No need to integrate action information during coarse semantic processing of man-made tools

Action representation of man-made tools consists of two subtypes: structural action representation concerning how to grasp an object, and functional action representation concerning the skilled use of an object. Compared to structural action representation, functional action representation plays the dominant role in fine-grained (i.e., basic level) object recognition. However, it remains unclear whether the two types of action representation are involved differently in the coarse semantic processing in which the object is recognized at a superordinate level (i.e., living/non-living). Here we conducted three experiments using the priming paradigm, in which video clips displaying structural and functional action hand gestures were used as prime stimuli and grayscale photos of man-made tools were used as target stimuli. Participants recognized the target objects at the basic level in Experiment 1 (i.e., naming task) and at the superordinate level in Experiments 2 and 3 (i.e., categorization task). We observed a significant priming effect for functional action prime-target pairs only in the naming task. In contrast, no priming effect was found in either the naming or the categorization task for the structural action prime-target pairs (Experiment 2), even when the categorization task was preceded by a preliminary action imitation of the prime gestures (Experiment 3). Our results suggest that only functional action information is retrieved during fine-grained object processing. In contrast, coarse semantic processing does not require the integration of either structural or functional action information.

The dominant role of functional action representation in object recognition

Action representation of manipulable objects has been found to be involved in object recognition. Recently, studies have indicated the existence of two distinct action systems: functional action specifying how to use an object and structural action concerning how to grasp an object. Despite evidence revealing the systems' anatomical and functional differences, few preceding studies have dissociated their respective roles in object recognition. The present study aimed to tease apart their roles in the recognition of manipulable objects with a priming paradigm. Specifically, we used static stimuli (photos, Experiments 1 and 2) and dynamic stimuli (video clips, Experiments 3 and 4) depicting functional and structural action hand gestures as primes and measured the magnitude of functional and structural action priming effect in object recognition. We found that static and dynamic priming stimuli induced a robust action priming effect only for functional action prime-target pairs. Naming latencies of the target objects were shorter when functional action representations of the prime and target were congruent than when they were incongruent. Moreover, as compared to static priming photos, dynamic priming stimuli induced a larger functional action priming effect. By contrast, neither static nor dynamic priming stimuli elicited a structural action priming effect. Behavioral data from our four experiments provide consistent evidence of the dominant role of functional action representation in the recognition of manipulable objects, suggesting that action knowledge regarding how to use rather than grasp an object is more likely an intrinsic component of objects' conceptual representation.