Portable Device Validation to Study the Relation between Motor Activity and Language: Verify the Embodiment Theory through Grip Force Modulation

Abstract

Studying the link between the motor function and the linguistic function has become increasingly popular over the past decade. Often, the subject is studied with the use of expensive devices (EEG, fIRM…) limited because they need a proper space. Following the studies of Frak (Cerveau, Motricité et Langage) laboratory, we developed a portable device that analyses the grip force modulation. This device provides us with the opportunity to put in place a developmental study with children in Canada and Brazil. We analyzed the grip force modulation of fourteen Canadian teenagers (Can.) and fifteen Brazilian teenagers (Bra.) after experiencing linguistic stimulation through the use of action words (e.g. grab) and non-action word (e.g. storm). The maturity of teenagers' intraparietal area is similar to that of adults. Thus, we can compare our results with the those of Frak & al. (2010). The force modulations are analyzed using grip force sensors that are recording a variation in millinewton (mN) every millisecond (ms). Our choice in material and technic to normalize the data is based on our previous study concerning grip force sensors and linguistic stimulation. Our results show a superior modulation after listening to an action word compared to the non-action word in the two groups. We reproduce the results of Frak & al. (2010). The validation of the portable device could facilitate research by giving access to a both a larger and diverse population.

Spatial-numerical associations without a motor response? Grip force says ‘Yes’

“…Note that, unlike reaction times, grip force data are continuous, and deciding which time windows should be analyzed is crucial. Previous studies using force registration faced the same problem and either aggregated force in time windows predicted by the theory (e.g., Aravena et al, 2012) or split data into consecutive time bins, e.g., of 50 ms each, and analyzed them (e.g., Labrecque et al, 2016). Selecting time windows a priori based on theory might look like the best practice; however, it requires such theories to be available.…”

“…Grip force registration is a relatively novel method, and no gold standard has been established for it yet (see Nazir et al, 2017, for methodological considerations). Most previous studies focused on linguistic (Aravena et al, 2012;da Silva et al, 2018da Silva et al, , 2019Labrecque et al, 2016;Nazir et al, 2017;Pérez-Gay Juárez et al, 2019) or video materials (Blampain et al, 2018). They either used unimanual grip force recording (Aravena et al, 2012;Blampain et al, 2018;da Silva et al, 2019;Labrecque et al, 2016;Nazir et al, 2017;Pérez-Gay Juárez et al, 2019) or only focused on the earlier part of the grip force effect (first 800 ms after stimulus presentation, da Silva et al, 2018).…”

“…Most previous studies focused on linguistic (Aravena et al, 2012;da Silva et al, 2018da Silva et al, , 2019Labrecque et al, 2016;Nazir et al, 2017;Pérez-Gay Juárez et al, 2019) or video materials (Blampain et al, 2018). They either used unimanual grip force recording (Aravena et al, 2012;Blampain et al, 2018;da Silva et al, 2019;Labrecque et al, 2016;Nazir et al, 2017;Pérez-Gay Juárez et al, 2019) or only focused on the earlier part of the grip force effect (first 800 ms after stimulus presentation, da Silva et al, 2018). The study by Miklashevsky et al (2021) mentioned above examined a more extended period of 1000 ms and found a complex multiphasic pattern of activity in both hands regardless of number magnitude (see also our Fig.…”