Refine
Has Fulltext
- no (2)
Document Type
- Article (2)
Language
- English (2)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (2)
Keywords
- arithmetic (1)
- cognitive module (1)
- cross-domain priming (1)
- embodied cognition (1)
- expertise (1)
- individual differences (1)
- information integration (1)
- language (1)
- mental representation (1)
- spatial ability (1)
Institute
- Department Linguistik (2) (remove)
Language and Arithmetic
(2018)
We examined cross-domain semantic priming effects between arithmetic and language. We paired subtractions with their linguistic equivalent, exception phrases (EPs) with positive quantifiers (e.g., "everybody except John") while pairing additions with their own linguistic equivalent, EPs with negative quantifiers (e.g., "nobody except John"; Moltmann, 1995). We hypothesized that EPs with positive quantifiers prime subtractions and inhibit additions while EPs with negative quantifiers prime additions and inhibit subtractions. Furthermore, we expected similar priming and inhibition effects from arithmetic into semantics. Our design allowed for a bidirectional analysis by using one trial's target as the prime for the next trial. Two experiments failed to show significant priming effects in either direction. Implications and possible shortcomings are explored in the general discussion.
This editorial introduces a set of papers on differential embodiment in spatial tasks. According to the theoretical notion of embodied cognition, our experiences of acting in the world, and the constraints of our sensory and motor systems, strongly shape our cognitive functions. In the current set of papers, the authors were asked to particularly consider idiosyncratic or differential embodied cognition in the context of spatial tasks and processes. In each contribution, differential embodiment is considered from one of two complementary perspectives: either by considering unusual individuals, who have atypical bodies or uncommon experiences of interacting with the world; or by exploring individual differences in the general population that reflect the naturally occurring variability in embodied processes. Our editorial summarizes the contributions to this special issue and discusses the insights they offer. We conclude from this collection of papers that exploring differences in the recruitment and involvement of embodied processes can be highly informative, and can add an extra dimension to our understanding of spatial cognitive functions. Taking a broader perspective, it can also shed light on important theoretical and empirical questions concerning the nature of embodied cognition per se.