Cited by 15Action Observation and SynchronizationNeurobiology of Language and BilingualismLanguage, Metaphor, and Cognition

Language and motor cortex response to comprehending accidental and intentional action sentences

Kana, Rajesh K., Ammons, Carla J., Doss, Constance F., Waite, Megan E., Kana, Bhumika, Herringshaw, Abbey J., Ver Hoef, Lawrence·2015·Neuropsychologia

Abstract

Understanding the meaning of others' actions involves mentally simulating those actions by oneself. Embodied theories of language espouse a prominent role for motor simulation in reading comprehension, especially when words, sentences, or narratives portray everyday actions. Inherent in these actions is the level of agency of the actor. Motor cortex activity in response to processing action verbs has been relatively well-established. What has been less explored, however, are: (1) the neural bases of determining whether an action is intentional or accidental (agency); and (2) whether agency influences level of motor simulation. This functional MRI study investigated how language and motor areas of the brain respond to sentences depicting intentional versus accidental action. 25 healthy adults read a series of sentences in the MRI scanner and determined whether the actions described were accidental or intentional. The main results include: (1) left hemisphere language areas (left inferior frontal gyrus, LIFG; left superior temporal gyrus, LSTG), premotor cortex (PM), and presupplementary motor area (pSMA) were strongly activated by both sentence types; (2) processing accidental action, relative to intentional action, elicited greater activity in LIFG, medial prefrontal cortex (MPFC), and left amygdala; no statistically significant activity was found in the opposite contrast; and (3) greater percent signal change was observed in LIFG while processing accidental action and in right precentral gyrus for intentional action. The results of this study support language and motor region involvement in action sentence comprehension in accordance with embodiment theories. Additionally, it provides new insight into the linguistic, integrative, and emotional demands of comprehending accidental action, its underlying neural circuitry, and its relationship to intentionality bias: the predisposition to ascribe purpose to action.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2015.08.020

Cites

44 of 44 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kana, R. K., Ammons, C. J., Doss, C. F., Waite, M. E., Kana, B., Herringshaw, A. J., & Ver Hoef, L.
Affiliations
University of Alabama at Birmingham (US)
Corresponding author
Kana, Rajesh K.
Venue
Neuropsychologia
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2015-10
Volume
77
Pages
158-164
ISSN
0028-3932 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1123008624
Cited by
15
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2024: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 1
FWCI
2.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Neuropsychologia (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
UAB Department of Psychology Faculty
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Action Observation and Synchronization
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Language, Metaphor, and Cognition
Keywords
intentional action, accidental actions, agency, motor simulation, embodied language, motor cortex, left inferior frontal gyrus, left superior temporal gyrus, medial prefrontal cortex, amygdala, action verbs, reading comprehension
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Brain Mapping, Cerebral Cortex, Female, Humans, Language Tests, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Neuropsychological Tests, Pattern Recognition, Visual, Photic Stimulation, Reading, Comprehension, Young Adult

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