Cited by 150Neurobiology of Language and BilingualismAction Observation and SynchronizationHearing Impairment and Communication

How iconic gestures enhance communication: An ERP study

Wu, Ying Choon, Coulson, Seana·2007·Brain and Language

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

Crossref · 10.1016/j.bandl.2006.12.003

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

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.
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