Swipe om te navigeren naar een ander artikel
Language processing requires the combination of compatible (auditory-vocal and visual-manual) or incompatible (auditory-manual and visual-vocal) sensory-motor modalities, and switching between these sensory-motor modality combinations is very common in every-day life. Sensory-motor modality compatibility is defined as the similarity of stimulus modality and the modality of response-related sensory consequences. We investigated the influence of sensory-motor modality compatibility during performing language-related cognitive operations on different linguistic levels. More specifically, we used a variant of the task-switching paradigm, in which participants had to switch between compatible or between incompatible sensory-motor modality combinations during a verbal semantic categorization (Experiment 1) or during a word-form decision (Experiment 2). The data show higher switch costs (i.e., higher reaction times and error rates in switch trials compared to repetition trials) in incompatible sensory-motor modality combinations than in compatible sensory-motor modality combinations. This was true for every language-related cognitive operation, regardless of the individual linguistic level. Taken together, the present study demonstrates that sensory-motor modality compatibility plays an important role in modality switching during language processing.
Log in om toegang te krijgen
Met onderstaand(e) abonnement(en) heeft u direct toegang:
Badets, A., Koch, I., & Philipp, A. M. (2014). A review of ideomotor approaches to perception, cognition, action, and language: advancing a cultural recycling hypothesis. Psychological Research, 1–15.
Barsalou, L. W. (1999). Perceptual symbol systems. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 577–660. PubMed
Hald, L. A., Marshall, J. A., Janssen, D. P., & Garnham, A. (2011). Switching modalities in a sentence verification task: ERP evidence for embodied language processing. Frontiers in Psychology, 2, 93. CrossRef
Howard, D., & Franklin, S. (1988). Missing the meaning? A cognitive neuropsychological study of processing of words by an aphasic patient. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
International Phonetic Association. (1999). Handbook of the International Phonetic Association: A guide to the use of the International Phonetic Alphabet. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Koch, I., Gade, M., Schuch, S., & Philipp, A. M. (2010). The role of inhibition in task switching: a review. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 17, 1–14. CrossRef
Meiran, N. (2010). Task switching: Mechanisms underlying rigid vs. flexible self control. In: Hassin, R., Ochsner, K., & Trope Y. (Eds.), Self control in society, mind, and brain (pp. 202–220). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Morton, J. (1969). The interaction of information in word recognition. Psychological Review, 76, 165–178. CrossRef
Vandierendonck, A., Liefooghe, B., & Verbruggen, F. (2010). Task switching: Interplay of reconfiguration and interference control. Psychological Bulletin, 13, 601–626. CrossRef
- The role of sensory-motor modality compatibility in language processing
Andrea M. Philipp
- Springer Berlin Heidelberg