How reading comprehension is embodied and why that matters

Main Article Content

Arthur M. Glenberg

Abstract

Reading comprehension, much like comprehension of situations and comprehension of oral
language, is embodied. In all cases, comprehension is the ability to take effective action on the basis of
affordances related to the body, the physical world, and personal goals and cultural norms. In
language contexts, action-based comprehension arises from simulating the linguistic content using
neural and bodily systems of perception, action, and emotion. Within this framework, a new approach
to teaching reading comprehension is described: Teach children how to simulate while reading. The
Moved by Reading intervention teaches simulation in two stages. In the first stage, physical
manipulation, children manipulate toys to simulate the content of what they are reading. After
success in physically manipulating the toys, the children are taught to manipulate the toys in
imagination. Research demonstrates that both physical and imagined manipulation leads to large
gains in memory and comprehension.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
GLENBERG, Arthur M.. How reading comprehension is embodied and why that matters. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, [S.l.], v. 4, n. 1, p. 5-18, aug. 2017. ISSN 1307-9298. Available at: <https://iejee.com/index.php/IEJEE/article/view/210>. Date accessed: 04 apr. 2020.
Section
Articles

References

Barsalou, L. W. (1999). Perceptual symbol systems. Behavioral and brain sciences, 22(04), 577–660.
Barsalou, L. W. (2008). Grounded cognition. Annu. Rev. Psychol., 59, 617–645.
Beilock, S. L., & Goldin-Meadow, S. (2010). Gesture Changes Thought by Grounding It in Action.
Psychological Science, 21(11), 1605-1610. doi:10.1177/0956797610385353
Bubic, A., Von Cramon, D. Y., & Schubotz, R. I. (2010). Prediction, cognition and the brain. Frontiers in
Human Neuroscience, 4.
Fischer, M. H., & Zwaan, R. A. (2008). Embodied language: A review of the role of the motor system in
language comprehension. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 61(6), 825-850.
doi:10.1080/17470210701623605
Gallese, V., & Lakoff, G. (2005). The brain’s concepts: The role of the sensory-motor system in
conceptual knowledge. The Multiple Functions of Sensory-Motor Representations, 22(3/4), 455.
Glenberg, A. M. (2007). Language and action: creating sensible combinations of ideas. In G. Gaskell
(Ed.) The Oxford handbook of psycholinguistics (pp.361-370). Oxford, UK: Oxford University
Press.
Glenberg, A. M. (2011). Introduction to the Mirror Neuron Forum. Perspectives on Psychological Science,
6(4), 363-368. doi:10.1177/1745691611412386
Glenberg, A. M, Brown, M., & Levin, J. R. (2007). Enhancing comprehension in small reading groups
using a manipulation strategy. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 32(3), 389–399.
Glenberg, A. M., & Gallese, V. (2011). Action-based language: A theory of language acquisition,
comprehension, and production. Cortex. doi:10.1016/ j.cortex. 2011. 04.010
Glenberg, A. M., Goldberg, A. B., & Zhu, X. (2009). Improving early reading comprehension using
embodied CAI. Instructional Science, 39(1), 27-39. doi:10.1007/s11251-009-9096-7
Glenberg, A. M., Gutierrez, T., Levin, J. R., Japuntich, S., & Kaschak, M. P. (2004). Activity and imagined
activity can enhance young children’s reading comprehension. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 96(3), 424–436.
Glenberg, A. M., Jaworski, B., Rischal, M., & Levin, J. R. (2007). What brains are for: Action, meaning, and
reading comprehension. Reading comprehension strategies: Theories, interventions, and
technologies, 221–240.
Glenberg, A. M., & Robertson, D. A. (2000). Symbol grounding and meaning: A comparison of highdimensional
and embodied theories of meaning. Journal of Memory and Language, 43(3),
379–401.
Glenberg, A., Sato, M., Cattaneo, L., Riggio, L., Palumbo, D., & Buccino, G. (2008). Processing abstract
language modulates motor system activity. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,
61(6), 905-919. doi:10.1080/ 17470210701625550
Glenberg, A. M., Willford, J., Gibson, B., Goldberg, A., & Zhu, X. (2011). Improving Reading to Improve
Math. Scientific Studies of Reading, 1-25. doi:10.1080/ 10888438. 2011.564245
Goldin-Meadow, S., & Beilock, S. L. (2010). Action’s Influence on Thought: The Case of Gesture.
Perspectives on Psychological Science, 5(6), 664-674. doi:10.1177/ 1745691610388764
Hauk, O., Johnsrude, I., & Pulvermüller, F. (2004). Somatotopic representation of action words in
human motor and premotor cortex. Neuron, 41(2), 301–307.
Havas, D. A., Glenberg, A. M., Gutowski, K. A., Lucarelli, M. J., & Davidson, R. J. (2010). Cosmetic Use of
Botulinum Toxin-A Affects Processing of Emotional Language. Psychological Science, 21(7),
895-900. doi:10.1177/0956797610374742
Hostetter, A. B., & Alibali, M. W. (2008). Visible embodiment: Gestures as simulated action. Psychonomic
Bulletin & Review, 15(3), 495-514. doi:10.3758/PBR.15.3.495
Kaschak, M. P, & Glenberg, A. M. (2000). Constructing meaning: The role of affordances and
grammatical constructions in sentence comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language,
43(3), 508–529.
Kiefer, M., & Pulvermüller, F. (2011). Conceptual representations in mind and brain: Theoretical
developments, current evidence and future directions. Cortex.
doi:10.1016/j.cortex.2011.04.006
Kousta, S.-T., Vigliocco, G., Vinson, D. P., Andrews, M., & Del Campo, E. (2010). The representation of
abstract words: Why emotion matters. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General.
doi:10.1037/a0021446
Marley, S. C, Levin, J. R, & Glenberg, A. M. (2007). Improving Native American children’s listening
comprehension through concrete representations. Contemporary Educational Psychology,
32(3), 537–550.
Marley, S. C., Szabo, Z., Levin, J. R., & Glenberg, A. M. (2011). Investigation of an Activity-Based Text-
Processing Strategy in Mixed-Age Child Dyads. The Journal of Experimental Education, 79(3),
340-360. doi:10.1080/00220973.2010.483697
Marley, S., Levin, J., & Glenberg, A. (2010). What Cognitive Benefits Does an Activity-Based Reading
Strategy Afford Young Native American Readers? The Journal of Experimental Education, 78(3),
395-417. doi:10.1080/00220970903548061
Rizzolatti, G., & Craighero, L. (2004). The mirror neuron system. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 27(1),
169-192. doi:10.1146/annurev.neuro.27.070203.144230
Rueschemeyer, S.-A., Glenberg, A. M., Kaschak, M. P., Mueller, K., & Friederici, A. D. (2010). Top-Down
and Bottom-Up Contributions to Understanding Sentences Describing Objects in Motion.
Frontiers in Psychology, 1. doi:10.3389/ fpsyg.2010. 00183
Santana, E., & de Vega, M. (2011). Metaphors are Embodied, and so are Their Literal Counterparts.
Frontiers in Psychology, 2. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00090
Zwaan, R. A., & Taylor, L. J. (2006). Seeing, acting, understanding: Motor resonance in language
comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 135(1), 1-11.