EMBODIED LANGUAGE
New College Oxford
26-28 September 2011
The effects of rTMS
on primary motor
cortex: the link
between
action and language
(preliminary results)
Claudia Repetto
Department of Psychology,
Catholic University of Sacred Heart, Milan,
Italy
RATIONAL
EMBODIED
COGNITION
EMBODIED
SEMANTICS
Experimental data
Verbs indicating actions performed with different body parts
activate the portions of the premotor cortex involved in the
real action
Experimental data
Verbs indicating actions performed with different body parts
activate the portions of the premotor cortex involved in the
real action
(Hauk, Johnsrude, & Pulvermüller, 2004)
Experimental data
Verbs indicating actions performed with different body parts
activate the portions of the premotor cortex involved in the
real action
(Hauk, Johnsrude, & Pulvermüller, 2004)
(Tettamanti et al., 2005)
Experimental data
Several studies indicate that even the primary motor
cortex (M1) is involved in language processing, but results
are sometimes contrasting
Tools:
Tasks:
VS
o Increase of MEP recorded from the listeners' tongue
muscles when the presented words strongly involve, when
pronounced, tongue movements
Birra…Firra.
..
Buffo…Biffo
(Fadiga et al., 2002)
birra
firra
buffo
biffo
o The processing of verbs indicating actions performed with
different body parts modulate the activity of the portions of
the primary motor cortex (M1) involved in the real action
he played
the piano
he jumped
the rope
he loved
his wife
(Buccino et al., 2005)
But on the other hand…..
o The comprehension of effector specific action word
meanings did not elicit preferential activity corresponding to
the somatotopic organisation of effectors in either primary
or premotor cortex
(Postle et al., 2008)
+
+
GOALS OF THE EXPERIMENT
METHOD
10 students, 5 males and 5 females (age: 21-46; mean:
28.7; st. dev.: 9.57 education:16-20; mean: 16.7; st.
dev.:1.25)
Low-frequency rTMS
Verbs comprehension (semantic judgment)
MATERIAL
24 ACTION
VERBS
applaudire (to clap)
abbottonare (to button)
firmare (to sign)
…….
+
24 ABSTRACT
VERBS
apprezzare (to appreciate)
immaginare (to imagine)
scordare (to forget)
…….
MATERIAL
24 ACTION
VERBS
+
24 ABSTRACT
VERBS
48 items x 3 blocks
i.e. firmavo-firmavi-firmava;
scordavo-scordavi-scordava
TASK
++
2 sec
firmava
5 minutes
5 sec
++
PROCEDURE
Practice session
task
Off-line rTMS session over M1
task
45 min
PROCEDURE
Practice session
task
Off-line rTMS session over M1
task
45 min
PROCEDURE
RIGHT HAND
Practice session
task
RIGHT M1
task
45 min
PROCEDURE
RIGHT HAND
Practice session
LEFT HAND
task
RIGHT M1
LEFT M1
task
45 min
EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN
NOtms
2
(stimulation)
M1
x
right
2
(side)
left
x
abstract
2
(verbs)
concrete
RESULTS
o main effect of stimulation [F(1,9)= 55.11;p<0.001]
o main effect of verb [F(1,9)=38.708; p<0.001]
o interaction stimulation x verb [F(1,9)=11.272; p=0.008]
DISCUSSION
Methodological issues: variable “stimulation” not counterbalanced
Possible explanations…
(to be completed…)
1.
M1 is not involved  the lower RTs post stimulation are due to
a learning effect
Control group: 18 students, comparable for age and
education
NO effect of time [F(1,16)= 1.657; p= 0.216]
NO interaction time x verb [F(1,16)= 0.01; p=0.975]
Possible explanations…
(to be completed…)
2.
M1 is involved in different ways depending on the type of verb
(action/abstract)
Abstract verbs
M1
Action verbs
Possible explanations…
(to be completed…)
2.
M1 is involved in different ways depending on the type of verb
(action/abstract)
Abstract verbs  “jump a step” faster
RTs
M1
Action verbs  slower RTs (with respect
to the gain between baseline and posttms with abstract verbs)
See Papeo et al. (2009)
Future perspectives
o sample completion (with sessions counterbalanced)
to disambiguate between the
hypothesis of involvment and noninvolvment of M1
to investigate the different
involvment during abstract vs action
verbs processing
To interpret the complete set of data and give a contribution to
the study of embodied language
THANK YOU FOR
YOUR ATTENTION!
claudia.repetto@unicatt.it