Implicit Associations between Adverbs of Place and Actions in the Physical and Digital Space
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Experiment 1
2.1. Materials and Methods
2.1.1. Participants
2.1.2. Stimuli and Procedure
2.2. Data Analysis
2.3. Results
2.4. Discussion
3. Experiment 2
3.1. Materials and Methods
3.1.1. Participants
3.1.2. Stimuli and Procedure
3.2. Results
3.3. Discussion
4. Experiment 3
4.1. Materials and Methods
4.1.1. Participants
4.1.2. Stimuli and Procedure
4.2. Results
4.3. Discussion
5. Experiment 4
5.1. Materials and Methods
5.1.1. Participants
5.1.2. Stimuli and Procedure
5.2. Results
5.3. Discussion
6. General Discussion
7. Conclusions
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Kemmerer, D. “Near” and “far” in language and perception. Cognition 1999, 73, 35–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Proffitt, D.R.; Caudek, C. Depth Perception and the Perception of Events. In Handbook of Psychology, 2nd ed.; John Wiley & Sons: New York, NY, USA, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Proffitt, D.R.; Stefanucci, J.; Banton, T.; Epstein, W. The role of effort in perceiving distance. Psychol. Sci. 2003, 14, 106–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Witt, J.K.; Proffitt, D.R.; Epstein, W. Perceiving distance: A role of effort and intent. Perception 2004, 33, 577–590. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Witt, J.K.; Proffitt, D.R.; Epstein, W. Tool use affects perceived distance, but only when you intend to use it. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 2005, 31, 880. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Berti, A.; Frassinetti, F. When far becomes near: Remapping of space by tool use. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 2000, 12, 415–420. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pegna, A.J.; Petit, L.; Caldara-Schnetzer, A.S.; Khateb, A.; Annoni, J.M.; Sztajzel, R.; Landis, T. So near yet so far: Neglect in far or near space depends on tool use. Ann. Neurol. 2001, 50, 820–822. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Halligan, P.W.; Marshall, J.C. Left neglect for near but not far space in man. Nature 1991, 350, 498–500. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cowey, A.; Small, M.; Ellis, S. Left visuo-spatial neglect can be worse in far than in near space. Neuropsychologia 1994, 32, 1059–1066. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Farnè, A.; Làdavas, E. Dynamic size-change of hand peripersonal space following tool use. Neuroreport 2000, 11, 1645–1649. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gamberini, L.; Seraglia, B.; Priftis, K. Processing of peripersonal and extrapersonal space using tools: Evidence from visual line bisection in real and virtual environments. Neuropsychologia 2008, 46, 1298–1304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Longo, M.R.; Lourenco, S.F. On the nature of near space: Effects of tool use and the transition to far space. Neuropsychologia 2006, 44, 977–981. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Maravita, A.; Husain, M.; Clarke, K.; Driver, J. Reaching with a tool extends visual–tactile interactions into far space: Evidence from cross-modal extinction. Neuropsychologia 2001, 39, 580–585. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Maravita, A.; Spence, C.; Kennett, S.; Driver, J. Tool-use changes multimodal spatial interactions between vision and touch in normal humans. Cognition 2002, 83, B25–B34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Neppi-Mòdona, M.; Rabuffetti, M.; Folegatti, A.; Ricci, R.; Spinazzola, L.; Schiavone, F.; Ferrarin, M.; Berti, A. Bisecting Lines with Different Tools in Right Brain Damaged Patients: The Role of Action Programming and Sensory Feedback in Modulating Spatial Remapping. Cortex 2007, 43, 397–410. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gamberini, L.; Carlesso, C.; Seraglia, B.; Craighero, L. A behavioural experiment in virtual reality to verify the role of action function in space coding. Vis. Cogn. 2013, 21, 961–969. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Andersen, R.A.; Gnadt, J.W. Posterior parietal cortex. Rev. Oculomot. Res. 1989, 3, 315–335. [Google Scholar]
- Goldberg, M.E.; Segraves, M.A. The visual and frontal cortices. Rev. Oculomot. Res. 1989, 3, 283–313. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
- Barash, S.; Bracewell, R.M.; Fogassi, L.; Gnadt, J.W.; Andersen, R.A. Saccade-related activity in the lateral intraparietal area. II. Spatial properties. J. Neurophysiol. 1991, 66, 1109–1124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Fogassi, L.; Gallese, V.; Fadiga, L.; Luppino, G.; Matelli, M.; Rizzolatti, G. Coding of peripersonal space in inferior premotor cortex (area F4). J. Neurophysiol. 1996, 76, 141–157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Craighero, L. The role of the motor system in cognitive functions. In The Routledge Handbook of Embodied Cognition; Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 2014; pp. 51–58. ISBN 9781315775845. [Google Scholar]
