Object Orientation Affects Spatial Language Comprehension

Mental simulation theories of language comprehension propose that people automatically create mental representations of real objects. Evidence from sentence-picture verification tasks has shown that people mentally represent various visual properties such as shape, color, and size. However, the evidence for mental simulations of object orientation is limited. We report a study that investigates the match advantage of object orientation across speakers of different languages. This multi-laboratory project aims to achieve two objectives. First, we examine the replicability of the match advantage of object orientation across multiple languages and laboratories. Second, we will use a mental rotation task to measure participants’ mental imagery after the sentence-picture verification task. The relationship between the participants’ performance of the two tasks will provide a cross-linguistic examination of perceptual simulation processes. With the (broad) evaluation of individual mental imagery ability and potential linguistic moderators, we expect a robust estimation of match advantage of object orientation.

Download Full-text

Three-year-olds’ spatial language comprehension and links with mathematics and spatial performance.

Developmental Psychology ◽

10.1037/dev0001098 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 56 (10) ◽

pp. 1894-1905

Author(s):

Corinne A. Bower ◽

Lindsey Foster ◽

Laura Zimmermann ◽

Brian N. Verdine ◽

Maya Marzouk ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Language Comprehension ◽

Spatial Language ◽

Spatial Performance

Download Full-text

The effects of direction and orientation of located objects on spatial language comprehension

Language and Cognition ◽

10.1017/langcog.2018.3 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 10 (2) ◽

pp. 298-328 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

MICHELE BURIGO ◽

HOLGER SCHULTHEIS

Keyword(s):

Language Comprehension ◽

Language Use ◽

Spatial Language ◽

Reference Object ◽

Geometric Features ◽

Spatial Description ◽

Language Understanding ◽

Geometric Properties ◽

Orientation Axis ◽

Reported Study

abstractSpatial descriptions such as “The spider isbehindthe bee” inform the listener about the location of the spider (the located object) in relation to an object whose location is known (i.e., the bee, also called the reference object). If the geometric properties of the reference object have been shown to affect how people use and understand spatial language (Carlson & Van Deman, 2008; Carlson-Radvansky & Irwin, 1994), the geometric features carried by the located object have been deemed irrelevant for spatial language (Landau, 1996; Talmy, 1983). This view on the (ir)relevance of the located object has been recently questioned by works showing that presenting the located object in misalignment with the reference object has consequences for spatial language understanding (Burigo, Coventry, Cangelosi, & Lynott, 2016; Burigo & Sacchi, 2013). In the reported study we aimed to investigate which geometric properties of the located object affect the apprehension of a spatial description, and to disentangle whether the information concerning its orientation (axis), direction (front/rear), or a combination of the two gives rise to conflict. The outcomes of three placing tasks suggest that only the information concerning the direction of the located object is critical for spatial language use.

Download Full-text

Spatial Language and Children’s Spatial Landmark Use

Child Development Research ◽

10.1155/2012/427364 ◽

2012 ◽

Vol 2012 ◽

pp. 1-14 ◽

Cited By ~ 7

Author(s):

Amber A. Ankowski ◽

Emily E. Thom ◽

Catherine M. Sandhofer ◽

Aaron P. Blaisdell

Keyword(s):

Language Comprehension ◽

Training Trial ◽

Search Task ◽

Search Behavior ◽

Spatial Language ◽

Search Performance ◽

Initial Training ◽

Spatial Search ◽

Probe Test ◽

Square Array

We examined how spatial language affected search behavior in a landmark spatial search task. In Experiment 1, two- to six-year-old children were trained to find a toy in the center of a square array of four identical landmarks. Children heard one of three spatial language cues once during the initial training trial (“here,” “in the middle,” “next to this one”). After search performance reached criterion, children received a probe test trial in which the landmark array was expanded. In Experiment 2, two- to four-year-old children participated in the search task and also completed a language comprehension task. Results revealed that children’s spatial language comprehension scores and spatial language cues heard during training trials were related to children’s performance in the search task.

Download Full-text