From action to abstraction: The sensorimotor grounding of metaphor in Parkinson's disease.
Abstraction
Embodied cognition
Metaphor
Parkinson's disease
Simulation
Journal
Cortex; a journal devoted to the study of the nervous system and behavior
ISSN: 1973-8102
Titre abrégé: Cortex
Pays: Italy
ID NLM: 0100725
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
12 2019
12 2019
Historique:
received:
02
08
2019
accepted:
06
09
2019
pubmed:
5
11
2019
medline:
25
11
2020
entrez:
4
11
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Embodied cognition theories propose that the semantic representations engaged in during language comprehension are partly supported by perceptual and motor systems, via simulation. Activation in modality-specific regions of cortex is associated with the comprehension of literal language that describes the analogous modalities, but studies addressing the grounding of non-literal or figurative language, such as metaphors, have yielded mixed results. Differences in the psycholinguistic characteristics of sentence stimuli across studies have likely contributed to this lack of consensus. Furthermore, previous studies have been largely correlational, whilst patient studies are a critical way of determining if intact sensorimotor function is necessary to understand language drawing on sensorimotor information. We designed a battery of metaphorical and literal sentence stimuli using action and sound words, with an unprecedented level of control over critical psycholinguistic variables, to test hypotheses about the grounding of metaphorical language. In this Registered Report, we assessed the comprehension of these sentences in 41 patients with Parkinson's disease, who were predicted to be disproportionately affected by the action sentences relative to the sound sentences, and compared their performance to that of 39 healthy age-matched controls who were predicted to show no difference in performance due to sensory modality. Using preregistered Bayesian model comparison methods, we found that PD patients' comprehension of literal action sentences was not impaired, while there was some evidence for a slowing of responses to action metaphors. Follow up exploratory analyses suggest that this response time modality effect was driven by one type of metaphor (predicate) and was absent in another (nominal), despite the fact that the action semantics were similar in both syntactic forms. These results suggest that the conditions under which PD patients demonstrate hypothesized embodiment effects are limited. We offer a critical assessment of the PD action language literature and discuss implications for the embodiment debate. In addition, we suggest how future studies could leverage Bayesian statistical methods to provide more convincing evidence for or against embodied cognition effects.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31678683
pii: S0010-9452(19)30323-5
doi: 10.1016/j.cortex.2019.09.005
pmc: PMC6903422
mid: NIHMS1543426
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
362-384Subventions
Organisme : NIDCD NIH HHS
ID : R01 DC012511
Pays : United States
Organisme : NICHD NIH HHS
ID : T32 HD071844
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIA NIH HHS
ID : U19 AG062418
Pays : United States
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Références
Psychon Bull Rev. 2013 Jun;20(3):542-50
pubmed: 23307559
Neuroimage. 2008 Sep 1;42(3):1185-95
pubmed: 18582580
Behav Res Methods. 2009 Nov;41(4):977-90
pubmed: 19897807
Mov Disord. 2010 Nov 15;25(15):2649-53
pubmed: 21069833
J Exp Psychol Gen. 2006 Feb;135(1):1-11
pubmed: 16478313
Neurosci Lett. 2012 Apr 4;513(2):219-22
pubmed: 22387157
J Alzheimers Dis. 2017;55(4):1429-1435
pubmed: 27834777
Cereb Cortex. 2009 Aug;19(8):1905-14
pubmed: 19068489
Am Psychol. 2008 Oct;63(7):591-601
pubmed: 18855490
J Cogn Neurosci. 2007 May;19(5):855-65
pubmed: 17488209
Curr Biol. 2006 Sep 19;16(18):1818-23
pubmed: 16979559