- Barsalou, L.W. Grounded Cognition. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 2008, 59, 617–645. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Gallese, V.; Lakoff, G. The Brain’s concepts: The role of the Sensory-motor system in conceptual knowledge. Cogn. Neuropsychol. 2005, 22, 455–479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gentilucci, M.; Benuzzi, F.; Bertolani, L.; Daprati, E.; Gangitano, M. Language and motor control. Exp. Brain Res. 2000, 133, 468–490. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Coventry, K.R.; Valdés, B.; Castillo, A.; Guijarro-Fuentes, P. Language within your reach: Near–far perceptual space and spatial demonstratives. Cognition 2008, 108, 889–895. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ghosh, A.; Pfister, J.-P.; Cook, M. Optimised information gathering in smartphone users. arXiv 2017, arXiv:1701.02796. [Google Scholar]
- Greenwald, A.G.; McGhee, D.E.; Schwartz, J.L.K. Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: The implicit association test. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 1998, 74, 1464–1480. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nosek, B.A.; Greenwald, A.G.; Banaji, M.R. The Implicit Association Test at Age 7: A Methodological and Conceptual Review. In Automatic Processes in Social Thinking and Behavior; Psychology Press: New York, NY, USA, 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Fazio, R.H.; Olson, M.A. Implicit Measures in Social Cognition Research: Their Meaning and Use. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 2003, 54, 297–327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Marini, M.; Rubichi, S.; Sartori, G. The Role of Self-Involvement in Shifting IAT Effects. Exp. Psychol. 2012, 59, 348–354. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Marini, M.; Agosta, S.; Mazzoni, G.; Barba, G.D.; Sartori, G. True and False DRM Memories: Differences Detected with an Implicit Task. Front. Psychol. 2012, 3, 310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Sartori, G.; Agosta, S.; Zogmaister, C.; Ferrara, S.D.; Castiello, U. How to Accurately Detect Autobiographical Events. Psychol. Sci. 2008, 19, 772–780. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- de Jong, P.; Pasman, W.; Kindt, M.; Hout, M.V.D. A reaction time paradigm to assess (implicit) complaint-specific dysfunctional beliefs. Behav. Res. Ther. 2001, 39, 101–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Teachman, B.A.; Gapinski, K.D.; Brownell, K.D.; Rawlins, M.; Jeyaram, S. Demonstrations of implicit anti-fat bias: The impact of providing causal information and evoking empathy. Heal. Psychol. 2003, 22, 68–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Baron, A.S.; Banaji, M.R. The Development of Implicit Attitudes. Evidence of Race Evaluations From Ages 6 and 10 and Adulthood. Psychol. Sci. 2006, 17, 53–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Dunham, Y.; Baron, A.S.; Banaji, M.R. From American City to Japanese Village: A Cross-Cultural Investigation of Implicit Race Attitudes. Child Dev. 2006, 77, 1268–1281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cunningham, W.A.; Johnson, M.K.; Raye, C.L.; Gatenby, J.C.; Gore, J.C.; Banaji, M.R. Separable Neural Components in the Processing of Black and White Faces. Psychol. Sci. 2004, 15, 806–813. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Marini, M.; Agosta, S.; Sartori, G. Electrophysiological Correlates of the Autobiographical Implicit Association Test (aIAT): Response Conflict and Conflict Resolution. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 2016, 10, 391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Marini, M.; Banaji, M.R.; Pascual-Leone, A. Studying Implicit Social Cognition with Noninvasive Brain Stimulation. Trends Cogn. Sci. 2018, 22, 1050–1066. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Phelps, E.A.; O’Connor, K.J.; Cunningham, W.A.; Funayama, E.S.; Gatenby, J.C.; Gore, J.C.; Banaji, M.R. Performance on Indirect Measures of Race Evaluation Predicts Amygdala Activation. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 2000, 12, 729–738. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Richeson, J.A.; Baird, A.A.; Gordon, H.L.; Heatherton, T.F.; Wyland, C.L.; Trawalter, S.; Shelton, J.N. An fMRI investigation of the impact of interracial contact on executive function. Nat. Neurosci. 2003, 6, 1323–1328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Maison, D.; Greenwald, A.G.; Bruin, R. The Implicit Association Test as a measure of implicit consumer attitudes. Pol. Psychol. Bull. 2001, 32, 61–69. [Google Scholar]
- Marini, M. Underweight vs. overweight/obese: Which weight category do we prefer? Dissociation of weight-related preferences at the explicit and implicit level. Obes. Sci. Pr. 2017, 3, 390–398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Marini, M.; Waterman, P.D.; Breedlove, E.; Chen, J.T.; Testa, C.; Reisner, S.L.; Pardee, D.J.; Mayer, K.H.; Krieger, N. The target/perpetrator brief-implicit association test (B-IAT): An implicit instrument for efficiently measuring discrimination based on race/ethnicity, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, weight, and age. BMC Public Heal. 2021, 21, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nosek, B.A.; Greenwald, A.; Banaji, M.R. Understanding and Using the Implicit Association Test: II. Method Variables and Construct Validity. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 2005, 31, 166–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Greenwald, A.G.; Nosek, B.A.; Banaji, M.R. Understanding and using the Implicit Association Test: I. An improved scoring algorithm. