Details
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 124-136 |
| Number of pages | 13 |
| Journal | Psychological research |
| Volume | 87 |
| Issue number | 1 |
| Early online date | 27 Feb 2022 |
| Publication status | Published - Feb 2023 |
| Externally published | Yes |
Abstract
Keywords
- Action-sentence compatibility, Embodiment, Individual differences, Language, Simulation view
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Psychology(all)
- Experimental and Cognitive Psychology
- Psychology(all)
- Developmental and Educational Psychology
- Arts and Humanities(all)
- Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous)
Cite this
- Standard
- Harvard
- Apa
- Vancouver
- BibTeX
- RIS
In: Psychological research, Vol. 87, No. 1, 02.2023, p. 124-136.
Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › Research › peer review
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - The experiential basis of compatibility effects in reading-by-rotating paradigms
AU - Capuano, Francesca
AU - Claus, Berry
AU - Kaup, Barbara
N1 - Funding Information: Open Access funding enabled and organized by Projekt DEAL. This work was supported by the Collaborative Research Centre 833 (SFB833) The Construction of Meaning/Z2 project appointed to Barbara Kaup by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG, German Research Foundation) [–SFB 833 – Project ID 75650358].
PY - 2023/2
Y1 - 2023/2
N2 - The current study originates from inconsistent findings within the framework of embodied language processing, specifically in the reading-by-rotating literature: whereas some studies report a match advantage (e.g., Zwaan and Taylor (J Exp Psychol 135:1, 2006)), i.e., shorter reading times when the direction of a linguistically conveyed manual rotation matched rather than mismatched the direction of an actually to be performed manual rotation Claus (Acta Psychol 156:104–113, 2015) found a mismatch advantage. The current study addresses two explanations that were previously discussed as potentially responsible for this inconsistency: on the one hand, differences in the knob devices employed; on the other hand, differences in the perspectives adopted by the readers depending on the number of characters involved in the narratives. Concurrently, the study exploits individual differences in motoric experience to explore the experiential basis of action-sentence compatibility effects. The results are inconclusive with respect to the two explanations. However, in their overall picture, they contribute suggestive considerations for the ongoing debate on action-simulation effects by pointing to the potential role of interindividual variation in motoric experience.
AB - The current study originates from inconsistent findings within the framework of embodied language processing, specifically in the reading-by-rotating literature: whereas some studies report a match advantage (e.g., Zwaan and Taylor (J Exp Psychol 135:1, 2006)), i.e., shorter reading times when the direction of a linguistically conveyed manual rotation matched rather than mismatched the direction of an actually to be performed manual rotation Claus (Acta Psychol 156:104–113, 2015) found a mismatch advantage. The current study addresses two explanations that were previously discussed as potentially responsible for this inconsistency: on the one hand, differences in the knob devices employed; on the other hand, differences in the perspectives adopted by the readers depending on the number of characters involved in the narratives. Concurrently, the study exploits individual differences in motoric experience to explore the experiential basis of action-sentence compatibility effects. The results are inconclusive with respect to the two explanations. However, in their overall picture, they contribute suggestive considerations for the ongoing debate on action-simulation effects by pointing to the potential role of interindividual variation in motoric experience.
KW - Action-sentence compatibility
KW - Embodiment
KW - Individual differences
KW - Language
KW - Simulation view
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85125379467&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s00426-022-01663-1
DO - 10.1007/s00426-022-01663-1
M3 - Article
VL - 87
SP - 124
EP - 136
JO - Psychological research
JF - Psychological research
SN - 0340-0727
IS - 1
ER -