Since its infancy embodied cognition research has fundamentally changed our understanding of how action, perception, and cognition relate to and interact with each other. Ideas from different schools of thought have led to controversial theories and a unifying framework is still being debated. In this perspective paper, we argue that in order to improve our understanding of embodied cognition and to take significant steps toward a comprehensive framework, a lifespan approach is mandatory. Given that most established theories have been developed and tested in the adult population, which is characterized by relatively robust and stable sensorimotor and cognitive abilities, we deem it questionable whether embodied cognition effects found in this population are representative for different life stages such as childhood or the elderly. In contrast to adulthood, childhood is accompanied by a rapid increase of sensorimotor and cognitive skills, and the old age by a decline of such capacities. Hence, sensorimotor and cognitive capacities, as well as their interactions, are more fragile at both extremes of the lifespan, thereby offering a unique window into the emergence of embodied cognition effects and age-related differences therein. A lifespan approach promises to make a major contribution toward a unifying and comprehensive theory of embodied cognition that is valid across the lifespan and ‘gets better with age.’
Temporal and spatial representations are not independent of each other. Two conflicting theories provide alternative hypotheses concerning the specific interrelations between temporal and spatial representations. The asymmetry hypothesis (based on the conceptual metaphor theory, Lakoff and Johnson, 1980) predicts that temporal and spatial representations are asymmetrically interrelated such that spatial representations have a stronger impact on temporal representations than vice versa. In contrast, the symmetry hypothesis (based on a theory of magnitude, Walsh, 2003) predicts that temporal and spatial representations are symmetrically interrelated. Both theoretical approaches have received empirical support. From an embodied cognition perspective, we argue that taking sensorimotor processes into account may be a promising steppingstone to explain the contradictory findings. Notably, different modalities are differently sensitive to the processing of time and space. For instance, auditory information processing is more sensitive to temporal than spatial information, whereas visual information processing is more sensitive to spatial than temporal information. Consequently, we hypothesized that different sensorimotor tasks addressing different modalities may account for the contradictory findings. To test this, we critically reviewed relevant literature to examine which modalities were addressed in time-space mapping studies. Results indicate that the majority of the studies supporting the asymmetry hypothesis applied visual tasks for both temporal and spatial representations. Studies supporting the symmetry hypothesis applied mainly auditory tasks for the temporal domain, but visual tasks for the spatial domain. We conclude that the use of different tasks addressing different modalities may be the primary reason for (a)symmetric effects of space on time, instead of a genuine (a)symmetric mapping.
Embodied cognition posits that abstract conceptual knowledge such as mental representations of time and space are at least partially grounded in sensorimotor experiences. If true, then the execution of whole-body movements should result in modulations of temporal and spatial reference frames. To scrutinize this hypothesis, in two experiments participants either walked forward, backward or stood on a treadmill and responded either to an ambiguous temporal question (Experiment 1) or an ambiguous spatial question (Experiment 2) at the end of the walking manipulation. Results confirmed the ambiguousness of the questions in the control condition. Nevertheless, despite large power, walking forward or backward did not influence the answers or response times to the temporal (Experiment 1) or spatial (Experiment 2) question. A follow-up Experiment 3 indicated that this is also true for walking actively (or passively) in free space (as opposed to a treadmill). We explore possible reasons for the null-finding as concerns the modulation of temporal and spatial reference frames by movements and we critically discuss the methodological and theoretical implications.
Embodied cognition frameworks suggest a direct link between sensorimotor experience and cognitive representations of concepts ( Shapiro, 2011 ). We examined whether this holds also true for concepts that cannot be directly perceived with the sensorimotor system (i.e., temporal concepts). To test this, participants learned object-space (Exp. 1) or object-time (Exp. 2) associations. Afterwards, participants were asked to assign the objects to their location in space/time meanwhile they walked backward, forward, or stood on a treadmill. We hypothesized that walking backward should facilitate the online processing of "behind"/"past"-related stimuli, but hinder the processing of "ahead"/"future"-related stimuli, and a reversed effect for forward walking. Indeed, "ahead"- and "future"-related stimuli were processed slower during backward walking. During forward walking and standing, stimuli were processed equally fast. The results provide partial evidence for the activation of specific spatial and temporal concepts by whole-body movements and are discussed in the context of movement familiarity.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.