Publications

Abstract

Gestures express redundant or complementary information to speech they accompany by depicting visual and spatial features of referents. In doing so, they recruit both spatial and verbal cognitive resources that underpin the processing of visual semantic information and its integration with speech. The relation between spatial and verbal skills and gesture comprehension, where gestures may serve different roles in relation to speech is yet to be explored. This study examined the role of spatial and verbal skills in processing gestures that expressed redundant or complementary information to speech during the comprehension of spatial relations between objects. Turkish-speaking adults (N=74) watched videos describing the spatial location of objects that involved perspective-taking (left-right) or not (on-under) with speech and gesture. Gestures either conveyed redundant information to speech (e.g., saying and gesturing “left”) or complemented the accompanying demonstrative in speech (e.g., saying “here,” gesturing “left”). We also measured participants’ spatial (the Corsi block span and the mental rotation tasks) and verbal skills (the digit span task). Our results revealed nuanced interactions between these skills and spatial language comprehension, depending on the modality in which the information was expressed. One insight emerged prominently. Spatial skills, particularly spatial working memory capacity, were related to enhanced comprehension of visual semantic information conveyed through gestures especially when this information was not present in the accompanying speech. This study highlights the critical role of spatial working memory in gesture processing and underscores the importance of examining the interplay among cognitive and contextual factors to understand the complex dynamics of multimodal language.

Abstract

In spoken languages, children acquire locative terms in a cross-linguistically stable order. Terms similar in meaning to in and on emerge earlier than those similar to front and behind, followed by left and right. This order has been attributed to the complexity of the relations expressed by different locative terms. An additional possibility is that children may be delayed in expressing certain spatial meanings partly due to difficulties in discovering the mappings between locative terms in speech and spatial relation they express. We investigate cognitive and mapping difficulties in the domain of spatial language by comparing how children map spatial meanings onto speech versus visually motivated forms in co-speech gesture across different spatial relations. Twenty-four 8-year-old and 23 adult native Turkish-speakers described four-picture displays where the target picture depicted in-on, front-behind, or left-right relations between objects. As the complexity of spatial relations increased, children were more likely to rely on gestures as opposed to speech to informatively express the spatial relation. Adults overwhelmingly relied on speech to informatively express the spatial relation, and this did not change across the complexity of spatial relations. Nevertheless, even when spatial expressions in both speech and co-speech gesture were considered, children lagged behind adults when expressing the most complex left-right relations. These findings suggest that cognitive development and mapping difficulties introduced by the modality of expressions interact in shaping the development of spatial language.

Abstract

Several studies indicate that both posterior superior temporal sulcus/middle temporal gyrus (pSTS/MTG) and left inferior frontal gyrus (LIFG) are involved in integrating information from different modalities. Here we investigated the respective roles of these two areas in integration of action and language information. We exploited the fact that the semantic relationship between language and different forms of action (i.e. co-speech gestures and pantomimes) is radically different. Speech and co-speech gestures are always produced together, and gestures are not unambiguously understood without speech. On the contrary, pantomimes are not necessarily produced together with speech and can be easily understood without speech. We presented speech together with these two types of communicative hand actions in matching or mismatching combinations to manipulate semantic integration load. Left and right pSTS/MTG were only involved in semantic integration of speech and pantomimes. Left IFG on the other hand was involved in integration of speech and co-speech gestures as well as of speech and pantomimes. Effective connectivity analyses showed that depending upon the semantic relationship between language and action, LIFG modulates activation levels in left pSTS.

This suggests that integration in pSTS/MTG involves the matching of two input streams for which there is a relatively stable common object representation, whereas integration in LIFG is better characterized as the on-line construction of a new and unified representation of the input streams. In conclusion, pSTS/MTG and LIFG are differentially involved in multimodal integration, crucially depending upon the semantic relationship between the input streams.