Linguistic negation acts by inhibiting the representation of information under its scope, often leading to the representation of positive alternative states of affairs. Motivational direction refers to approach/avoidance intentionality in our interactions with environmental stimuli expressed by means of verbs (e.g., "accept" vs "reject"). We consider it plausible that negation interacts with direction to represent the true motivation of the protagonist in sentence understanding (e.g., if an approach action is negated it is represented as avoidance). In the first study, we examine this interaction offline by asking participants to judge approach or avoidance meaning of affirmative (e.g., "he/she included/excluded meat") and negative sentences ("he/she did not include/exclude meat"). Results support that negation reversed participants' interpretation of sentence motivational direction. In a further study, we carried out two probe recognition experiments to examine the interaction during sentence comprehension; in both, the critical probe was the word referring to the target of the action (e.g., "meat"). In the first experiment, participants had to recognize the probe word presented 1500 milliseconds after sentence offset, while for the second one, the delay was 500 milliseconds. Results showed that at 1500 ms, target recognition took significantly more time for negated avoidance sentences than for the other conditions. Therefore, representing negated avoidance sentences seems to imply more complex processing, as avoidance verbs would be implicitly negative. By contrast, at the 500 ms delay, negation impaired target recognition for both approach and avoidance sentences, suggesting an unspecific inhibitory effect of negation at that sentence processing stage. Implication of these results for both research on negation and in action understanding are discussed.

We examine the effect of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) of right superior temporal sulcus (rSTS) in memorization of approach/avoidance relationship-action sentences; for example, “Alejandro accepted/rejected Marta in his group.” Sixty-five university students participated in a tDCS study, in which a between-subjects design was adopted. Sixty-four participants were also given the behavioral approach system (BAS) and behavioral inhibition system (BIS) scales. Participants were subjected to 20 min of stimulation: anodal (N = 24), cathodal (N = 21), or sham (N = 20); subsequently, they were given a list of 40 sentences (half approach and half avoidance) and told to try to memorize them. Finally, they performed a changed/same memory task (half the sentences were the “same” and half were “changed”). Previously, we had examined performance in the memory task without tDCS with another group of participants (N = 20). We found that anodal stimulation improved d’ index of discriminability (hits-false alarms) compared to sham and cathodal conditions for both approach and avoidance sentences. Moreover, the comparison between anodal and task-alone performance showed that stimulation improved d’ index of approach sentences more, as task-alone performance showed better discrimination for avoidance than for approach. Likewise, we explored a potential modulation of tDCS effect by (BAS) and (BIS) traits. We found that d’ index improvement in anodal stimulation condition only benefited low BAS and low BIS participants. Implications of these results are discussed in the context of rSTS function in encoding and memorizing verbally described intentional relationship-actions and the role of individual differences on modulating tDCS effect.

Human brains encode approach in social relationships as cognitively relevant for adaptive behavior. In this study, using event-related potentials (ERPs), we found that reading approach-social actions are likely to cause activation around the right anterior/middle superior temporal sulcus (STS), a brain area particularly involved in processing action intentionality and social relationships. We consider that the human capacity for the mental rotation of figures could also be adaptive for social relationships at the service of planning interaction with other bodies in social encounters. Encoding of social approach and spatial ability would correlate if both capacities are aimed at achieving the adaptive goal of secure interactions with others. We found a strong correlation between brain activation in the right temporal brain region and spatial ability. Implications of these results for the psychological mechanisms involved in adaptive social behavior are discussed.

In this case, 62 university students participated in the study, in which a between-subjects design was adopted. Participants were also given the behavioral approach system (BAS) and behavioral inhibition system (BIS) scales. Participants had to read a list of 60 sentences with interpersonal and neutral content: 20 approach (“Pedro accepted Rosa in Whatsapp”), 20 avoidance (“Pedro Blocked Rosa in Whatsapp”) and 20 neutral (“Marta thought about the causes of the problem”). After reading them, they were subjected to 20 min of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) in one of the two conditions: anodal (31) or sham (31). After tDCS, they had to read other list of 60 sentences matched in approach, avoidance and neutral contents with the former list. We found significant improvement in reading speed after anodal stimulation for social and neutral sentences. Regarding affective traits, we found that anodal stimulation benefitted reading speed in low-BIS and low-BAS participants and had no effect in either high BAS or high BIS participants. In addition, tDCS improvement in reading speed was significantly lower in avoidance sentences in low-BIS (avoidance) participants. We discuss these results at the light of previous research and highlight the importance of approach and avoidance traits as moderators of tDCS effects.

No abstract

Motivational congruency has been examined using tasks where participants perform approach or avoidance movements towards socially positive or negative faces. Language is tightly intertwined with interpersonal cognition. Thus, similar situations could be represented by means of language in interpersonal contexts: adjectives furnish valence to people (e.g. someone is cordial or arrogant), and attitudinal verbs define direction to relationship-actions: approach–avoidance (e.g. accept vs. reject). In an Electroencephalography (EEG) study, 40 participants were presented with sentences where a character was valenced (e.g. “Arthur is cordial/arrogant”) before being the target of a relationship-actions (“Grisela welcomed/ignored Arthur at the party”). We analyzed both Event-related potential (ERP) amplitude and time–frequency power in response to the attitudinal verb. For ERP amplitudes, we found a significant cluster between 280 and 370 ms, covering part of the development of a N400-like ERP component. This cluster reflects an interaction driven by congruency between motivational direction and target valence. Likewise, time–frequency power analysis revealed an enhancement of theta rhythms under incongruent conditions, most likely indexing conflict processing. Results support that relationship-actions are represented as approach and avoidance and thus involve conflict processing and resolution of incongruent situations. Implications for the interweaving of affective language and social cognition within Embodiment Simulation Theory are discussed.

Approach and avoidance have been incorporated into language by means of attitudinal verbs; for example, “Pedro admitted/blocked Rosa in WhatsApp.” Representation of attitudes in language would reuse previous motor reactions associated with individuals’ approach (forward) and avoidance (backward) towards stimuli. We examine the modulation of reading relationship-action sentences in the execution of concurrent motor actions. We manipulated the delay between the sentence display and the visual prompt for motor response: 300 ms and 800 ms. If approach-avoidance verbs recruit motor representations, sentence reading will modulate the execution of the motor action. We found that sentence interfered with motor action at 300 ms delay while facilitated it at 800 ms delay in congruent conditions: approach-forward and avoidance-backward. This result supports that sentence understanding and motor action execution share motor processes. Implications are discussed for embodiment of social cognition in the ambit of relationship actions and their interwoven with language to facilitate social navigation.