Publications

Abstract

Is visual reinterpretation of bistable figures (e.g., duck/rabbit figure) in visual imagery possible? Current consensus suggests that it is in principle possible because of converging evidence of quasi-pictorial functioning of visual imagery. Yet, studies that have directly tested and found evidence for reinterpretation in visual imagery, allow for the possibility that reinterpretation was already achieved during memorization of the figure(s). One study resolved this issue, providing evidence for reinterpretation in visual imagery (Mast and Kosslyn, Cognition 86:57-70, 2002). However, participants in that study performed reinterpretations with aid of visual cues. Hence, reinterpretation was not performed with mental imagery alone. Therefore, in this study we assessed the possibility of reinterpretation without visual support. We further explored the possible role of haptic cues to assess the multimodal nature of mental imagery. Fifty-three participants were consecutively presented three to be remembered bistable 2-D figures (reinterpretable when rotated 180 degrees), two of which were visually inspected and one was explored hapticly. After memorization of the figures, a visually bistable exemplar figure was presented to ensure understanding of the concept of visual bistability. During recall, 11 participants (out of 36; 30.6%) who did not spot bistability during memorization successfully performed reinterpretations when instructed to mentally rotate their visual image, but additional haptic cues during mental imagery did not inflate reinterpretation ability. This study validates previous findings that reinterpretation in visual imagery is possible.

Abstract

In two experiments, we examined the role of gesture in reinterpreting a mental image. In Experiment 1, we found that participants gestured more about a figure they had learned through manual exploration than about a figure they had learned through vision. This supports claims that gestures emerge from the activation of perception-relevant actions during mental imagery. In Experiment 2, we investigated whether such gestures have a causal role in affecting the quality of mental imagery. Participants were randomly assigned to gesture, not gesture, or engage in a manual interference task as they attempted to reinterpret a figure they had learned through manual exploration. We found that manual interference significantly impaired participants' success on the task. Taken together, these results suggest that gestures reflect mental imaginings of interactions with a mental image and that these imaginings are critically important for mental manipulation and reinterpretation of that image. However, our results suggest that enacting the imagined movements in gesture is not critically important on this particular task.

Abstract

Gesture–speech synchrony re-stabilizes when hand movement or speech is disrupted by a delayed
feedback manipulation, suggesting strong bidirectional coupling between gesture and speech. Yet it
has also been argued from case studies in perceptual–motor pathology that hand gestures are a special
kind of action that does not require closed-loop re-afferent feedback to maintain synchrony with
speech. In the current pre-registered within-subject study, we used motion tracking to conceptually
replicate McNeill’s (1992) classic study on gesture–speech synchrony under normal and 150 ms
delayed auditory feedback of speech conditions (NO DAF vs. DAF). Consistent with, and extending
McNeill’s original results, we obtain evidence that (a) gesture-speech synchrony is more stable
under DAF versus NO DAF (i.e., increased coupling effect), (b) that gesture and speech variably
entrain to the external auditory delay as indicated by a consistent shift in gesture-speech synchrony
offsets (i.e., entrainment effect), and (c) that the coupling effect and the entrainment effect are codependent.
We suggest, therefore, that gesture–speech synchrony provides a way for the cognitive
system to stabilize rhythmic activity under interfering conditions.

Abstract

Spontaneously occurring speech is often seamlessly accompanied by hand gestures. Detailed
observations of video data suggest that speech and gesture are tightly synchronized in time,
consistent with a dynamic interplay between body and mind. However, spontaneous gesturespeech
synchrony has rarely been objectively quantified beyond analyses of video data, which
do not allow for identification of kinematic properties of gestures. Consequently, the point in
gesture which is held to couple with speech, the so-called moment of “maximum effort”, has
been variably equated with the peak velocity, peak acceleration, peak deceleration, or the onset
of the gesture. In the current exploratory report, we provide novel evidence from motiontracking
and acoustic data that peak velocity is closely aligned, and shortly leads, the peak pitch
(F0) of speech

Abstract

The split-attention effect entails that learning from spatially separated, but mutually referring information
sources (e.g., text and picture), is less effective than learning from the equivalent spatially integrated
sources. According to cognitive load theory, impaired learning is caused by the working memory load
imposed by the need to distribute attention between the information sources and mentally integrate them.
In this study, we directly tested whether the split-attention effect is caused by spatial separation per se.
Spatial distance was varied in basic cognitive tasks involving pictures (Experiment 1) and text–picture
combinations (Experiment 2; preregistered study), and in more ecologically valid learning materials
(Experiment 3). Experiment 1 showed that having to integrate two pictorial stimuli at greater distances
diminished performance on a secondary visual working memory task, but did not lead to slower
integration. When participants had to integrate a picture and written text in Experiment 2, a greater
distance led to slower integration of the stimuli, but not to diminished performance on the secondary task.
Experiment 3 showed that presenting spatially separated (compared with integrated) textual and pictorial
information yielded fewer integrative eye movements, but this was not further exacerbated when
increasing spatial distance even further. This effect on learning processes did not lead to differences in
learning outcomes between conditions. In conclusion, we provide evidence that larger distances between
spatially separated information sources influence learning processes, but that spatial separation on its
own is not likely to be the only, nor a sufficient, condition for impacting learning outcomes.

