Actions speak no louder than words: Symmetrical cross-modal interference effects in the processing of verbal and gestural information.

Five experiments are reported which investigate the distribution of selective attention to verbal and non-verbal components of an utterance when conflicting information exists in these channels. A Stroop-type interference paradigm is adopted in which attributes from the verbal and non-verbal dimensions are placed into conflict. Static directional (deictic) gestures and corresponding spoken and written words show symmetrical interference (Experiments 1, 2 and 3) as do directional arrows and spoken words (Experiment 4). This symmetry is maintained when the task is switched from a manual key press to a verbal naming response (Experiment 5) suggesting the mutual influence of the two dimensions is independent of spatial stimulus response compatibility. It is concluded that the results are consistent with a model of interference where information from pointing gestures and speech are integrated prior to the response selection stage of processing. Cross-Modal Interference 3 In the mid 1980’s a number of authors published work which criticised the widely held view of gestures and other non-verbal behaviours as “body-language”. For instance Rime (1983) and McNeill (1985) challenged the notion, largely established by Argyle (e.g. Argyle, 1975), that gestures form part of a system of body movements which might offer a privileged means of knowing and perceiving one another, a system thought to follow its own laws and transmit affective, cognitive and regulating mechanisms distinct from those carried by any accompanying speech. McNeill’s (1985) article suggested that gestures and speech, far from being psychologically distinct, “share a computational stage; they are, accordingly, parts of the same psychological structure” (p. 350). This prompted rebuttals from Feyereisen (1987) and Butterworth & Hadar (1989) with accompanying replies from McNeill (McNeill, 1987b, 1989). Most seem to agree that gesture production depends, to some extent, on the mechanisms responsible for speech production (see also Rime, 1983; Kendon, 1983). The arguments centred around specifying the locus of the interaction, elaborating McNeill’s conception of inner speech as the shared computational stage. This work represented a shift in emphasis from the social impact of nonverbal behavior to an approach which sought to examine the processes underlying the performance of body movements and, in particular, the relationships between these processes and the structures mediating vocal behavior. However, despite a relatively large amount of research on gesture and speech production, the field of gesture comprehension remains a “neglected field in cognitive psychology” (Feyereisen 1991, p.57). The main aim of this study was to begin to redress this imbalance by studying the comprehension of gestures within an information processing framework. More specifically we ask whether gestures performed concurrently with spoken and written words influence the processing of that verbal signal and reciprocally whether verbal processing modifies the processing of the gestural component of the utterance.

[1]  R. Melara,et al.  Dimensional interaction between color and pitch. , 1989, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[2]  P H Seymour,et al.  Conceptual Encoding and Locus of the Stroop Effect , 1977, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[3]  C. Umilta,et al.  Right-left prevalence in spatial compatibility , 1984, Perception & psychophysics.

[4]  Ronald E. Shor,et al.  The processing of conceptual information on spatial directions from pictorial and linguistic symbols , 1970 .

[5]  H. McGurk,et al.  Hearing lips and seeing voices , 1976, Nature.

[6]  P H Seymour,et al.  Stroop interference with response, comparison, and encoding stages in a sentence-picture comparison task , 1974, Memory & cognition.

[7]  L A Thompson,et al.  Children's integration of speech and pointing gestures in comprehension. , 1994, Journal of experimental child psychology.

[8]  J R Simon,et al.  Processing symbolic information from a visual display: interference from an irrelevant directional cue. , 1970, Journal of experimental psychology.

[9]  R. Melara,et al.  Selective attention to Stroop dimensions: Effects of baseline discriminability, response mode, and practice , 1993, Memory & cognition.

[10]  Brian Butterworth,et al.  Gesture, speech, and computational stages: a reply to McNeill. , 1989 .

[11]  Philip H. K. Seymour,et al.  Stroop interference in naming and verifying spatial locations , 1973 .

[12]  M. Studdert-Kennedy Hand and Mind: What Gestures Reveal About Thought. , 1994 .

[13]  D. McNeill So you think gestures are nonverbal , 1985 .

[14]  J. R. Simon,et al.  Response selection in choice reaction time: Test of a buffer model , 1980, Memory & cognition.

[15]  Bernard Rimé,et al.  Fundamentals of nonverbal behavior , 1991 .

[16]  L. McClain,et al.  Stimulus-response compatibility affects auditory Stroop interference , 1983, Perception & psychophysics.

[17]  M. C. Smith,et al.  Tracing the time course of picture--word processing. , 1980, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[18]  H E Egeth,et al.  Right-left confusion in the adult: A verbal labeling effect , 1981, Memory & cognition.

