Effect size matters: the role of language statistics and perceptual simulation in conceptual processing

Representing mental representations – Neuroscientific and computational approaches to study language processing in the brain

“…The paper by Louwerse, Hutchinson, Tillman, and Recchia (2015) provides empirical support for this view. The authors performed a meta-analysis of behavioural studies that reported evidence for perceptual simulation in language processing.…”

Hand Position and Response Assignment Modulate the Activation of the Valence‐Space Conceptual Metaphor

“…In semantic judgment tasks, it has been observed that high‐frequency words are processed faster than low‐frequency words (Monsell, Doyle, & Haggard, ) and that lexical co‐occurrence frequencies influence and predict response times which directly supports the symbolic account (Louwerse et al., ). In the case of valence, it has been reported that positive words are significantly more frequent than negative words (Warriner, Kuperman, & Brysbaert, ) and that the frequency of word sequences, where positive words precede negative words, tends to be significantly higher than that of sequences where the reverse order applies (Louwerse et al., ). These results point out that linguistic factors are particularly relevant in semantic judgment tasks where positive and negative valence word pairs are presented horizontally relative to when they are presented vertically (Hutchinson & Louwerse, ).…”

“…Our data indicate that along with the manipulation of the whole body (Dehaene et al, 1993;Hartmann et al, 2012) and the execution of simple motor actions, such as vertical arm movements (Casasanto & Dijkstra, 2010;Oppenheimer & Trail, 2010), more subtle manipulations of the body like a slight variation in hand position can also affect subjects' performance in valence judgment tasks. Many studies have demonstrated in the last few years that perceptual representations are active during conceptual processing, although a debate exists on whether perceptual, symbolic, or both processes are either necessary and/or sufficient for conceptual processing (Louwerse et al, 2015). In semantic judgment tasks, it has been observed that highfrequency words are processed faster than low-frequency words (Monsell, Doyle, & Haggard, 1989) and that lexical co-occurrence frequencies influence and predict response times which directly supports the symbolic account (Louwerse et al, 2015).…”

“…Many studies have demonstrated in the last few years that perceptual representations are active during conceptual processing, although a debate exists on whether perceptual, symbolic, or both processes are either necessary and/or sufficient for conceptual processing (Louwerse et al, 2015). In semantic judgment tasks, it has been observed that highfrequency words are processed faster than low-frequency words (Monsell, Doyle, & Haggard, 1989) and that lexical co-occurrence frequencies influence and predict response times which directly supports the symbolic account (Louwerse et al, 2015). In the case of valence, it has been reported that positive words are significantly more frequent than negative words (Warriner, Kuperman, & Brysbaert, 2013) and that the frequency of word sequences, where positive words precede negative words, tends to be significantly higher than that of sequences where the reverse order applies (Louwerse et al, 2015).…”

Knowing the Meaning of a Word by the Linguistic and Perceptual Company It Keeps

“…Following Deacon's () hierarchy of signs, we proposed the Symbol Interdependency Hypothesis (Louwerse, , ; Louwerse, Hutchinson, Tillman, & Recchia, ; Louwerse & Jeuniaux, ). According to this hypothesis, and akin to what Deacon () proposes, language comprehension can be symbolic through interdependencies of symbols, but can also be embodied through the references symbols make to modal representations (Louwerse, ).…”