Abstract

We investigated whether augmenting instructional animations with a body analogy (BA) would improve 10- to 13-year-old children’s learning about class-1 levers. Children with a lower level of general math skill who learned with an instructional animation that provided a BA of the physical system, showed higher accuracy on a lever problem-solving reaction time task than children studying the instructional animation without this BA. Additionally, learning with a BA led to a higher speed–accuracy trade-off during the transfer task for children with a lower math skill, which provided additional evidence that especially this group is likely to be affected by learning with a BA. However, overall accuracy and solving speed on the transfer task was not affected by learning with or without this BA. These results suggest that providing children with a BA during animation study provides a stepping-stone for understanding mechanical principles of a physical system, which may prove useful for instructional designers. Yet, because the BA does not seem effective for all children, nor for all tasks, the degree of effectiveness of body analogies should be studied further. Future research, we conclude, should be more sensitive to the necessary degree of analogous mapping between the body and physical systems, and whether this mapping is effective for reasoning about more complex instantiations of such physical systems.

Abstract

Previous research indicates that sensori‐motor experience with physical systems can have a positive effect on learning. However, it is not clear whether this effect is caused by mere bodily engagement or the intrinsically meaningful information that such interaction affords in performing the learning task. We investigated (N = 74), through the use of a Wii Balance Board, whether different forms of physical engagement that was either meaningfully, non‐meaningfully, or minimally related to the learning content would be beneficial (or detrimental) to learning about the workings of seesaws from instructional animations. The results were inconclusive, indicating that motoric competency on lever problem solving did not significantly differ between conditions, nor were response speed and transfer performance affected. These findings suggest that adult's implicit and explicit knowledge about physical systems is stable and not easily affected by (contradictory) sensori‐motor experiences. Implications for embodied learning are discussed.

Abstract

Two broad approaches have dominated the literature on the production of speech-accompanying gestures. On the one hand, there are approaches that aim to explain the origin of gestures by specifying the mental processes that give rise to them. On the other, there are approaches that aim to explain the cognitive function that gestures have for the gesturer or the listener. In the present paper we aim to reconcile both approaches in one single perspective that is informed by a recent sea change in cognitive science, namely, Predictive Processing Perspectives (PPP; Clark 2013b; 2015). We start with the idea put forth by the Gesture as Simulated Action (GSA) framework (Hostetter, Alibali 2008). Under this view, the mental processes that give rise to gesture are re-enactments of sensori-motor experiences (i.e., simulated actions). We show that such anticipatory sensori-motor states and the constraints put forth by the GSA framework can be understood as top-down kinesthetic predictions that function in a broader predictive machinery as proposed by PPP. By establishing this alignment, we aim to show how gestures come to fulfill a genuine cognitive function above and beyond the mental processes that give rise to gesture.

Abstract

Non-communicative hand gestures have been found to benefit problem-solving performance. These gestures seem to compensate for limited internal cognitive capacities, such as visual working memory capacity. Yet, it is not clear how gestures might perform this cognitive function. One hypothesis is that gesturing is a means to spatially index mental simulations, thereby reducing the need for visually projecting the mental simulation onto the visual presentation of the task. If that hypothesis is correct, less eye movements should be made when participants gesture during problem solving than when they do not gesture. We therefore used mobile eye tracking to investigate the effect of co-thought gesturing and visual working memory capacity on eye movements during mental solving of the Tower of Hanoi problem. Results revealed that gesturing indeed reduced the number of eye movements (lower saccade counts), especially for participants with a relatively lower visual working memory capacity. Subsequent problem-solving performance was not affected by having (not) gestured during the mental solving phase. The current findings suggest that our understanding of gestures in problem solving could be improved by taking into account eye movements during gesturing.

Abstract

Previous research has established that gesture observation aids learning in children. The current study examinedwhether observation of gestures (i.e. depictive and tracing gestures) differentially affected verbal and visual–spatial retention whenlearning a route and its street names. Specifically, we explored whether children (n = 97) with lower visual and verbal working-memory capacity benefited more from observing gestures as compared with children who score higher on these traits. To thisend, 11- to 13-year-old children were presented with an instructional video of a route containing no gestures, depictive gestures,tracing gestures or both depictive and tracing gestures. Results indicated that the type of observed gesture affected performance:Observing tracing gestures or both tracing and depictive gestures increased performance on route retention, while observingdepictive gestures or both depictive and tracing gestures increased performance on street name retention. These effects werenot differentially affected by working-memory capacity