Mental Imagery vs. Mental Simulation in Cognitive Processes

Critical Feedback in Real Life Submitted manuscripts Switching Between Lift and Use Grasp Actions Bub, Masson and Van Mook Contributions of Population Stereotypes and Mental Simulation to Sentence Comprehension Morgan L. Teskey, Daniel N. Bub, and Michael E. J. Masson

Task: Turn the knob (clockwise/counterclockwise) to present the sentence segment by segment. Anticlockwise The music/ was/ too loud/ so/ John/ turned down/ the/ volume Clockwise The music/ was/ too loud/ so/ John/ turned down/ the/ volume

One of the most interesting features of this literature is that there are various experiments in which the priming effect appears superficially to reverse itself. Analyses were performed on the reading times per frame of the gapping sentences and were based on residual reading times, adjusted for frame length in terms of number of characters

Isabel Gauthier COI

Before you begin Think about this question: What is the basic distinction - if any - between the concepts: Conflating the distinction in research article does not mean that a distinction does not exist Mental Simulation Mental Imagery

Mental Imagery versus Mental Simulation An important tenet of mental simulation theory is that mental simulation does not equate mental imagery. Mental imagery is a conscious and resource-consuming process. Mental simulation, on the other hand, is thought to be part-and-parcel of routine cognitive processes. If mental simulation is mental imagery, then one would expect the size of the match effect to correlate with mental imagery ability. We found very little evidence that this is indeed the case.

Mental Imagery versus Mental Simulation Why not write: Mental imagery is a conscious and resource-consuming process. Mental simulation is unconscious and does not consume any cognitive resources. An important tenet of mental simulation theory is that mental simulation does not equate mental imagery.Mental imagery is a conscious and resource-consuming process. Mental simulation, on the other hand, is thought to be part-and-parcel of routine cognitive processes. If mental simulation is mental imagery, then one would Assumption: Mental imagery is always conscious. Mental simulation is not necessarily conscious. expect the size of the match effect to correlate with mental imagery ability. We found very little evidence that this is indeed the case.

Segment A needs work Segment B needs work Segment C needs work Segment D needs work Everything is okay Group 1 Paragraph 1 a) Begin with a sentence meant to trigger a mental image b) Explain the main issue of the paper by questioning whether this experience was imagery or simulation (sets up how difficult these concepts are). Experience? c) Give examples of how studies have defined mental imagery in the past d) Give examples of how studies have defined simulation in the past

Segment A needs work Segment B needs work Segment C needs work Segment D needs work Everything is okay Group 1 Paragraph 2 A. Brief summary of mixed findings of studies that have used these statements B. Use the mixed findings to show why we need clearer definitions C. Explain why research into mental imagery/simulation is practically important D. Hint at all the directions that we will be going in (but save a thorough explanation for later in the introduction/ in the method section)

Segment 1 needs work Segment 2 needs work Segment 3 needs work Segment 4 needs work Everything is okay Group 2 Paragraph 1 1. Introduce the theory underlying the theory of mental simulation (basically defining the current understanding) 2. Describe how and why mental simulation is often confused with mental imagery 3. Explain how past research has distinguished between the two concepts 4. Summarize the key concepts that define mental simulation What do you mean by confused ? Theoretically confused? Methodologically confused? Wrong place! Also, how do "key concepts differ from the theory of mental simulation ?

Segment 1 needs work Segment 2 needs work Segment 3 needs work Segment 4 needs work Everything is okay Group 2 Paragraph 2 1. Expand on previous research results showing the difference between conscious and unconscious word/stimuli processing 2. Elaborate on the limitations and inconsistencies of these studies 3. Explain why inconsistencies even matter and are important to understand 4. Transition into next paragraph on how current study will differ from past research Redundant with Segment 3 Paragraph 1

Segment 1 needs work Segment 2 needs work Segment 3 needs work Segment 4 needs work Everything is okay Group 3 Paragraph 1 The difference has been defined - though roughly - by some researchers 1. Begin with stating that the difference between the two has not been clearly defined 2. Define how we use mental imagery in the paper 3. Define how we use mental simulation in this paper 4. State how current research suggest there is a difference between the 2 Possible contradiction with segment 1 Late relative to segment 1.

