Abstract
Much of the reading that we do occurs near our hands. Previous research has revealed that spatial processing is enhanced near the hands, potentially benefiting several processes involved in reading; however, it is unknown whether semantic processing—another critical aspect of reading—is affected near the hands. While holding their hands either near to or far from a visual display, our subjects performed two tasks that drew on semantic processing: evaluation of the sensibleness of sentences, and the Stroop color-word interference task. We found evidence for impoverished semantic processing near the hands in both tasks. These results suggest a trade-off between spatial processing and semantic processing for the visual space around the hands. Readers are encouraged to be aware of this trade-off when choosing how to read a text, since both kinds of processing can be beneficial for reading.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Abrams, R. A., Davoli, C. C., Du, F., Knapp, W. H., III, & Paull, D. (2008). Altered vision near the hands. Cognition, 107, 1035–1047.
Bekkering, H., & Neggers, S. F. W. (2002). Visual search is modulated by action intentions. Psychological Science, 13, 370–374.
Davoli, C. C., & Abrams, R. A. (2009). Reaching out with the imagination. Psychological Science, 20, 293–295.
di Pellegrino, G., Ládavas, E., & Farné, A. (1997). Seeing where your hands are. Nature, 388, 730.
Egeth, H. E., Blecker, D. L., & Kamlet, A. S. (1969). Verbal interference in a perceptual comparison task. Perception & Psychophysics, 6, 355–356.
Fagioli, S., Hommel, B., & Schubotz, R. I. (2007). Intentional control of attention: Action planning primes action-related stimulus dimensions. Psychological Research, 71, 22–29.
Fischer, M. H., & Zwaan, R. A. (2008). Embodied language: A review of the role of motor system in language comprehension. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 61, 825–850.
Goldin-Meadow, S. (2006). Talking and thinking with our hands. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 15, 34–39.
Graziano, M. S. A., Hu, X. T., & Gross, C. G. (1997). Visuospatial properties of ventral premotor cortex. Journal of Neurophysiology, 77, 2268–2292.
Halligan, P. W., & Marshall, J. C. (1991). Left neglect for near but not far space in man. Nature, 350, 498–500.
Holt, L. E., & Beilock, S. L. (2006). Expertise and its embodiment: Examining the impact of sensorimotor skill expertise on the representation of action-related text. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13, 694–701.
Ihssen, N., Heim, S., & Keil, A. (2007). The costs of emotional attention: Affective processing inhibits subsequent lexico-semantic analysis. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 19, 1932–1949.
Iverson, J. M., & Goldin-Meadow, S. (2005). Gesture paves the way for language development. Psychological Science, 16, 367–371.
Koch, S., Holland, R. W., Hengstler, M., & van Knippenberg, A. (2009). Body locomotion as regulatory process: Stepping backward enhances cognitive control. Psychological Science, 20, 549–550.
Ládavas, E., di Pellegrino, G., Farné, A., & Zeloni, G. (1998). Neuropsychological evidence of an integrated visuotactile representation of peripersonal space in humans. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 10, 581–589.
MacLeod, C. M. (1991). Half a century of research on the Stroop effect: An integrative review. Psychological Bulletin, 109, 163–203.
Makin, T. R., Holmes, N. P., & Zohary, E. (2007). Is that near my hand? Multisensory representation of peripersonal space in human intraparietal sulcus. Journal of Neuroscience, 27, 731–740.
Phelps, E. A., Ling, S., & Carrasco, M. (2006). Emotion facilitates perception and potentiates the perceptual benefits of attention. Psychological Science, 17, 292–299.
Reed, C. L., Grubb, J. D., & Steele, C. (2006). Hands up: Attentional prioritization of space near the hand. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 32, 166–177.
Schendel, K., & Robertson, L. C. (2004). Reaching out to see: Arm position can attenuate human visual loss. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 16, 935–943.
Stein, J. (2003). Visual motion sensitivity and reading. Neuropsychologia, 41, 1785–1793.
Stroop, J. R. (1935). Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 18, 643–662.
Unsworth, N., Heitz, R. P., Schrock, J. C., & Engle, R. W. (2005). An automated version of the operation span task. Behavior Research Methods, 37, 498–505.
Vishton, P. M., Stephens, N. J., Nelson, L. A., Morra, S. E., Brunick, K. L., & Stevens, J. A. (2007). Planning to reach for an object changes how the reacher perceives it. Psychological Science, 18, 713–719.
Wexler, M., Kosslyn, S. M., & Berthoz, A. (1998). Motor processes in mental rotation. Cognition, 68, 77–94.
Wohlschläger, A. (2000). Visual motion priming by invisible actions. Vision Research, 40, 925–930.
Wohlschläger, A., & Wohlschläger, A. (1998). Mental and manual rotation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 24, 397–412.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Davoli, C.C., Du, F., Montana, J. et al. When meaning matters, look but don’t touch: The effects of posture on reading. Memory & Cognition 38, 555–562 (2010). https://doi.org/10.3758/MC.38.5.555
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/MC.38.5.555