How iconic gestures enhance communication: An ERP study
Abstract
EEG was recorded as adults watched short segments of spontaneous discourse in which the speaker's gestures and utterances contained complementary information. Videos were followed by one of four types of picture probes: cross-modal related probes were congruent with both speech and gestures; speech-only related probes were congruent with information in the speech, but not the gesture; and two sorts of unrelated probes were created by pairing each related probe with a different discourse prime. Event-related potentials (ERPs) elicited by picture probes were measured within the time windows of the N300 (250-350 ms post-stimulus) and N400 (350-550 ms post-stimulus). Cross-modal related probes elicited smaller N300 and N400 than speech-only related ones, indicating that pictures were easier to interpret when they corresponded with gestures. N300 and N400 effects were not due to differences in the visual complexity of each probe type, since the same cross-modal and speech-only picture probes elicited N300 and N400 with similar amplitudes when they appeared as unrelated items. These findings extend previous research on gesture comprehension by revealing how iconic co-speech gestures modulate conceptualization, enabling listeners to better represent visuo-spatial aspects of the speaker's meaning.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Observing gestures triggers semantic processing.
“Because observing gesture triggers semantic processing [30,31] it is conceivable that gestures linked to L2 grammatical morphemes could help children learn.”
From Can grammatical morphemes be taught? Evidence of gestures influencing second language procedural learning in middle childhood (2023) · cites this paper as [31]
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 63 · Cited by 150
- Authors
- Wu, Y. C., & Coulson, S.
- ORCID
- Wu, Ying Choon
- Venue
- Brain and Language
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2007-06
- Volume
- 101
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 234-245
- ISSN
- 0093-934X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2101717170
- Cited by
- 150
- References
- 63
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 16 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 13
- FWCI
- 4.16
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Brain and Language (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institutes of Health (n01mh002002-000)
- National Institute of Mental Health (MH 2002-07)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Action Observation and Synchronization
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Hearing Impairment and Communication
- Keywords
- iconic gestures, co-speech gestures, gesture comprehension, gesture-speech integration, cross-modal correspondence, N300, N400, spontaneous discourse, conceptualization, event-related potentials
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Analysis of Variance, Brain, Brain Mapping, Communication, Concept Formation, Evoked Potentials, Female, Gestures, Humans, Male, Psycholinguistics, Semantics, Space Perception, Speech Perception
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review