Cogn Neuropsychol. 2005 May;22(3):455-79
pubmed: 21038261
J Cogn Neurosci. 2013 Aug;25(8):1191-205
pubmed: 23574587
Brain Lang. 2008 Oct;107(1):16-43
pubmed: 17977592
Behav Res Methods. 2017 Apr;49(2):471-483
pubmed: 26956680
Neuropsychologia. 2012 Dec;50(14):3636-40
pubmed: 22995942
J Cogn Neurosci. 2002 Jul 1;14(5):795-805
pubmed: 12167263
Neuroimage. 2004 Jan;21(1):112-24
pubmed: 14741648
Cereb Cortex. 2009 Dec;19(12):2767-96
pubmed: 19329570
Neuroimage. 2004 May;22(1):11-21
pubmed: 15109993
Brain Lang. 2008 Dec;107(3):194-202
pubmed: 18692890
Cortex. 2013 Feb;49(2):474-86
pubmed: 22405961
Behav Res Methods. 2010 Aug;42(3):651-64
pubmed: 20805587
Brain Res. 2007 Jan 26;1130(1):119-24
pubmed: 17174278
Front Hum Neurosci. 2014 Nov 03;8:871
pubmed: 25404906
Brain Lang. 2007 Apr;101(1):80-9
pubmed: 16875726
Neuropsychologia. 2013 Jul;51(8):1510-7
pubmed: 23624313
Cognition. 2009 Mar;110(3):412-31
pubmed: 19135654
J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 2001 Jun;23(3):399-406
pubmed: 11419453
Psychon Bull Rev. 2002 Sep;9(3):558-65
pubmed: 12412897
Brain Lang. 2012 Aug;122(2):120-5
pubmed: 22726721
Brain Lang. 2013 Oct;127(1):65-74
pubmed: 22910144
J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 1999 Aug;21(4):435-43
pubmed: 10550804
J Cogn Neurosci. 2005 Dec;17(12):1855-70
pubmed: 16356324
Lang Cogn. 2010 May;2(1):79-116
pubmed: 20802833
Brain Lang. 2004 May;89(2):354-61
pubmed: 15068918
Cortex. 2012 Jul;48(7):900-4
pubmed: 21247557
Parkinsonism Relat Disord. 2011 Dec;17(10):753-6
pubmed: 21855393
J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1992 Mar;55(3):181-4
pubmed: 1564476
Psychon Bull Rev. 2016 Aug;23(4):1015-27
pubmed: 27282993
J Cogn Neurosci. 2005 Feb;17(2):273-81
pubmed: 15811239
Cortex. 2009 Sep;45(8):960-71
pubmed: 19368905
J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 2010 Jan;16(1):1-5
pubmed: 19765354
Cortex. 2013 Apr;49(4):968-84
pubmed: 22482695
Front Psychol. 2010 Nov 25;1:212
pubmed: 21833267
Neuron. 2004 Jan 22;41(2):301-7
pubmed: 14741110
Brain Struct Funct. 2013 Nov;218(6):1355-73
pubmed: 23412746
Clin Linguist Phon. 2003 Jan-Feb;17(1):63-80
pubmed: 12737055
Front Psychol. 2018 Dec 03;9:2308
pubmed: 30559690
Eur J Neurol. 2007 Jun;14(6):632-7
pubmed: 17539940
J Cogn Neurosci. 2014 Nov;26(11):2585-95
pubmed: 24800628
Brain Lang. 2009 Nov;111(2):114-24
pubmed: 19781756
Brain Lang. 2016 Nov;162:19-28
pubmed: 27501386
J Neurosci. 2006 May 3;26(18):4917-21
pubmed: 16672666
J Neurosci. 2008 Nov 19;28(47):12224-30
pubmed: 19020016
Behav Res Methods. 2012 Sep;44(3):675-705
pubmed: 22351612
J Cogn Neurosci. 2012 Jun;24(6):1492-509
pubmed: 22390464
Neuroimage. 2012 Feb 15;59(4):3502-13
pubmed: 22100772
Neuroimage. 2012 Feb 15;59(4):3212-21
pubmed: 22155328
J Neuropsychol. 2018 Sep;12(3):389-408
pubmed: 28296213
Behav Brain Sci. 1999 Aug;22(4):577-609; discussion 610-60
pubmed: 11301525
Front Psychol. 2014 May 26;5:494
pubmed: 24904506
Cereb Cortex. 2010 Feb;20(2):468-78
pubmed: 19546154
Cortex. 2015 Aug;69:237-54
pubmed: 26103601
Mov Disord. 2003 Feb;18(2):150-6
pubmed: 12539207
Cortex. 2016 May;78:44-54
pubmed: 26995225
J Cogn Neurosci. 2011 Sep;23(9):2376-86
pubmed: 21126156
Annu Rev Psychol. 2008;59:617-45
pubmed: 17705682
Behav Res Methods. 2014 Sep;46(3):904-11
pubmed: 24142837
Brain Cogn. 2002 Mar-Apr;48(2-3):277-80
pubmed: 12030451
Brain Lang. 2017 May;168:37-46
pubmed: 28131052
Curr Opin Neurol. 2013 Dec;26(6):671-7
pubmed: 24184973
Cereb Cortex. 2006 Dec;16(12):1709-17
pubmed: 16400163
Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2001 Sep;1(3):207-21
pubmed: 12467121
Front Aging Neurosci. 2014 Jun 12;6:122
pubmed: 24971062
Mov Disord. 2006 Apr;21(4):467-72
pubmed: 16250017
Brain Lang. 2017 Mar;166:1-18
pubmed: 27951437
J Neurosci. 2012 Jun 6;32(23):7986-91
pubmed: 22674273
Psychon Bull Rev. 2016 Aug;23(4):1080-9
pubmed: 27294425
Neuropsychologia. 2009 Jan;47(2):388-96
pubmed: 18930749
Neuropsychologia. 2008 Jan 31;46(2):743-56
pubmed: 18037143