Grounded Spatial Belief Revision

Beliefs frequently undergo revisions, especially when new pieces of information are true but inconsistent with current beliefs. In previous studies, we showed that linguistic asymmetries provided by relational statements, play a crucial role in spatial belief revision. Located objects (LO) are preferably revised compared to reference objects (RO), known as the LO-principle. Here we establish a connection between spatial belief revision and grounded cognition. In three experiments, we explored whether imagined physical object properties influence which object is relocated and which remains at its initial position. Participants mentally revised beliefs about the arrangements of objects which could be envisaged as light and heavy (Experiment 1), small and large (Experiment 2), or movable and immovable (Experiment 3). The results show that intrinsic object properties are differently taken into account during spatial belief revision. Object weight did not alter the LO-principle (Experiment 1), whereas object size was found to influence which object was preferably relocated (Experiment 2). Object movability did not affect relocation preferences but had an effect on relocation durations (Experiment 3). The findings support the simulation hypothesis within the grounded cognition approach and create new connections between the spatial mental model theory of reasoning and the idea of grounded cognition.

[1]  R. Revlin,et al.  Reasoning counterfactually: Combining and rending , 2001, Memory & cognition.

[2]  John R. Anderson,et al.  Rules of the Mind , 1993 .

[3]  M. Arbib,et al.  Language within our grasp , 1998, Trends in Neurosciences.

[4]  Lance J. Rips,et al.  Reasoning : studies of human inference and its foundations , 2008 .

[5]  Rolf A. Zwaan,et al.  Motor resonance as a function of narrative time: Further tests of the linguistic focus hypothesis , 2010, Brain and Language.

[6]  Qin Zhu,et al.  Learning to perceive the affordance for long-distance throwing: smart mechanism or function learning? , 2010, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[7]  G. Logan.  Linguistic and Conceptual Control of Visual Spatial Attention , 1995, Cognitive Psychology.

[8]  J. Flanagan,et al.  Independence of perceptual and sensorimotor predictions in the size–weight illusion , 2000, Nature Neuroscience.

[9]  J. Fodor,et al.  The Language of Thought , 1980 .

[10]  Benjamin K. Bergen,et al.  Embodied Construction Grammar in Simulation-Based Language Understanding , 2003 .

[11]  Mark Johnson,et al.  The Metaphorical Structure of the Human Conceptual System , 1980, Cogn. Sci..

[12]  G. d'Ydewalle,et al.  Initial belief state as a predictor of belief revision , 2000 .

[13]  Philip N. Johnson-Laird,et al.  The Effect of an Irrelevant Premise on Temporal and Spatial Reasoning , 1998, Kognitionswissenschaft.

[14]  L. Barsalou,et al.  Whither structured representation? , 1999, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[15]  Jeanine K. Stefanucci,et al.  The Role of Effort in Perceiving Distance , 2003, Psychological science.

[16]  John R. Anderson.  A Spreading Activation Theory of Memory , 1988 .

[17]  M. Knauff,et al.  The construction of spatial mental models—A new view on the continuity effect , 2015, Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[18]  Markus Knauff,et al.  Spatial Reasoning in Native Speakers of Russian and German , 2013, CogSci.

[19]  A. Glenberg,et al.  What memory is for: Creating meaning in the service of action , 1997, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[20]  Markus Knauff,et al.  The effects of source trustworthiness and inference type on human belief revision , 2012 .

[21]  Lawrence W. Barsalou,et al.  Language and simulation in conceptual processing , 2008 .

[22]  R. Ilmoniemi,et al.  Functional links between motor and language systems , 2005, The European journal of neuroscience.

[23]  Brian MacWhinney,et al.  Grounding Cognition: The Emergence of Grammar from Perspective , 2005 .

[24]  P. Johnson-Laird.  Mental models , 1989 .

[25]  Brice Isableu,et al.  Embodied spatial transformations: "body analogy" for the mental rotation of objects. , 2006, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[26]  Allen Newell,et al.  Deduction as verbal reasoning. , 1995 .

[27]  E. Stern,et al.  Linguistic threat activates the human amygdala. , 1999, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[28]  André Vandierendonck,et al.  Mental model construction in linear reasoning: Evidence for the construction of initial annotated models , 2004, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[29]  Lera Boroditsky,et al.  Are things that are hard to physically move also hard to imagine moving? , 2011, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[30]  Kai Hamburger,et al.  Belief revision and way-finding , 2013, Cognitive Processing.

[31]  Roel M. Willems,et al.  Body-specific representations of action verbs: Neural evidence from right- and left-handers , 2009, NeuroImage.

[32]  Nicholas A. Giudice,et al.  Evidence for Amodal Representations after Bimodal Learning: Integration of Haptic-Visual Layouts into a Common Spatial Image , 2009, Spatial Cogn. Comput..