Group 3 Paragraph 2 Segment 1 needs work Segment 2 needs work Segment 3 needs work Segment 4 needs work Everything is okay Redundant with 2,3 Previous paragraph 1. Contrast mental imagery/ simulation 2. Define why it is important 3. Define some limitations of current studies 4. State how we will address these limitations on our study A bit vague and late given 1 in previous paragraph Gap between this segment and 4 in previous paragraph

Segment 1 needs work Segment 2 needs work Segment 3 needs work Everything is okay Group 4 Segments 1 , 2 and 3 take us too far away from the central question: How do you distinguish empirically between mental simulation and mental imagery? 1. Introduce the importance of the topic 2. Embodied cognition does not account for the abstract words 3. There is a problem with the current understanding of how humans represent meaning of abstract words 4. How is meaning created if we are incapable of forming mental images of abstract symbols These 3 segments might appear in the Discussion raising the problem of abstraction from embodied representations.

Segment 1 needs work Segment 2 needs work Segment 3 needs work Everything is okay Group 4 1. Define mental simulation + mental imagery 2. Discuss similarities 3. Discuss multiple ways that they are different + support it with previous literature

Segment 1 needs work Segment 2 needs work Segment 3 needs work Segment 4 needs work Segment 5 needs work Everything is okay Group 5 1. Segments 1 is a bit vague: you mean sensory-motor representations. Experience implies conscious experience and simulation does not necessarily imply a conscious experience. When we interpret language, we experience mental representations This is often an argument for the embodiment theory of language which states that the meaning of the word is grounded in our sensory modalities This process is often referred to as mental imagery & mental simulation Many often use these two terms interchangeably. The current paper will argue that this is erroneous Mental simulation is fundamentally different than mental imagery 2. 3. Could be better worded 4. 5.

Segment 1 needs work Segment 2 needs work Segment 3 needs work Segment 4 needs work Segment 5 needs work Everything is okay Too strong Group 5: cont d 1. Mental imagery is a conscious effortful process 2. Mental imagery is also strategic meaning that you can choose the amount of detail in the imagery 3. Mental simulation on the other hand occurs unconsciously & therefore is not strategic 4. Certain studies have demonstrated that words associated with up & down can have an effect on our actions, such that the word up creates faster upward actions and vice versa 5. However when words are presented too quickly to be perceived by the participants we see the opposite effect, thus demonstrating mental simulation not imagery Link to next paragraph?

Segment 1 needs work Segment 2 needs work Segment 3 needs work Segment 4 needs work Everything is okay Group 6 1. Conceptual framework: general information about language processing + Do you mean: that meaning of words is grounded in sensory motor representations? I think I know what you mean but you need more detail here. Bergen s evidence for what? meaning Explanation? You mean perhaps, flesh out the details of what is meant by the claim that meaning is grounded in sensory motor representations. 2. Give proposed explanation (mental simulation) 3. Evidence from Bergen 4. Flaws in Bergen s argument reg. effortful processing

Segment 1 needs work Segment 2 needs work Segment 3 needs work Segment 4 needs work Everything is okay Late Group 6 (cont d) 1. Definition + criteria of mental imagery Late 2. Why is it important to differentiate This is only one example. Behavioural evidence using reaction time? to give enough information to suggest an easy way to begin the next paragraph 3. Tehamanti s passive learning experiment A bit vague. You need 4. Why isn t the existing research enough

Segment 1 needs work Segment 2 needs work Segment 3 needs work Segment 4 needs work Everything is okay Group 7 A little more detail Paragraph 1 1. Mental imagery and mental simulation have been used interchangeably in literature 2. Mental imagery is often defined as a conscious and effortful process 3. When distinct from mental imagery, mental simulation is defined as a process that does not necessarily entail conscious processing, nor does it require effortful mental resources. 4. We posit that mental imagery and mental simulation are two separate constructs

