Does the motor system functionally contribute to keeping words in working memory? A pre-registered replication of Shebani and Pulvermüller (2013, Cortex)

Abstract

Increasing evidence implicates the sensorimotor systems with high-level cognition, but the extent to which these systems play a functional role remains debated. Using an elegant design, Shebani and Pulvermüller (2013) reported that carrying out a demanding rhythmic task with the hands led to selective impairment of working memory for hand-related words (e.g., clap), while carrying out the same task with the feet led to selective memory impairment for foot-related words (e.g., kick). This striking double dissociation constitutes strong evidence for an embodied account of working memory, a system that has received scarce attention in the embodiment literature. However, the original study was likely underpowered and used suboptimal statistical analyses, raising questions about the robustness of the results. In fact, our Bayesian reanalysis with a more appropriate model yields inconclusive evidence for the effect (BF10 = 1.7). To re-examine this seminal finding, we here attempt an appropriately powered, fully pre-registered replication of the original study, following a sequential design with a maximal participant sample size over seven times that of the original (108 vs. 15). We will analyse the results with Bayesian generalized mixed models and use Bayes factors to quantify the evidence in support of the effect predicted by theories of embodied cognition.

Workflow techniques for the robust use of bayes factors.

“…Indeed, very recently Uri Simonsohn criticized Bayes factors because they might provide evidence in favor of the null and against a very specific alternative model, when the researchers only knew the direction of the effect (see https://datacolada.org/ 78a). This can happen when very uninformative vague priors are used (Montero-Melis et al, 2019), and provides a major motivation for using more informed prior distributions.…”

Towards Strong Inference in Research on Embodiment – Possibilities and Limitations of Causal Paradigms

“…By contrast, a number of largely similar studies did not obtain any evidence that motor interference affects working memory for action-related objects (Canits et al, 2018;Pecher, 2013;Quak et al, 2014;Zeelenberg & Pecher, 2016). At this point, it is not clear whether or when motor interference causes action-specific working memory impairments (Montero-Melis, van Paridon, Ostarek, & Bylund, 2019;Zeelenberg & Pecher, 2016).…”

How to embrace variation and accept uncertainty in linguistic and psycholinguistic data analysis

“…For an example using judgement about expected ranges of effect sizes for deciding on a sample size, see Vasishth et al (2018). Another possible approach is Bayes factor design analysis (Schönbrodt and Wagenmakers 2018); for an example, see Montero-Melis et al (2019) (although the way that these authors compute Bayes factors is not really appropriate; for further details, see Schad et al (2021)). The adaptive Bayesian methods developed for clinical trials (Berry et al 2010;Spiegelhalter et al 2004) also have a lot of potential applications in linguistics and psychology.…”