The scope and limits of action semantics: Reply to comments on ‘Action semantics: A unifying conceptual framework for the selective use of multimodal and modality-specific object knowledge’

In our target paper [1], we have provided an integrative review of the current state of affairs regarding research on the use of conceptual knowledge for action. In short, we argue that humans have developed declarative and procedural knowledge about objects, i.e. action semantics that enable them to use objects in a purposeful and effective manner. We were impressed by both the quantity and the quality of the commentaries on our position paper. We would like to thank the commentators for their valuable contributions, pointing out supportive evidence for our framework, indicating additional and complementary strands of research in this field and raising important conceptual and theoretical challenges for our proposed model. Here we take the opportunity to briefly indicate how additional lines of research could be integrated in our framework and how potentially conflicting findings could be reconciled. Joachim Hermsdorfer suggests that the overlap between the kinematics of pantomimed and object-directed actions points towards the existence of a common motor program, while at the same time task context also modulates the low-level features of action execution [2]. The suggestion that the context may exert both an indirect effect (i.e. through a top-down selection of motor programs) and a direct effect on movement execution (e.g. by providing participants with stronger task constraints and sensory feedback through a direct interaction with an object) provides an excellent illustration of the role of context, as proposed in our model of action semantics. A similar role of context on the activation of motor programs is proposed by Anna Borghi [3], who showed that the context (i.e. provided by the task, the inclusion of other objects, semantic information or the presence of other persons) can have a strong influence on the activation of object affordances.