DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.4210863
title: Modality switch effects emerge early and increase throughout conceptual processing: Evidence from ERPs

description: Files: poster, paper, design overview, stimuli, EEG montage used, waveforms, window 1 close-ups, mean differences with 95% CIs, subtraction topographies, detailed waveforms, statistical results, fixed effects of final models, entire modelling, raw data. For best resolution, download file(s). Abstract We tested whether conceptual processing is modality-specific by tracking the time course of the Conceptual Modality Switch effect. Forty-six participants verified the relation between property words and concept words. The conceptual modality of consecutive trials was manipulated in order to produce an Auditory-to-visual switch condition, a Haptic-to-visual switch condition, and a Visual-to-visual, no-switch condition. Event-Related Potentials (ERPs) were time-locked to the onset of the first word (property) in the target trials so as to measure the effect online and to avoid a within-trial confound. A switch effect was found, characterised by more negative ERP amplitudes for modality switches than no-switches. It proved significant in three typical time windows from 270 to 750 milliseconds post word onset, with greater strength in the Slow group, in posterior brain regions, and in the N400 window. These results suggest that conceptual processing may be modality-specific in certain tasks, but also that the early stage of processing is relatively amodal.<br> References Collins, J., Pecher, D., Zeelenberg, R., & Coulson, S. (2011). Modality switching in a property verification task: an ERP study of what happens when candles flicker after high heels click. <em>Frontiers in Psychology, 2.</em> Hald, L. A., Marshall, J.-A., Janssen, D. P., & Garnham, A. (2011). Switching modalities in a sentence verification task: ERP evidence for embodied language processing. <em>Frontiers in Psychology, 2.</em> Hauk, O. (2016). Only time will tell—Why temporal information is essential for our neuroscientific understanding of semantics. <em>Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 23</em>. Louwerse, M., & Connell, L. (2011). A taste of words: Linguistic context and perceptual simulation predict the modality of words. <em>Cognitive Science, 35, </em>2, 381-98. Mahon, B.Z., & Hickok, G. (2016). Arguments about the nature of concepts: Symbols, embodiment, and beyond. <em>Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 23, </em>941-958. Find more information on these links: <strong>-</strong> Interactive visualisation of waveforms in each data section (Shiny app).<br> <strong>- </strong>OSF archive with all data and code <strong>- </strong>Paper in <em>Proceedings of the 39th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society</em> <strong>-</strong> Dashboard for using Dutch modality norms (336 properties, 411 concepts) and exploring various analyses with them<br> Bernabeu, P., Willems, R. M., & Louwerse, M. M. (2017). Modality switch effects emerge early and increase throughout conceptual processing: Evidence from ERPs.<em> </em>In G. Gunzelmann, A. Howes, T. Tenbrink, & E. J. Davelaar (Eds.),<em> Proceedings of the 39th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society </em>(pp. 1629-1634). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/a5pcz<br>