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 2003, 85, 197–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Chayko, M. Portable Communities: The Social Dynamics of Online and Mobile Connectedness; SUNY Press: Albany, NY, USA, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Diessel, H.; Coventry, K.R. Demonstratives in Spatial Language and Social Interaction: An Interdisciplinary Review. Front. Psychol. 2020, 11, 3158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bufacchi, R.; Iannetti, G.D. An Action Field Theory of Peripersonal Space. Trends Cogn. Sci. 2018, 22, 1076–1090. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Cléry, J.; Guipponi, O.; Wardak, C.; Ben Hamed, S. Neuronal bases of peripersonal and extrapersonal spaces, their plasticity and their dynamics: Knowns and unknowns. Neuropsychologia 2015, 70, 313–326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Committeri, G.; Pitzalis, S.; Galati, G.; Patria, F.; Pelle, G.; Sabatini, U.; Castriota-Scanderbeg, A.; Piccardi, L.; Guariglia, C.; Pizzamiglio, L. Neural bases of personal and extrapersonal neglect in humans. Brain 2006, 130, 431–441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- di Pellegrino, G.; Làdavas, E. Peripersonal space in the brain. Neuropsychologia 2015, 66, 126–133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Caggiano, V.; Fogassi, L.; Rizzolatti, G.; Thier, P.; Casile, A. Mirror Neurons Differentially Encode the Peripersonal and Extrapersonal Space of Monkeys. Science 2009, 324, 403–406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cardellicchio, P.; Sinigaglia, C.; Costantini, M. Grasping affordances with the other’s hand: A TMS study. Soc. Cogn. Affect. Neurosci. 2012, 8, 455–459. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Pierno, A.C.; Becchio, C.; Wall, M.B.; Smith, A.T.; Turella, L.; Castiello, U. When Gaze Turns into Grasp. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 2006, 18, 2130–2137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Serino, A. Peripersonal space (PPS) as a multisensory interface between the individual and the environment, defining the space of the self. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 2019, 99, 138–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Allport, D.A. Distributed memory, modular subsystems and dysphasia. In Current Perspectives in Dysphasia; Churchill Livingstone: New York, NY, USA, 1985; pp. 207–244. [Google Scholar]
- Barsalou, L.W.; Simmons, W.K.; Barbey, A.K.; Wilson, C.D. Grounding conceptual knowledge in modality-specific systems. Trends Cogn. Sci. 2003, 7, 84–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Martin, A.; Wiggs, C.L.; Ungerleider, L.G.; Haxby, J.V. Neural correlates of category-specific knowledge. Nature 1996, 379, 649–652. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Pulvermüller, F. Words in the brain’s language. Behav. Brain Sci. 1999, 22, 253–279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pulvermüller, F. Brain reflections of words and their meaning. Trends Cogn. Sci. 2001, 5, 517–524. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pulvermüller, F. A brain perspective on language mechanisms: From discrete neuronal ensembles to serial order. Prog. Neurobiol. 2002, 67, 85–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Caramazza, A.; Hillis, A.E.; Rapp, B.C.; Romani, C. The multiple semantics hypothesis: Multiple confusions? Cogn. Neuropsychol. 1990, 7, 161–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mahon, B.Z.; Caramazza, A. A critical look at the embodied cognition hypothesis and a new proposal for grounding conceptual content. J. Physiol. 2008, 102, 59–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Rogers, T.T.; Lambon Ralph, M.A.; Garrard, P.; Bozeat, S.; McClelland, J.L.; Hodges, J.R.; Patterson, K. Structure and Deterioration of Semantic Memory: A Neuropsychological and Computational Investigation. Psychol. Rev. 2004, 111, 205–235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Gindrat, A.-D.; Chytiris, M.; Balerna, M.; Rouiller, E.M.; Ghosh, A. Use-Dependent Cortical Processing from Fingertips in Touchscreen Phone Users. Curr. Biol. 2015, 25, 109–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Parsey, C.M.; Schmitter-Edgecombe, M. Applications of Technology in Neuropsychological Assessment. Clin. Neuropsychol. 2013, 27, 1328–1361. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Prensky, M. Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants Part 1. Horizon 2001, 9, 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Craighero, L.; Marini, M. Implicit Associations between Adverbs of Place and Actions in the Physical and Digital Space. Brain Sci. 2021, 11, 1523. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci11111523
Craighero L, Marini M. Implicit Associations between Adverbs of Place and Actions in the Physical and Digital Space. Brain Sciences. 2021; 11(11):1523. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci11111523
Chicago/Turabian StyleCraighero, Laila, and Maddalena Marini. 2021. "Implicit Associations between Adverbs of Place and Actions in the Physical and Digital Space" Brain Sciences 11, no. 11: 1523. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci11111523