2
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Abstract concepts in interaction: the need of others when guessing abstract concepts smooths dyadic motor interactions

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Abstract concepts (ACs, e.g. ‘justice’) are more complex compared with concrete concepts (CCs) (e.g. ‘table’). Indeed, they do not possess a single object as a referent, they assemble quite heterogeneous members and they are more detached from exteroceptive and more grounded in interoceptive experience. Recent views have hypothesized that interpersonal communication is particularly crucial to acquire and use ACs. The current study investigates the reliance of ACs/CCs representation on interpersonal behaviour. We asked participants to perform a motor interaction task with two avatars who embodied two real confederates. Before and after the motor interaction task, the two confederates provided participants with hints in a concept guessing task associated with visual stimuli: one helped in guessing ACs and the other, CCs. A control study we performed both with the materials employed in the main experiment and with other materials, confirmed that associating verbal concepts with visual images was more difficult with ACs than with CCs. Consistently, the results of the main experiment showed that participants asked for more hints with ACs than CCs and were more synchronous when interacting with the avatar corresponding to the AC's confederate. The results highlight an important role of sociality in grounding ACs.

          Related collections

          Most cited references61

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Least-Squares Means: TheRPackagelsmeans

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            An integrated theory of language production and comprehension.

            Currently, production and comprehension are regarded as quite distinct in accounts of language processing. In rejecting this dichotomy, we instead assert that producing and understanding are interwoven, and that this interweaving is what enables people to predict themselves and each other. We start by noting that production and comprehension are forms of action and action perception. We then consider the evidence for interweaving in action, action perception, and joint action, and explain such evidence in terms of prediction. Specifically, we assume that actors construct forward models of their actions before they execute those actions, and that perceivers of others' actions covertly imitate those actions, then construct forward models of those actions. We use these accounts of action, action perception, and joint action to develop accounts of production, comprehension, and interactive language. Importantly, they incorporate well-defined levels of linguistic representation (such as semantics, syntax, and phonology). We show (a) how speakers and comprehenders use covert imitation and forward modeling to make predictions at these levels of representation, (b) how they interweave production and comprehension processes, and (c) how they use these predictions to monitor the upcoming utterances. We show how these accounts explain a range of behavioral and neuroscientific data on language processing and discuss some of the implications of our proposal.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The challenge of abstract concepts.

              concepts ("freedom") differ from concrete ones ("cat"), as they do not have a bounded, identifiable, and clearly perceivable referent. The way in which abstract concepts are represented has recently become a topic of intense debate, especially because of the spread of the embodied approach to cognition. Within this framework concepts derive their meaning from the same perception, motor, and emotional systems that are involved in online interaction with the world. Most of the evidence in favor of this view, however, has been gathered with regard to concrete concepts. Given the relevance of abstract concepts for higher-order cognition, we argue that being able to explain how they are represented is a crucial challenge that any theory of cognition needs to address. The aim of this article is to offer a critical review of the latest theories on abstract concepts, focusing on embodied ones. Starting with theories that question the distinction between abstract and concrete concepts, we review theories claiming that abstract concepts are grounded in metaphors, in situations and introspection, and in emotion. We then introduce multiple representation theories, according to which abstract concepts evoke both sensorimotor and linguistic information. We argue that the most promising approach is given by multiple representation views that combine an embodied perspective with the recognition of the importance of linguistic and social experience. We conclude by discussing whether or not a single theoretical framework might be able to explain all different varieties of abstract concepts. (PsycINFO Database Record
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                R Soc Open Sci
                RSOS
                royopensci
                Royal Society Open Science
                The Royal Society
                2054-5703
                July 28, 2021
                July 2021
                : 8
                : 7
                : 201205
                Affiliations
                [ 1 ]Department of Dynamic and Clinical Psychology and Health Studies, ‘Sapienza’ University of Rome, , Italy
                [ 2 ]SCNLab Department of Psychology, ‘Sapienza’ University of Rome, , Italy
                [ 3 ]IRCCS, Fondazione Santa Lucia, , Rome, Italy
                [ 4 ]Institute of Cognitive Sciences and Technologies, National Research Council (CNR), , Rome, Italy
                Author notes
                [†]

                Equal contribution.

                Electronic supplementary material is available online at https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.c.5514770.

                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9939-4745
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5288-1378
                Article
                rsos201205
                10.1098/rsos.201205
                8316795
                34350007
                b0492de8-d186-4feb-88a0-2f98c3c03865
                © 2021 The Authors.

                Published by the Royal Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/, which permits unrestricted use, provided the original author and source are credited.

                History
                : July 7, 2020
                : June 21, 2021
                Categories
                1001
                42
                205
                Psychology and Cognitive Neuroscience
                Research Articles

                abstract concepts,cooperative behaviour,joint action,kinematic indexes,social interaction

                Comments

                Comment on this article