[33]  R. Shepard,et al.  Mental Rotation of Three-Dimensional Objects , 1971, Science.

[34]  Markus Knauff,et al.  Plausibility and Visualizability in Relational Belief Revision , 2013, CogSci.

[35]  Markus Knauff,et al.  The cognitive adequacy of Allen's interval calculus for qualitative spatial representation and reasoning , 1999, Spatial Cogn. Comput..

[36]  H. H. Clark,et al.  Influence of language on solving three-term series problems. , 1969, Journal of experimental psychology.

[37]  Arthur M. Glenberg,et al.  Indexical understanding of instructions , 1999 .

[38]  Jodie A. Baird,et al.  Who is being deceived? The experimental demands of wearing a backpack , 2009, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[39]  Klaus Oberauer,et al.  Two principles of premise integration in spatial reasoning , 2005, Memory & cognition.

[40]  P. Johnson-Laird,et al.  Mental Models: Towards a Cognitive Science of Language, Inference, and Consciousness , 1985 .

[41]  P. Johnson-Laird,et al.  Reasoning from inconsistency to consistency. , 2004, Psychological review.

[42]  Marios N. Avraamides,et al.  Flexible spatial perspective-taking: conversational partners weigh multiple cues in collaborative tasks , 2013, Front. Hum. Neurosci..

[43]  Rolf A. Zwaan,et al.  Revisiting Mental Simulation in Language Comprehension: Six Replication Attempts , 2012, PloS one.

[44]  A. Glenberg,et al.  Reflecting on the debate , 2008 .

[45]  Linda B. Smith.  Cognition as a dynamic system: Principles from embodiment , 2005 .

[46]  Mike Rinck,et al.  Goal-Based Accessibility Of Entities Within Situation Models , 2003 .

[47]  Rolf A. Zwaan,et al.  PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE Research Article THE EFFECT OF IMPLIED ORIENTATION DERIVED FROM VERBAL CONTEXT ON PICTURE RECOGNITION , 2022 .

[48]  Markus Knauff,et al.  Cognitive processes underlying spatial belief revision , 2011, CogSci.

[49]  Janet Metcalfe,et al.  From the Revolution to Embodiment , 2013, Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science.

[50]  D. Proffitt,et al.  Visual-motor recalibration in geographical slant perception. , 1999, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[51]  L. Barsalou,et al.  Verifying Different-Modality Properties for Concepts Produces Switching Costs , 2003, Psychological science.

[52]  Merideth Leigh Gattis,et al.  Spatial schemas and abstract thought , 2001 .

[53]  Bernhard Nebel,et al.  A model for relational reasoning as verbal reasoning , 2011, Cognitive Systems Research.

[54]  Thora Tenbrink,et al.  Spatial Strategies in the Description of Complex Configurations , 2011 .

[55]  Leandra Bucher,et al.  Relocating Multiple Objects during Spatial Belief Revision , 2012, Spatial Cognition.

[56]  G. Miller,et al.  Language and Perception , 1976 .

[57]  Leonard Talmy,et al.  How Language Structures Space , 1983 .

[58]  T. Matlock.  Fictive motion as cognitive simulation , 2004, Memory & cognition.

[59]  Teenie Matlock,et al.  The integration of figurative language and static depictions: An eye movement study of fictive motion , 2007, Cognition.

[60]  Jaeho Shim,et al.  Estimation of Lifted Weight and Produced Effort through Perception of Point-Light Display , 2004, Perception.

[61]  P. Johnson-Laird.  How We Reason , 2006 .

[62]  L. Rips.  The Psychology of Proof , 1994 .

[63]  Markus Knauff,et al.  Cognitive processes underlying the continuity effect in spatial reasoning , 2011, CogSci.

[64]  Gerhard Strube,et al.  Abstract Introduction and Related Work , 2022 .

[65]  Michael P. Kaschak,et al.  Grounding language in action , 2002, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[66]  Irene P. Kan,et al.  ROLE OF MENTAL IMAGERY IN A PROPERTY VERIFICATION TASK: FMRI EVIDENCE FOR PERCEPTUAL REPRESENTATIONS OF CONCEPTUAL KNOWLEDGE , 2003, Cognitive neuropsychology.

[67]  D. Proffitt.  Embodied Perception and the Economy of Action , 2006, Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science.

[68]  Alex Martin,et al.  Semantic memory and the brain: structure and processes , 2001, Current Opinion in Neurobiology.

[69]  S. Kosslyn,et al.  Neural foundations of imagery , 2001, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[70]  Christine D. Wilson,et al.  Grounding conceptual knowledge in modality-specific systems , 2003, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[71]  Renée Elio,et al.  Belief Change as Propositional Update , 1997, Cogn. Sci..

