ArticlePloS one2023
The embodied typist: Bimanual actions are modulated by words' implied motility and number of evoked limbs.
Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Embodied Effects in Verb Processing and Learning: A Three-Level Meta-Analysis.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- See what I mean? Reading visual verbs modulates ocular dynamics.Language, cognition and neuroscience · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The planning and execution of manual actions can be influenced by concomitant processing of manual action verbs. However, this phenomenon manifests in varied ways throughout the literature, ranging from facilitation to interference effects. Suggestively, stimuli across studies vary randomly in two potentially relevant variables: verb motility and effector quantity (i.e., the amount of movement and the number of hands implied by the word, respectively). Here we examine the role of these factors during keyboard typing, a strategic bimanual task validated in previous works. Forty-one participants read and typed high and low motility items from four categories: bimanual, unimanual, and non-manual action verbs, as well as minimally motoric verbs. Motor planning and execution were captured by first-letter lag (the lapse between word presentation and first keystroke) and whole-word lag (the lapse between the first and last keystroke). We found that verb motility modulated action planning and execution, both stages being delayed by high (relative to low) motility verbs. Effector quantity also influenced both stages, which were facilitated by bimanual verbs relative to unimanual verbs and non-manual verbs (this effect being confined to high motility items during action execution). Accordingly, motor-language coupling effects seem sensitive to words' implied motility and number of evoked limbs. These findings refine our understanding of how semantics influences bodily movement.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.