[19]  W. Gill Woodall,et al.  Nonverbal cue context and episodic memory: On the availability and endurance of nonverbal behaviors as retrieval cues , 1985 .

[20]  Carlo Umilta,et al.  Responding with hand and foot: The right/left prevalence in spatial compatibility is still present , 1985, Perception & psychophysics.

[21]  B. Butterworth,et al.  Gesture, speech, and computational stages: a reply to McNeill. , 1989, Psychological review.

[22]  N Morris,et al.  Characteristics of visual interference with visuospatial working memory. , 1994, British journal of psychology.

[23]  The fallacy of the cross-modal Stroop effect: A rejoinder to Cowan (1989) , 1989 .

[24]  J. Richard Simon,et al.  Effect of an auditory stimulus on the processing of a visual stimulus under single- and dual-tasks conditions , 1982 .

[25]  J. Morton,et al.  Categories of interference: verbal mediation and conflict in card sorting. , 1969, British journal of psychology.

[26]  K. Heilman,et al.  Pantomime agnosia. , 1986, Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry.

[27]  David McNeill,et al.  So you do think gestures are nonverbalp Reply to Feyereisen (1987). , 1987 .

[28]  J R Simon,et al.  Effect of Compatibility of S-R Mapping on Reactions toward the Stimulus Source , 1979, Acta psychologica.

[29]  J. R. Pomerantz Global and local precedence: selective attention in form and motion perception. , 1983, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[30]  G. Hammond,et al.  Mutual interactions between speech and finger movements. , 1987, Journal of motor behavior.

[31]  Simon Heywood,et al.  The effects of elimination of hand gestures and of verbal codability on speech performance , 1975 .

[32]  W. R. Garner,et al.  Integrality of stimulus dimensions in various types of information processing , 1970 .

[33]  Effects of motor and verbal practice on the Stroop task. , 1980, Perceptual and motor skills.

[34]  W. Glaser,et al.  Context effects in stroop-like word and picture processing. , 1989, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[35]  G. Logan Attention and automaticity in Stroop and priming tasks: Theory and data , 1980, Cognitive Psychology.

[36]  D. McNeill Psycholinguistics: A New Approach , 1987 .

[37]  Colin M. Macleod,et al.  American Psychological Association, Inc. A Horse Race of a Different Color: Stroop Interference Patterns With Transformed Words v , 2022 .

[38]  Margaret Gwendoline Riseborough,et al.  Physiographic gestures as decoding facilitators: Three experiments exploring a neglected facet of communication , 1981 .

[39]  L. Jacoby,et al.  Stroop process dissociations: the relationship between facilitation and interference. , 1994, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[40]  M. Corballis,et al.  The Psychology of Left and Right , 2020 .

[41]  R. Shor,et al.  Symbol Processing Speed Differences and Symbol Interference Effects in a Variety of Concept Domains. , 1971, The Journal of general psychology.

[42]  Colin M. Macleod Half a century of research on the Stroop effect: an integrative review. , 1991, Psychological bulletin.

[43]  W. Glaser,et al.  The time course of picture-word interference. , 1984, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[44]  L A Thompson,et al.  Evaluation and integration of speech and pointing gestures during referential understanding. , 1986, Journal of experimental child psychology.

[45]  H Egeth,et al.  Verbal interference with encoding in a perceptual classification task. , 1970, Journal of experimental psychology.

[46]  W T Rogers,et al.  The relevance of body motion cues to both functional and dysfunctional communicative behavior. , 1979, Journal of Communication Disorders.

[47]  W. Kintsch,et al.  Memory and cognition , 1977 .

[48]  D. McNeill,et al.  A straight path-to where? Reply to Butterworth and Hadar. , 1989, Psychological review.

[49]  ADAM KENDON Some reasons for studying gesture , 1986 .

[50]  Dylan M. Jones,et al.  Cross-modal, auditory-visual Stroop interference: A reply to Cowan and Barron (1987) , 1989, Perception & psychophysics.

[51]  F N Dyer,et al.  The Stroop phenomenon and its use in the stlldy of perceptual, cognitive, and response processes , 1973, Memory & cognition.

[52]  M. Posner,et al.  Attention and cognitive control. , 1975 .

[53]  P. Gestures and Speech , Interactions and Separations : A Reply to McNeill ( 1985 ) , 2022 .

