Abstract
The aim of the present study was to understand the underlying cognitive processes of imitation and matching of meaningless gestures. Neuropsychological evidence obtained in brain damaged patients, has shown that distinct cognitive processes supported imitation and matching of meaningless gestures. Left-brain damaged (LBD) patients failed to imitate while right-brain damaged (RBD) patients failed to match meaningless gestures. Moreover, other studies with brain damaged patients showed that LBD patients were impaired in motor imagery while RBD patients were impaired in visual imagery. Thus, we hypothesize that imitation of meaningless gestures might rely on motor imagery, whereas matching of meaningless gestures might be based on visual imagery. In a first experiment, using a correlational design, we demonstrated that posture imitation relies on motor imagery but not on visual imagery (Experiment 1a) and that posture matching relies on visual imagery but not on motor imagery (Experiment 1b). In a second experiment, by manipulating directly the body posture of the participants, we demonstrated that such manipulation evokes a difference only in imitation task but not in matching task. In conclusion, the present study provides direct evidence that the way we imitate or we have to compare postures depends on motor imagery or visual imagery, respectively. Our results are discussed in the light of recent findings about underlying mechanisms of meaningful and meaningless gestures.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Conceptual mediation specifies the determining features of the gesture independently of arbitrary variations of its visual appearance caused by differences between demonstrating persons and between angles of view under which they are perceived (see Goldenberg, 1999).
α = covariance(x, y)/variance(x) where x is the degree of the orientation of the hand (expressed in °) and y is the RT for each orientation (expressed in ms).
To compute the slope of the motor imagery task, we did not take into account the 270° orientation. Indeed, it has been previously shown that the transformation of the the 180° to the 270° orientation is not linear and depends on the laterality of the hand. It has been assumed that this effect reveals biomechanical constraints (e.g., Parsons, 1994). Thus, the slopes for visual imagery task and motor imagery task were computed in the same range (i.e., 0°–180°).
α = covariance(x, y)/variance(x) where x is the degree of the orientation of the right model relative to the left model (expressed in °) and y is the RT for each orientation (expressed in ms).
References
Adolphs, R. (2003). Cognitive neuroscience of human social behavior. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 4, 165–178.
Cooper, L. A. (1975). Mental rotation of random two-dimensional shapes. Cognitive Psychology, 7, 20–43. doi:10.1016/0010-0285(75)90003-1.
Cubelli, R., Marchetti, C., Boscolo, G., & Della Sala, S. (2000). Cognition in action: Testing a model of limb apraxia. Brain and Cognition, 44(2), 144–165. doi:10.1006/brcg.2000.1226.
de Lange, F. P., Helmich, R. C., & Toni, I. (2006). Posture influences motor imagery: An fMRI study. NeuroImage, 33(2), 609–617. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2006.07.017.
Decety, J. (1996). Do imagined and executed actions share the same neural substrate? Cognitive Brain Research, 3(2), 87–93. doi:10.1016/0926-6410(95)00033-X.
Decety, J., Grèzes, J., Costes, N., Perani, D., Jeannerod, M., Procyk, E., … Fazio, F. (1997). Brain activity during observation of actions. Influence of action content and subject’s strategy. Brain, 120, 1763–1777. doi:10.1093/brain/120.10.1763.
Decety, J., & Ingvar, D. H. (1990). Brain structures participating in mental simulation of motor behavior: A neuropsychological interpretation. Acta Psychologica, 73(1), 13–34. doi:10.1016/0001-6918(90)90056-L.
Goldenberg, G. (1995). Imitating gestures and manipulating a mannikin—The representation of the human body in ideomotor apraxia. Neuropsychologia, 33(1), 63–72. doi:10.1016/0028-3932(94)00104-W.
Goldenberg, G. (1999). Matching and imitation of hand and finger postures in patients with damage in the left or right hemispheres. Neuropsychologia, 37(5), 559–566. doi:10.1016/S0028-3932(98)00111-0.
Goldenberg, G. (2001). Imitation and matching of hand and finger postures. NeuroImage, 14, 132–136. doi:10.1006/nimg.2001.0820.
Goldenberg, G. (2013). Apraxia: The cognitive side of motor control. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Goldenberg, G., & Hagmann, S. (1997). The meaning of meaningless gestures: A study of visuo-imitative apraxia. Neuropsychologia, 35(3), 333–341. doi:10.1016/S0028-3932(96)00085-1.
Hodges, J. R., Bozeat, S., Lambon Ralph, M. A., Patterson, K., & Spatt, J. (2000). The role of conceptual knowledge in object use evidence from semantic dementia. Brain, 123, 1913–1925. doi:10.1093/brain/123.9.1913.
Johnson-Frey, S. H. (2004). The neural bases of complex tool use in humans. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8(2), 71–78. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2003.12.002.
Kosslyn, S. M. (1987). Seeing and imagining in the cerebral hemisphere: A computational approach. Psychological Review, 94, 148–175.
Meltzoff, A. N., & Moore, M. K. (1977). Imitation of facial and manual gestures by human neonates. Science, 198(4312), 75–78. doi:10.1126/science.198.4312.75.
Negri, G. A. L., Rumiati, R. I., Zadini, A., Ukmar, M., Mahon, B. Z., & Caramazza, A. (2007). What is the role of motor simulation in action and object recognition? Evidence from apraxia. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 24(8), 795–816. doi:10.1080/02643290701707412.
