit: A comparison between web-based (PsyToolkit) and lab-based (E-Prime 3.0) measurements of response choice and response time in a complex psycholinguistic task. PLOS ONE, 14(9), Article e0221802.
41.
KitaS.ÖyürekA. (2003). What does cross-linguistic variation in semantic coordination of speech and gesture reveal? Evidence for an interface representation of spatial thinking and speaking. Journal of Memory and Language, 48, 16–32.
42.
LoftusE. F. (1977). Shifting human color memory. Memory & Cognition, 5(6), 696–699.
43.
MandlerG. (1980). Recognizing: The judgment of previous occurrence. Psychological Review, 87(3), 252–271.
44.
MartuzziR.van der ZwaagW.FarthouatJ.GruetterR.BlankeO. (2014). Human finger somatotopy in areas 3b, 1, and 2: A 7T fMRI study using a natural stimulus. Human Brain Mapping, 35(1), 213–226.
45.
MayerR. E. (1997). Multimedia learning: Are we asking the right questions?Educational Psychologist, 32(1), 1–19.
46.
McNeillD. (1992). Hand and mind: What gestures reveal about thought. University of Chicago Press.
47.
McNeillD. (2005). Gesture and thought. University of Chicago Press.
48.
MorenoR.MayerR. E. (1999a). Cognitive principles of multimedia learning: The role of modality and contiguity. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(2), 358–368.
49.
MorenoR.MayerR. E. (1999b). Visual presentations in multimedia learning: Conditions that overload visual working memory. In International conference on advances in visual information systems (pp. 798–805). Springer.
50.
NilssonL. G.CraikF. I. (1990). Additive and interactive effects in memory for subject-performed tasks. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 2(4), 305–324.
51.
NúñezR. (2006). Do real numbers really move? Language, thought, and gesture: The embodied cognitive foundations of mathematics. In HershR. (Ed.), 18 unconventional essays on the nature of mathematics (pp. 160–181). Springer.
52.
ÖzerD.GöksunT. (2020). Gesture use and processing: A review on individual differences in cognitive resources. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, Article 573555.
53.
PaivioA. (1975). Coding distinctions and repetition effects in memory. The Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 9, 179–214.
RiseboroughM. G. (1981). Physiographic gestures as decoding facilitators: Three experiments exploring a neglected facet of communication. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 5(3), 172–183.
56.
SmythM. M.PearsonN. A.PendletonL. R. (1988). Movement and working memory: Patterns and positions in space. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 40(3), 497–514.
57.
SmythM. M.PendletonL. R. (1989). Working memory for movements. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 41(2), 235–250.
58.
SoW. C.LowA.YapD. F.KhengE.YapM. (2013). Iconic gestures prime words: Comparison of priming effects when gestures are presented alone and when they are accompanying speech. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, Article 779.
59.
SoW. C.Sim Chen-HuiC.Low Wei-ShanJ. (2012). Mnemonic effect of iconic gesture and beat gesture in adults and children: Is meaning in gesture important for memory recall?Language and Cognitive Processes, 27(5), 665–681.
60.
ThompsonL. A. (1995). Encoding and memory for visible speech and gestures: A comparison between young and older adults. Psychology and Aging, 10(2), 215–228.
61.
Viera DelgadoB.Roldán CoyaJ. W. (2018). Normative data on transparency of pictograms. ARASAAC: estudio con población adulta.
62.
WilsonM.EmmoreyK. (2006). No difference in short-term memory span between sign and speech. Psychological Science, 17(12), 1093–1094.
63.
WilsonM.KnoblichG. (2005). The case for motor involvement in perceiving conspecifics. Psychological Bulletin, 131(3), 460–473.
64.
WoodallW. G.FolgerJ. P. (1985). Nonverbal cue context and episodic memory: On the availability and endurance of nonverbal behaviors as retrieval cues. Communications Monographs, 52(4), 319–333.
65.
WuY. C.CoulsonS. (2005). Meaningful gestures: Electrophysiological indices of iconic gesture comprehension. Psychophysiology, 42, 654–667.
66.
WuY. C.CoulsonS. (2007a). How iconic gestures enhance communication: An ERP study. Brain and Language, 101, 234–245.
67.
WuY. C.CoulsonS. (2007b). Iconic gestures prime related concepts: An ERP study. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 14(1), 57–63.
68.
WuY. C.CoulsonS. (2014). Co-speech iconic gestures and visuo-spatial working memory. Acta Psychological, 153, 39–50.
69.
YapD. F.SoW. C.Melvin YapJ. M.TanY. Q.TeohR. L. S. (2011). Iconic gestures prime words. Cognitive Science, 35(1), 171–183.
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.
