Not so secret agents

Event-related potentials to semantic roles in visual event comprehension

Neil Cohn, Martin Paczynski, Marta Kutas

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

Abstract

Research across domains has suggested that agents, the doers of actions, have a processing advantage over patients, the receivers of actions. We hypothesized that agents as "event builders" for discrete actions (e.g., throwing a ball, punching) build on cues embedded in their preparatory postures (e.g., reaching back an arm to throw or punch) that lead to (predictable) culminating actions, and that these cues afford frontloading of event structure processing. To test this hypothesis, we compared event-related brain potentials (ERPs) to averbal comic panels depicting preparatory agents (ex. reaching back an arm to punch) that cued specific actions with those to non-preparatory agents (ex. arm to the side) and patients that did not cue any specific actions. We also compared subsequent completed action panels (ex. agent punching patient) across conditions, where we expected an inverse pattern of ERPs indexing the differential costs of processing completed actions asa function of preparatory cues. Preparatory agents evoked a greater frontal positivity (600-900ms) relative to non-preparatory agents and patients, while subsequent completed actions panels following non-preparatory agents elicited a smaller frontal positivity (600-900ms). These results suggest that preparatory (vs. non-) postures may differentially impact the processing of agents and subsequent actions in real time.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1-9
Number of pages9
JournalBrain and Cognition
Volume119
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Dec 2017

Fingerprint

Cues
Proxy
Semantic Roles
Secret Agent
Event-related Potentials

Cite this

@article{764b894b20454ba18112caea81ea0e88,
title = "Not so secret agents: Event-related potentials to semantic roles in visual event comprehension",
abstract = "Research across domains has suggested that agents, the doers of actions, have a processing advantage over patients, the receivers of actions. We hypothesized that agents as {"}event builders{"} for discrete actions (e.g., throwing a ball, punching) build on cues embedded in their preparatory postures (e.g., reaching back an arm to throw or punch) that lead to (predictable) culminating actions, and that these cues afford frontloading of event structure processing. To test this hypothesis, we compared event-related brain potentials (ERPs) to averbal comic panels depicting preparatory agents (ex. reaching back an arm to punch) that cued specific actions with those to non-preparatory agents (ex. arm to the side) and patients that did not cue any specific actions. We also compared subsequent completed action panels (ex. agent punching patient) across conditions, where we expected an inverse pattern of ERPs indexing the differential costs of processing completed actions asa function of preparatory cues. Preparatory agents evoked a greater frontal positivity (600-900ms) relative to non-preparatory agents and patients, while subsequent completed actions panels following non-preparatory agents elicited a smaller frontal positivity (600-900ms). These results suggest that preparatory (vs. non-) postures may differentially impact the processing of agents and subsequent actions in real time.",
author = "Neil Cohn and Martin Paczynski and Marta Kutas",
note = "Copyright {\circledC} 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.",
year = "2017",
month = "12",
doi = "10.1016/j.bandc.2017.09.001",
language = "English",
volume = "119",
pages = "1--9",
journal = "Brain and Cognition",
issn = "0278-2626",
publisher = "Academic Press Inc.",

}

Not so secret agents : Event-related potentials to semantic roles in visual event comprehension. / Cohn, Neil; Paczynski, Martin; Kutas, Marta.

In: Brain and Cognition, Vol. 119, 12.2017, p. 1-9.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Not so secret agents

T2 - Event-related potentials to semantic roles in visual event comprehension

AU - Cohn, Neil

AU - Paczynski, Martin

AU - Kutas, Marta

N1 - Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

PY - 2017/12

Y1 - 2017/12

N2 - Research across domains has suggested that agents, the doers of actions, have a processing advantage over patients, the receivers of actions. We hypothesized that agents as "event builders" for discrete actions (e.g., throwing a ball, punching) build on cues embedded in their preparatory postures (e.g., reaching back an arm to throw or punch) that lead to (predictable) culminating actions, and that these cues afford frontloading of event structure processing. To test this hypothesis, we compared event-related brain potentials (ERPs) to averbal comic panels depicting preparatory agents (ex. reaching back an arm to punch) that cued specific actions with those to non-preparatory agents (ex. arm to the side) and patients that did not cue any specific actions. We also compared subsequent completed action panels (ex. agent punching patient) across conditions, where we expected an inverse pattern of ERPs indexing the differential costs of processing completed actions asa function of preparatory cues. Preparatory agents evoked a greater frontal positivity (600-900ms) relative to non-preparatory agents and patients, while subsequent completed actions panels following non-preparatory agents elicited a smaller frontal positivity (600-900ms). These results suggest that preparatory (vs. non-) postures may differentially impact the processing of agents and subsequent actions in real time.

AB - Research across domains has suggested that agents, the doers of actions, have a processing advantage over patients, the receivers of actions. We hypothesized that agents as "event builders" for discrete actions (e.g., throwing a ball, punching) build on cues embedded in their preparatory postures (e.g., reaching back an arm to throw or punch) that lead to (predictable) culminating actions, and that these cues afford frontloading of event structure processing. To test this hypothesis, we compared event-related brain potentials (ERPs) to averbal comic panels depicting preparatory agents (ex. reaching back an arm to punch) that cued specific actions with those to non-preparatory agents (ex. arm to the side) and patients that did not cue any specific actions. We also compared subsequent completed action panels (ex. agent punching patient) across conditions, where we expected an inverse pattern of ERPs indexing the differential costs of processing completed actions asa function of preparatory cues. Preparatory agents evoked a greater frontal positivity (600-900ms) relative to non-preparatory agents and patients, while subsequent completed actions panels following non-preparatory agents elicited a smaller frontal positivity (600-900ms). These results suggest that preparatory (vs. non-) postures may differentially impact the processing of agents and subsequent actions in real time.

U2 - 10.1016/j.bandc.2017.09.001

DO - 10.1016/j.bandc.2017.09.001

M3 - Article

VL - 119

SP - 1

EP - 9

JO - Brain and Cognition

JF - Brain and Cognition

SN - 0278-2626

ER -