Has social distancing increased our relationships and sense of being connected? Results from a study conducted in Italy, France and Spain during the first COVID-19 lockdown

Connecting with others is a basic human need, often associated with health and well-being. The COVID-19 pandemic and the related distancing measures have been challenging the way we connect and interact, by raising psychological and social issues. During the first lockdown, we designed a questionnaire to investigate people’s social relationships and sense of connectedness. We distributed it online in Italy, France, and Spain (N=672). The survey asked people to rate how much they perceived to be connected to personal (family, friends), local (city), European, or global communities; we related connectedness to other factors, such as quality of social relations, fear of contagion, loneliness, worries for the future. Our results show that the majority of responders reported being moderately to consistently in touch with other people. Yet, to be in contact does not mean to be connected. Compared to the pre-pandemic period, responders reported to be particularly connected with their families/friends, less connected with their town and Europe, while they perceived no variation in the degree of connection with the entire world. Among the predictors we analysed, the fear of being infected and the perception of loneliness revealed significant effects on the connectedness to family and friends. Furthermore, perceiving to be connected to personal and larger groups was associated with fewer worries for the future. Our findings are in line with other psychological studies developed during the pandemic which demonstrate that relationships and the sense of being connected improve the quality of life of people and their expectations for the future

Effects of observing hand motor action on number processing: an online study

In this online study we hypothesized that hand pointing might specifically contribute to the processing of number ordinality, since we learn to list, order, and count series of items through pointing. To test this hypothesis, we asked participants to observe hand pointing or grasping prior to executing number comparison. In experiment 1, participants (N=77) indicated whether a number was larger/smaller than a reference number (magnitude task), therefore processing number cardinality. In Experiment 2, participants (N=75) processed number ordinality, judging whether a number came before/after a reference number in a mental number line (order task). The results showed that response times in the magnitude task (Exp. 1) were faster after grasping as compared to pointing. In the order task (Exp. 2), response times did not differ between grasping and pointing conditions. These results suggest that hand action contribute to specific aspects of numerical processing, in line with embodied accounts of cognition

Distance in depth: A comparison of explicit and implicit numerical distances in the horizontal and radial dimensions

: Numbers are a constant presence in our daily lives: A brain devoid of the ability to process numbers would not be functional in its external environment. Comparing numerical magnitudes is a fundamental ability that requires the processing of numerical distances. From magnitude comparison tasks, a comparison distance effect (DE) emerges: It describes better performance when comparing numerically distant rather than close numbers. Unlike other signatures of number processing, the comparison DE has been assessed only implicitly, with numerical distance as nonsalient task property. Different assessments permit identification of different cognitive processes underlying a specific effect. To investigate whether explicit and implicit assessment of the comparison DE influences numerical cognition differently, we introduced the distance classification task, involving explicit classification of numbers as close or far from a reference. N = 93 healthy adults classified numbers either by magnitude or by numerical distance. To investigate associations between numerical and physical distance, response buttons were positioned horizontally (Experiment 1) or radially (Experiment 2). In both experiments, there was an advantage for both the closest and farthest numbers with respect to the reference during distance classification, but not during magnitude classification. In Experiment 2, numerically close/far numbers were classified faster with the close/far response button, respectively, suggesting radial correspondence between physical and representational distances. These findings provide new theoretical and methodological insights into the mental representation of numbers. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved)

Perceiving object dangerousness: an escape from pain?

n/

Ecological Meanings: A Consensus Paper on Individual Differences and Contextual Influences in Embodied Language

Embodied theories of cognition consider many aspects of language and other cognitive domains as the result of sensory and motor processes. In this view, the appraisal and the use of concepts are based on mechanisms of simulation grounded on prior sensorimotor experiences. Even though these theories continue receiving attention and support, increasing evidence indicates the need to consider the flexible nature of the simulation process, and to accordingly refine embodied accounts. In this consensus paper, we discuss two potential sources of variability in experimental studies on embodiment of language: individual differences and context. Specifically, we show how factors contributing to individual differences may explain inconsistent findings in embodied language phenomena. These factors include sensorimotor or cultural experiences, imagery, context-related factors, and cognitive strategies. We also analyze the different contextual modulations, from single words to sentences and narratives, as well as the top-down and bottom-up influences. Similarly, we review recent efforts to include cultural and language diversity, aging, neurodegenerative diseases, and brain disorders, as well as bilingual evidence into the embodiment framework. We address the importance of considering individual differences and context in clinical studies to drive translational research more efficiently, and we indicate recommendations on how to correctly address these issues in future research. Systematically investigating individual differences and context may contribute to understanding the dynamic nature of simulation in language processes, refining embodied theories of cognition, and ultimately filling the gap between cognition in artificial experimental settings and cognition in the wild (i.e., in everyday life)