Embodied spatial transformations: "Body analogy" for the mental rotation of objects.

Abstract

The cognitive advantage of imagined spatial transformations of the human body over that of more unfamiliar objects (e.g., Shepard-Metzler [S-M] cubes) is an issue for validating motor theories of visual perception. In 6 experiments, the authors show that providing S-M cubes with body characteristics (e.g., by adding a head to S-M cubes to evoke a posture) facilitates the mapping of the cognitive coordinate system of one's body onto the abstract shape. In turn, this spatial embodiment improves object shape matching. Thanks to the increased cohesiveness of human posture in people's body schema, imagined transformations of the body operate in a less piecemeal fashion as compared with objects (S-M cubes or swing-arm desk lamps) under a similar spatial configuration, provided that the pose can be embodied. If the pose cannot be emulated (covert imitation) by the sensorimotor system, the facilitation due to motoric embodiment will also be disrupted.

Imagined own-body transformations during passive self-motion

“…Whereas previous studies have highlighted the role of integrating motor signals and proprioceptive information (Amorim et al, 2006;Creem-Regehr, Neil, & Yeh, 2007;Keehner, Guerin, Miller, Turk, & Hegarty, 2006;Kessler & Thomson, 2010;Parsons, 1987;Vogeley et al, 2004;Wraga, 2003;Zacks & Michelon, 2005), this study underlines the central importance of vestibular information for embodied perspective taking. These signals may be of particular importance for mental imagery with respect to one's entire body as opposed to imagery for body parts (Parsons, 1987) where motor and proprioceptive mechanisms may predominate.…”

“…Based on previous studies, showing effects of galvanic and caloric vestibular stimulation on the mental rotation of objects and bodily stimuli (Falconer & Mast, 2012;Lenggenhager et al, 2008), in the present study we hypothesized that spatial perspective taking would be facilitated if the implied direction of the mental body rotation was the same as the actual passive own-body rotation. Such a finding would extend previous studies showing facilitatory effects of one's own body posture on spatial perspective taking (Amorim et al, 2006;Kessler & Thomson, 2010) to the domain of vestibular processing.…”

“…More specifically, it has been proposed that spatial perspective taking involves a process of endogenous motor embodiment, in which a self-initiated emulation of a body movement is used to adopt the imposed perspective (Arzy, Thut, Mohr, Michel, & Blanke, 2006;Kessler & Thomson, 2010). This view is supported by the finding that imagined own-body transformation is modulated by one's current body posture (Amorim, Isableu, & Jarraya, 2006;Kessler & Thomson, 2010). For instance, Kessler & Thomson (2010) asked participants to perform a spatial perspective taking task while their body posture could be congruent or incongruent with respect to the imposed perspective.…”

Mental Rotation with Egocentric and Object-Based Transformations

“…Essentially, asking people whether they are looking at a left or right hand allows them to refer directly to their body, and this seems to facilitate the task compared to a sameness judgment as has been supported by a large body of studies (e.g., Amorim et al, 2006;Jansen, Lehmann, & van Doren, 2012;Kosslyn, Digirolamo, Thompson, & Alpert, 1998;Wraga, Thompson, Alpert, & Kosslyn, 2003). The findings of Experiment 2 are particularly interesting in that the hands we used offered very few features (see Figure 5) as only finger length could be used as a cue to whether the hand was palm up or down.…”

Perceiving conspecifics as integrated body-gestalts is an embodied process.

“…Movement-or motor-resonance was investigated predominantly in the context of the so-called mirror system, typically using imitation or observation tasks that showed limbs in isolation (Bertenthal & Pinto, 1994;Biermann-Ruben et al, 2008; Embodied Body-Gestalt Completion; Kessler & Miellet 4 Wohlschlager, & Prinz, 2000;Catmur, Walsh, & Heyes, 2007;Iacoboni et al, 1999;Jonas et al, 2007;Kessler et al, 2006;Rizzolatti & Fabbri-Destro, 2010). In contrast, other research has emphasised the importance of the overall posture or gestalt perceived in conspecifics (Amorim, Isableu, & Jarraya, 2006;Johansson, 1973;Kessler, Gordon, Cessford, & Lages, 2010;Kessler & Thomson, 2010;Lestou, Pollick, & Kourtzi, 2008;McKay et al, 2011;Meltzoff & Moore, 1994;Reed & Farah, 1995;Saygin, 2007). Returning to our initial example of people being occluded by a table and a newspaper in a café, we set out to investigate whether the body schema -as the likely substrate of motor-and posture-resonance (e.g.…”