Segment 1 needs work Segment 2 needs work Segment 3 needs work Segment 4 needs work Everything is okay Group 7 (cont d) Paragraph 2 Late in relation to Segment Some examples of previous experiments that have made claims to the targeting mental simulation 1, Paragraph 1. 1. that appeared to be instead targeting mental imagery 2. Researchers who have suggested a difference between mental imagery and mental simulation there is a significant difference in results when a word is processed consciously rather than Unclear and possibly redundant in relation to Segments 2,3 of Paragraph 1. unconsciously 3. It is important to distinguish between the two constructs to reduce confusion in the field using empirical evidence, as it has been demonstrated that there is a significant difference between But does not this result already establish that imagery and simulation are different? What confusion exactly? You have already indicated that researchers have shown evidence for sensory motor representations that cannot be due to conscious and unconscious priming 4. This study will study the effect of study X and Y in different terms to remedy the confusion

Common Mistakes Using a word that makes life difficult for you: The term experience applied to both mental imagery and mental simulation. Explain the main issue of the paper by questioning whether this experience was imagery or simulation We experience mental representations An alternative phrasing that makes life easier: Explain the main issue of the paper by questioning whether the sensory and motor representations generated during language comprehension are implicated in mental simulation or mental imagery.

Errors in logical order. Too early Paragraph 1 1. Embodied cognition does not account for the abstract words 2. There is a problem with the current understanding of how humans represent meaning of abstract words

Errors in logical order. Too late: Paragraph 1 1. Mental imagery and mental simulation have been used interchangeably in literature 4. We posit that mental imagery and mental simulation are two separate constructs Paragraph 2 1. Some examples of previous experiments that have made claims to the targeting mental simulation that appeared to be instead targeting mental imagery

Too late. Too much of a gap between related ideas. Paragraph 1 1. Mental imagery and mental simulation have been used interchangeably in literature Mental imagery is often defined as a conscious and effortful process When distinct from mental imagery, mental simulation is defined as a process that does not necessarily entail conscious processing, nor does it require effortful mental resources. We posit that mental imagery and mental simulation are two separate constructs 2. 3. 4. Paragraph 2 1. Some examples of previous experiments that have made claims to be targeting mental simulation that appeared to be instead targeting mental imagery

Paragraph 1 1. Conceptual framework: general information about language processing + meaning 2. Give proposed explanation (mental simulation) 3. Evidence from Bergen 4. Flaws in Bergen s argument reg. effortful processing Paragraph 2 1. Definition + criteria of mental imagery 2. Why is it important to differentiate 3. Tettamanti s passive learning experiment 4. Why isn t the existing research enough

Redundancies, repetition 1. Mental imagery is often defined as a conscious and effortful process 2. When distinct from mental imagery, mental simulation is defined as a process that does not necessarily entail conscious proce Paragraph 2 Researchers who have suggested a difference between mental imagery and mental simulation there is a significant difference in

Contradiction 1. It is important to distinguish between the two constructs to reduce confusion in the field using empirical evidence, as it has been demonstrated that there is a significant difference between conscious and unconscious priming Does not this empirical evidence in itself distinguish between mental simulation and mental imagery? You cannot unconsciously image. You can unconsciously generate a mental simulation.

Blurring an important distinction 1. Mental simulation on the other hand occurs unconsciously & therefore is not strategic Mental imagery is a conscious and resource-consuming process. Mental simulation, on the other hand, is thought to be part-and-parcel of routine cognitive processes. If mental simulation is mental imagery, then one would expect the size of the match effect to correlate with mental imagery ability. We found very little evidence that this is indeed the case. Mental simulation on the other hand need not occur consciously & therefore is not necessarily always induced by explicit attention to strategic task demands.