[54]  W. Glaser,et al.  Time course analysis of the Stroop phenomenon. , 1982, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[55]  M M Smyth,et al.  Working Memory for Movements , 1989, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[56]  J. R. Simon,et al.  Auditory S-R compatibility: the effect of an irrelevant cue on information processing. , 1967, The Journal of applied psychology.

[57]  M. Smyth,et al.  Movement and Working Memory: Patterns and Positions in Space , 1988, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[58]  R. Golinkoff,et al.  Automatic semantic processing in a picture-word interference task. , 1975 .

[59]  J. Richard Simon,et al.  Effect of compatibility of S-R mapping on reactions toward the stimulus source. , 1981 .

[60]  R. Melara Dimensional interaction between color and pitch , 1989 .

[61]  W. Gill Woodall,et al.  Encoding specificity and nonverbal cue context: An expansion of episodic memory research , 1981 .

[62]  Gordon D. Logan,et al.  Strategies in the color-word Stroop task , 1984 .

[63]  H Shimada,et al.  Effect of Auditory Presentation of Words on Color Naming: The Intermodal Stroop Effect , 1990, Perceptual and motor skills.

[64]  John Morton,et al.  Selective Attention to Words and Colours , 1973 .

[65]  A. Baddeley The concept of working memory: A view of its current state and probable future development , 1981, Cognition.

[66]  A reply to Miles, Madden, and Jones (1989): Mistakes and other flaws in the challenge to the cross-modal Stroop effect , 1989 .

[67]  W. S. Farrell Coding left and right. , 1979, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[68]  L. Marks,et al.  Processes underlying dimensional interactions: Correspondences between linguistic and nonlinguistic dimensions , 1990, Memory & cognition.

[69]  A. Hedge,et al.  The effect of irrelevant spatial correspondences on two-choice response-time. , 1975, Acta psychologica.

[70]  Serge Moscovici,et al.  Current issues in European social psychology , 1983 .

[71]  Alan S. Brown,et al.  Information Processing and Cognition: The Loyola Symposium , 1976 .

[72]  S. Keele Attention demands of memory retrieval. , 1972, Journal of experimental psychology.

[73]  Bernard Rimé,et al.  Effects of relative immobilization on the speaker's nonverbal behavior and on the dialogue imagery level , 1984 .

[74]  N Cowan The reality of cross-modal Stroop effects , 1989, Perception & psychophysics.

[75]  T Hasbroucq,et al.  Stimulus-response compatibility and the Simon effect: toward a conceptual clarification. , 1991, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[76]  Carlo Umiltà,et al.  Why are left-right spatial codes easier to form than above-below ones? , 1988, Perception & psychophysics.

[77]  R H Maki,et al.  Why is telling right from left more difficult than telling above from below? , 1979, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[78]  J R Simon,et al.  Effects of S-R mapping and response modality on performance in a Stroop Task. , 1979, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[79]  HighWire Press Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London , 1781, The London Medical Journal.

[80]  A. Leroi‐Gourhan,et al.  Gesture and Speech , 1993 .

[81]  Colin M. Macleod,et al.  Training and Stroop-like interference: evidence for a continuum of automaticity. , 1988, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[82]  M. Argyle,et al.  A Cross-Cultural Study of the Communication of Extra-Verbal Meaning by Gesture , 1975 .

[83]  Shelley Masion Rosenberg Bodily Communication , 1978 .

[84]  J R Simon,et al.  Effect of conflicting cues on information processing: the 'Stroop effect' vs. the 'Simon effect'. , 1990, Acta psychologica.

[85]  L. Jacoby A process dissociation framework: Separating automatic from intentional uses of memory , 1991 .

[86]  G. Rizzolatti,et al.  Spatial compatibility effects on the same side of the body midline. , 1982, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[87]  James R. Pomerantz,et al.  CHAPTER 1 – Visual Form Perception: An Overview* , 1986 .

[88]  P. Fitts,et al.  S-R compatibility: spatial characteristics of stimulus and response codes. , 1953, Journal of experimental psychology.

[89]  H. Egeth,et al.  Toward a translational model of Stroop interference , 1985, Memory & cognition.

[90]  Robert D. Melara,et al.  Interaction between synesthetically corresponding dimensions. , 1987 .

[91]  P. Barber,et al.  Interference effects in the Stroop and Simon paradigms. , 1993, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[92]  Frederick N. Dyer,et al.  Latencies for movement naming with congruent and incongruent word stimuli , 1972 .

[93]  Experimental note: Cross-modal, visual-auditory picture-word interference , 1990 .

[94]  N Cowan,et al.  Cross-modal, auditory-visual Stroop interference and possible implications for speech memory , 1987, Perception & psychophysics.