A pre-registered, multi-lab non-replication of the action-sentence compatibility effect (ACE)

Morey, Richard D.; Kaschak, Michael P.; Díez-Álamo, Antonio M.; Glenberg, Arthur M.; Zwaan, Rolf A.; Lakens, Daniël; Ibáñez, Agustín; García, Adolfo M.; Gianelli, Claudia; Jones, John L.; Madden, Julie; Alifano, Florencia; Bergen, Benjamin; Bloxsom, Nicholas G.; Bub, Daniel N.; Cai, Zhenguang G.; Chartier, Christopher R.; Chatterjee, Anjan; Conwell, Erin; Cook, Susan Wagner; Davis, Joshua D.; Evers, Ellen; Girard, Sandrine; Harter, Derek; Hartung, Franziska; Herrera, Eduar; Huettig, Falk; Humphries, Stacey; Juanchich, Marie; Kühne, Katharina; Lu, Shulan; Lynes, Tom; Masson, Michael E. J.; Ostarek, Markus; Pessers, Sebastiaan; Reglin, Rebecca; Steegen, Sara; Thiessen, Erik D.; Thomas, Laura E.; Trott, Sean; Vandekerckhove, Joachim; Vanpaemel, Wolf; Vlachou, Maria; Williams, Kristina; Ziv-Crispel, Noam

doi:10.3758/s13423-021-01927-8

Cited by 84 publications

(45 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To create the two shape conditions (match/mismatch), each one of the sentences in each pair was matched with the two pictures depicting the verbally described object in two different 1 The SPV task (Zwaan et al, 2002) was chosen because, as opposed to other simulation-inducing paradigms (e.g., Morey et al, 2021), this paradigm has been wellestablished in terms of producing the visual shape effect in the L1. Indeed, this effect has been replicated in numerous L1 studies (e.g., De Koning, Wassenburg, Bos & van der Schoot, 2017b;Engelen, Bouwmeester, De Bruin & Zwaan, 2011;Hirschfeld, Zwitserlood & Dobel, 2011), including studies examining L1-Hebrew (Peleg et al, 2018) and L1-English (e.g., Zwaan & Madden, 2006;Zwaan & Pecher, 2012), the two languages that were tested in the current study, ruling out the possibility that the shape effect would be modulated by the specific language (Hebrew/English) rather than by the nativeness of language (L1/L2) as was intended.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Growing up, they keep using their native language and experiencing the world simultaneously and constantly, and thus, their neural networks associated with L1 processing and those associated with the processing of real-life experiences become strongly linked over time. Therefore, as mentioned above, L1 users routinely simulate perceptual (e.g., Brunyé, Ditman, Mahoney, Walters & Taylor, 2010; Zwaan et al, 2002), motor (e.g., Glenberg & Kaschak, 2002; Myung, Blumstein & Sedivy, 2006; Scorolli & Borghi, 2007), and affective (e.g., Havas, Glenberg & Rinck, 2007; Niedenthal, Winkielman, Mondillon & Vermeulen, 2009) knowledge during language comprehension (but see Bedny & Caramazza, 2011; and Mahon, 2015, for an alternative view; and also Morey, Kaschak, Díez-Álamo, Glenberg, Zwaan, Lakens, Ibáñez, García, Gianelli, Jones, Madden, Alifano, Bergen, Bloxsom, Bub, Cai, Chartier, Chatterjee, Conwell, Cook, Davis, Evers, Girard, Harter, Hartung, Herrera, Huettig, Humphries, Juanchich, Kühne, Lu, Lynes, Masson, Ostarek, Pessers, Reglin, Steegen, Thiessen, Thomas, Trott, Vandekerckhove, Vanpaemel, Vlachou, Williams & Ziv-Crispel, 2021, for a failure to replicate the action-sentence compatibility effect first reported by Glenberg & Kaschak, 2002).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The reduced embodiment of a second language