[72]  Zenon W. Pylyshyn,et al.  Computation and Cognition: Toward a Foundation for Cognitive Science , 1984 .

[73]  K. Dieussaert,et al.  Reasoning from inconsistency: a field exploration , 2005 .

[74]  Markus Knauff,et al.  Spatial belief revision , 2013 .

[75]  Martin J. Pickering,et al.  Perspective taking in language: integrating the spatial and action domains , 2013, Front. Hum. Neurosci..

[76]  Jean-Baptiste Van der Henst.  Mental model theory versus the inference rule approach in relational reasoning , 2002 .

[77]  J. Hayes,et al.  The importance of universal quantifiers in a hypothetical reasoning task , 1971 .

[78]  G. Logan.  Spatial attention and the apprehension of spatial relations. , 1994, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[79]  Walter Kintsch,et al.  Toward a model of text comprehension and production. , 1978 .

[80]  L. Barsalou.  Continuing themes in the study of human knowledge: associations, imagery, propositions, and situations. , 2007 .

[81]  Markus Knauff,et al.  Efficiency and Minimal Change in Spatial Belief Revision , 2011, CogSci.

[82]  Cornelius Hagen,et al.  Preferred and Alternative Mental Models in Spatial Reasoning , 2005, Spatial Cogn. Comput..

[83]  M. Knauff,et al.  Preferred mental models in qualitative spatial reasoning: A cognitive assessment of Allen's calculus , 1995 .

[84]  Paul D. Thorn,et al.  Construction and Revision of Spatial Mental Models under High Task Demand , 2014, CogSci.

[85]  Michael P. Kaschak,et al.  Neuroimaging studies of language production and comprehension. , 2003, Annual review of psychology.

[86]  Rolf A. Zwaan.  The Immersed Experiencer: Toward An Embodied Theory Of Language Comprehension , 2003 .

[87]  C. Spence,et al.  The cost of expecting events in the wrong sensory modality , 2001, Perception & psychophysics.

[88]  B. Landau,et al.  “What” and “where” in spatial language and spatial cognition , 1993 .

[89]  F. Pulvermüller,et al.  Words in the brain's language , 1999, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[90]  Michael P. Kaschak,et al.  Constructing Meaning: The Role of Affordances and Grammatical Constructions in Sentence Comprehension , 2000 .

[91]  G. Politzer,et al.  Belief revision and uncertain reasoning , 2001 .

[92]  L. Barsalou.  Grounded cognition. , 2008, Annual review of psychology.

[93]  Markus Knauff,et al.  A Neuro-Cognitive Theory of Deductive Relational Reasoning with Mental Models and Visual Images , 2009, Spatial Cogn. Comput..

[94]  Catharine Abell,et al.  Seeing and Visualizing: It's Not What You Think , 2005 .

[95]  Markus Knauff,et al.  A theory and a computational model of spatial reasoning with preferred mental models. , 2013, Psychological review.

[96]  Friedemann Pulvermüller,et al.  Brain mechanisms linking language and action , 2005, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[97]  A. Vandierendonck,et al.  Working Memory Constraints on Linear Reasoning with Spatial and Temporal Contents , 1997, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[98]  P. Johnson-Laird.  Mental models and deduction , 2001, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[99]  Reasoning to consistency: how people resolve logical inconsistencies , 2000 .

[100]  P N Johnson-Laird,et al.  Reasoning about relations. , 2005, Psychological review.

[101]  Markus Knauff,et al.  How our brains reason logically , 2007 .

[102]  I. Johnsrude,et al.  Somatotopic Representation of Action Words in Human Motor and Premotor Cortex , 2004, Neuron.

[103]  Bernhard Nebel,et al.  A Computational Model for Spatial Reasoning with Mental Models , 2005 .

[104]  María José González Labra,et al.  Mental models in reasoning , 2000 .

[105]  Lawrence W. Barsalou,et al.  Grounded Cognition: Past, Present, and Future , 2010, Top. Cogn. Sci..

[106]  Philip N Johnson-Laird,et al.  INAUGURAL ARTICLE by a Recently Elected Academy Member:Mental models and human reasoning , 2010 .

[107]  Markus Knauff,et al.  Spatial Reasoning as Verbal Reasoning , 2010 .

[108]  P. Johnson-Laird,et al.  How We Detect Logical Inconsistencies , 2004 .

[109]  Diane Pecher,et al.  Sensorimotor simulations underlie conceptual representations: Modality-specific effects of prior activation , 2004, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[110]  O. Wilhelm,et al.  Effects of directionality in deductive reasoning: I. The comprehension of single relational premises. , 2000, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.