However, it suggests that the basic level of action verb memory is sensorimotor perception, such as implicit motor simulation. Contrary to previous studies, our results cannot be explained by an improvement of items relation processing. Semantic resonance between linguistic and motor representations of action could also contribute to memory improvement.
Taken together, those results suggest that action observation is beneficial because it allows the encoding of motor-related information (implicit motor simulation).
#SENTE LABS FREE#
We observed better free recall for the verbs learned with biological kinematics. For the other half of the verbs, the velocity of point-light movements was modified to create abnormal nonbiological kinematic actions. Half of the verbs were learned with their normal corresponding movement (biological kinematic). Experiment 2 compared two encoding conditions based on point-light human movement videos. Subsequent free recall indicated better memory for the verbs within the video clip condition. In Experiment 1, action verbs were encoded with short videos of point-light human movements or with written definitions. To prevent influence of item relation processing, two studies about isolated action verbs learning were designed. We aimed to assess whether encoding of implicit motor simulation can also explain why observation is better than reading for action memory. However, action observation also elicits implicit motor simulation, that is a processing of one’s movement through the observer own motor system. Previous findings linked such an effect with an easier relation processing of action components following observation compared to mere sentence reading. Observation is known to improve memory for action.
#SENTE LABS SERIES#
Overall, this series of experiments highlights for the first time that motor imagery can contribute to the improvement of lexical-semantic processing and could open new avenues on rehabilitation methods for language deficits. Although the improvement magnitude between pre-and post-training sessions was greater in the KMI group than in the SVI one on the semantic categorization task, the sentence-picture matching task tended to provide an opposite pattern of results. Experiment 2 aimed at replicating these results using a pre/post-training language assessment and a longer training period (four training sessions spread over four days).
Experiment 1 showed that KMI training can induce better performance (shorter reaction times) than SVI training for the two language comprehension tasks, thus suggesting that a KMI-based motor activation can facilitate lexico-semantic access after only one training session. Differential impacts of both training protocols on two different language comprehension tasks (i.e., semantic categorization and sentence-picture matching task) were investigated. In two experiments, participants were assigned to a kinesthetic motor-imagery training (KMI) group, in which they had to imagine making upper-limb movements, or to a static visual imagery training (SVI) group, in which they had to mentally visualize pictures of landscapes. In line with literature suggesting an intimate relationship between the language and the motor system, we proposed that a MI-training could improve language comprehension by facilitating lexico-semantic access. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of Motor Imagery (MI) training on language comprehension.
0 kommentar(er)