Norman

Peleg

2021

Bilingualism

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Substantial evidence indicates that first language (L1) comprehension involves embodied visual simulations. The present study tested the assumption that a formally learned second language (L2), which is less related to real-life experiences, is processed in a less embodied manner relative to a naturally acquired L1. To this end, bilingual participants completed the same task in their L1 and L2. In the task, they read sentences and decided immediately after each sentence whether a pictured object had been mentioned in the preceding sentence. Responses were significantly faster when the shape of the object in the picture matched rather than mismatched the sentence-implied shape, but only in the L1, and only when the L1 block was performed before the L2 block. These findings suggest that embodied visual simulations are reduced in a formally learned L2 and may be subjected to cross-language influences.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The reduced embodiment of a second language

Norman

Peleg

2021

Bilingualism

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, many studies failed to find such effects or found only tiny ones. Moreover, the direction of these effects was often unpredictable (e.g., Estes & Barsalou, 2018;Morey et al, 2021;Shebani & Pulvermüller, 2018). With substantial evidence that sensory and motor simulations contribute to language processing, research questions are now shifting to how these embodied effects translate to situated, real-world language processing and comprehension (e.g., Barsalou, 2019;García & Ibáñez, 2016a;Hasson, Egidi, Marelli, & Willems, 2018).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ecological meanings: A consensus paper on individual differences and contextual influences in embodied language

Ibáñez¹,

Kühne²,

Miklashevsky³

et al. 2022

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Embodied theories of cognition consider many aspects of language and other cognitive domains as the result of sensory and motor processes. In this view, the appraisal and the use of concepts are based on mechanisms of simulation grounded on prior sensorimotor experiences. Even though these theories continue receiving attention and support, increasing evidence indicates the need to consider the flexible nature of the simulation process, and to accordingly refine embodied accounts. In this consensus paper, we discuss two potential sources of variability in experimental studies on embodiment of language: individual differences and context. Specifically, we show how factors contributing to individual differences may explain inconsistent findings in embodied language phenomena. These factors include sensorimotor or cultural experiences, imagery, context-related factors, and cognitive strategies. We also analyze the different contextual modulations, from single words to sentences and narratives, as well as the top-down and bottom-up influences. Similarly, we review recent efforts to include cultural and language diversity, aging, neurodegenerative diseases, and brain disorders, as well as bilingual evidence into the embodiment framework. We address the importance of considering individual differences and context in clinical studies to drive translational research more efficiently, and we indicate recommendations on how to correctly address these issues in future research. Systematically investigating individual differences and context may contribute to understanding the dynamic nature of simulation in language processes, refining embodied theories of cognition, and ultimately filling the gap between cognition in artificial experimental settings and cognition in the wild (i.e., in everyday life).

show abstract

“…Psychology is finally finding black swans. A number of prominent theories have been called into question including ego depletion [22], the action-sentence compatibility effect [23], frontal asymmetry as a marker for depression [24], the growth mindset [25], and various priming effects [26,27]. In the absence of these refutations, progress in psychology was stagnant as researchers considered these (incorrect) theories as proven.…”

Section: Why Losing Is Better Than Winning (In Science)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Psychology needs to get tired of winning

Haeffel

2022

R. Soc. open sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Psychological science is on an extraordinary winning streak. A review of the published literature shows that nearly all study hypotheses are supported. This means that either all the theories are correct, or the literature is biased towards positive findings. Results from large-scale replication projects and the prevalence of questionable research practices indicate the latter. This is a problem because science progresses from being wrong. For decades, there have been calls for better theories and the adoption of a strong inference approach to science. However, there is little reason to believe that psychological science is ready to change. Although recent developments like the open science movement have improved transparency and replicability, they have not addressed psychological science's method-oriented (rather than problem-oriented) mindset. Psychological science still does not embrace the scientific method of developing theories, conducting critical tests of those theories, detecting contradictory results, and revising (or disposing of) the theories accordingly. In this article, I review why psychologists must embrace being wrong and how the Registered Report format might be one strategy for stopping psychology's winning streak.

show abstract

A pre-registered, multi-lab non-replication of the action-sentence compatibility effect (ACE)

Cited by 84 publications

References 34 publications

The reduced embodiment of a second language

The reduced embodiment of a second language

Ecological meanings: A consensus paper on individual differences and contextual influences in embodied language

Psychology needs to get tired of winning

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About