Ochipa, C., Rothi, L. J., & Heilman, K. M. (1989). Ideational apraxia: A deficit in tool selection and use. Annals of Neurology, 25(2), 190–193. doi:10.1002/ana.410250214.
Oldfield, R. C. (1971). The assessment and analysis of handedness: The Edinburgh inventory. Neuropsychologia, 9, 97–113.
Parsons, L. M. (1994). Temporal and kinematic properties of motor behavior reflected in mentally simulated action. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 20(4), 709–730. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.20.4.709.
Pelgrims, B., Andres, M., & Olivier, E. (2009). Double dissociation between motor and visual imagery in the posterior parietal cortex. Cerebral Cortex, 19(10), 2298–2307. doi:10.1093/cercor/bhn248.
Rizzolatti, G., Fogassi, L., & Gallese, V. (2001). Neurophysiological mechanisms underlying the understanding and imitation of action. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 2, 661–670.
Rumiati, R. I., Carmo, J. C., & Corradi-Dell’Acqua, C. (2009). Neuropsychological perspectives on the mechanisms of imitation. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 364(1528), 2337–2347. doi:10.1098/rstb.2009.0063.
Rumiati, R. I., Tomasino, B., Vorano, L., Umiltà, C., & De Luca, G. (2001). Selective deficit of imagining finger configurations. Cortex, 37, 730–733.
Schwoebel, J., & Coslett, H. B. (2005). Evidence for multiple, distinct representations of the human body. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 17(4), 543–553. doi:10.1162/0898929053467587.
Shiffrar, M., & Freyd, J. J. (1990). Apparent motion of the human body. Psychological Science, 1, 257–264.
Simmons, K., & Barsalou, L. W. (2003). The similarity-in-topography principle: Reconciling theories of conceptual deficits. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 20, 451–486.
Sirigu, A., & Duhamel, J. R. (2001). Motor and visual imagery as two complementary but neurally dissociable mental processes. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 13(7), 910–919. doi:10.1162/089892901753165827.
Sirigu, A., Grafman, J., & Sunderland, T. (1991). Multiple representations contribute to body knowledge processing. Brain, 114, 629–642. Retrieved from papers2://publication/uuid/9A1C10D4-40AD-4D1B-9675-E1746B3C2152.
Steiger, J. H. (1980). Tests for comparing elements of a correlation matrix. Psychological Bulletin,. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.87.2.245.
Stevens, J. A. (2005). Interference effects demonstrate distinct roles for visual and motor imagery during the mental representation of human action. Cognition, 95(3), 329–350. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2004.02.008.
Tessari, A., Canessa, N., Ukmar, M., & Rumiati, R. I. (2007). Neuropsychological evidence for a strategic control of multiple routes in imitation. Brain, 130(4), 1111–1126. doi:10.1093/brain/awm003.
Tessari, A., & Rumiati, R. I. (2004). The strategic control of multiple routes in imitation of actions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 30(6), 1107–1116. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.30.6.1107.
Tomasino, B., & Rumiati, R. I. (2004). Effects of strategies on mental rotation and hemispheric lateralization: Neuropsychological evidence. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 16(5), 878–888. doi:10.1162/089892904970753.
Tomasino, B., Toraldo, A., & Rumiati, R. I. (2003). Dissociation between the mental rotation of visual images and motor images in unilateral brain-damaged patients. Brain and Cognition, 51, 368–371.
Vannuscorps, G., Pillon, A., & Andres, M. (2012). Effect of biomechanical constraints in the hand laterality judgment task: Where does it come from? Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 6, 1–9. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2012.00299.
Vingerhoets, G., de Lange, F. P., Vandemaele, P., Deblaere, K., & Achten, E. (2002). Motor imagery in mental rotation: An fMRI study. NeuroImage, 17(3), 1623–1633. doi:10.1006/nimg.2002.1290.
Viswanathan, S., Fritz, C., & Grafton, S. T. (2012). Telling the right hand from the left hand: Multisensory integration, not motor imagery, solves the problem. Psychological Science, 23(6), 598–607. doi:10.1177/0956797611429802.
Wohlschlager, A., Gattis, M., & Bekkering, H. (2003). Action generation and action perception in imitation: An instance of the ideomotor principle. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 358(1431), 501–515. doi:10.1098/rstb.2002.1257.
Wraga, M., Creem, S. H., & Proffitt, D. R. (1999). The influence of spatial reference frames on imagined object and viewer rotations. Acta Psychologica, 102, 247–264.
Zacks, J., Mires, J., Tversky, B., & Hazeltine, E. (2000). Mental spatial transformations of objects and perspective. Sptaial Cognition and Computation, 2, 315–332.
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by grants from ANR (Agence Nationale pour la Recherche; Project Démences et Utilisation d’Outils/Dementia and Tool Use, N°ANR 2011 MALZ 006 03; D. Le Gall, F. Osiurak), and was performed within the framework of the LABEX CORTEX (ANR-11-LABX-0042) of Université de Lyon, within the program “Investissements d’Avenir” (ANR-11-IDEX-0007; F. Osiurak, J. Navarro) operated by the French National Research Agency (ANR).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Lesourd, M., Navarro, J., Baumard, J. et al. Imitation and matching of meaningless gestures: distinct involvement from motor and visual imagery. Psychological Research 81, 525–537 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-016-0758-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-016-0758-1