Empirical evidence for affective horizontal priming
Brief report
Authors:
Marcin Baraniecki Andrzej Gajda
Jacek Mańko Bartosz Michałowski
July 16, 2012
Abstract
In a series of two studies we investigated whether affect could have a senso- motoric basis. Experimental and, partially, theoretical framework for that was provided in Meier & Robinson (2004), who, by using spatial priming, found that positive and negative words are processed faster while presented either at the top or bottom of the screen. We rearranged the original design from ver- tical to a horizontal one, predicting the right side to facilitate the processing of positive words and, by analogy, the left side was regarded as associated with the negative content, at least in right-handers. Study 1 provides partial con- firmation of the hypothesis, while Study 2 fully supports our predictions. The results are discussed in the light of original results and more recent findings (Casasanto 2009).
Keywords: embodiment, affective priming, spatial priming, cognitive sci- ence, metaphor, valence
1 Introduction
When Lakoff & Johnson had published (1980) their first controversial, but, nev- ertheless, groundbreaking book about metaphors, the fields of not only linguistics, but also of cognitive science underwent a radical shift to the new paradigm, namely, to the embodiment.
Embodiment assumes that the human abstract concepts arise from and are grounded in sensomotoric (bodily) experiences (Lakoff & Johnson 1980). It also entails that these abstract concepts are largely metaphorical and that these con- ceptual metaphors are founded in the experiental basis mentioned above. As Evans
& Green explicitly put it: "...our construal of reality is likely to be mediated in large measure by the nature of our bodies. (2006:45). One of the most productive con- ceptual metaphor, GOOD IS UP and in reverse, BAD IS DOWN, links the notion of verticality with the, i.e. morality (Heaven is above but Hell deep under) or phys- ical condition (being depressed or cheering up) (See also: Lakoff & Johnson 1999 for more detailed analysis.). However, there is a need of converging evidence sup- porting these ideas, for if we rely solely on the theoretical, observational level, such a reasoning becomes circular. It is therefore claimed that these abstract concepts are embodied, which should reflect itself in using metaphors, but using metaphors cannot be explained merely by the fact that they are a part of embodied conceptual system. Meier & Robinson’s (2004) study provides such evidence and their work became an inspiration for us. In their study, they combine spatial (vertical) and affective priming,1 while using the embodiment as a source of prediction.
In a series of three studies they found significant effects, such that the congurent (accordingly to a vertical metaphor - words with positive valence on the top of the screen, while those with the negative on the bottom) presenting an affective word on the screen facilitates its recognition and that affective evaluations activate spatial attention. Their conclusion is that affect is somehow perceptually grounded. Similar research was carried out also by Schubert (2005), who found that the specific concept of power is associated with the notion of verticality.
Our study aims to expand the paradigm developed by Meier & Robinson (2004) by investigating hypothetical, yet plausible conceptual metaphor: GOOD is RIGHT and BAD IS LEFT, that could be successfully investigated within that theoretical and experimental framework.
The only work, dealing with that horizontal metaphor in a systematic way, is Casasanto (2009).2 Casasanto also coined the term body-specifity hypothesis (See review in: Casasnto 2011) assuming that having a different body could possibly dif- ferentiate the way people implictly relate some concepts to the certain experiental basis. In a series of 5 studies he found a dissociative effect, such that the handedness influences the pattern of associating positive or negative concepts in a horizontal orientation. Right-handers were more likely to link the former with the right side, while the latter with the left and left-handers performed the other way round.
Casasanto points out that everyday interaction with physical environment can lead to forming different, yet analogous mental represenation in these groups.
The notions of the right side being good, while the left being bad, seem to be evident in English, where the term right is polysemous meaning direction and truth or (as an adjective) morally good. Similar relations are spotted frequently in Pol- ish, where the adjective prawy means direction, but also being justice and noble or fair.3 The noun prawo is also polysemous meaning right (to do something) and law at the same time. The adjective lewy means apart from direction being illegal, false, fake and dull, stupid or not skilled enough. These attitudes are also conveyed in many idiomatic expressions4, i.e. mieć/załatwić coś na lewo means underhand dealings/business or obtained by the crook, wstać lewą nogą means to get out of the bed on the wrong side, mieć dwie lewe ręce means to have two left feet, but also to be clumsy, być czyjąś prawą ręką means to be sb’s right hand. Even clothes have
”right and ”left side” and wearing them on the ”left side” (inside out) is highly un-
two if rarely embraced in a reasearch. See: Bromberek-Dyzman (2011) for the review of affective priming research.
2See also: Casasanto & Jasmin 2010 and Casasanto & Chrysikou 2011 for similar ideas.
3http://www.sjp.pwn.pl
4All of the translations come from: Polsko-angielski słownik frazeologiczny, Arabski J. (ed.), SWSPiZ, Łódź - Warszawa 2010.
common, not to say inappriopriate. Also Jesus used to sitteth on the right hand of the Father5 (...po prawicy Ojca.). Casasanto (2009) presents a comprehensive review of such an evaulative framing in other languages and cultures.
It is therefore reasonable to predict similar results in a facilitative and congruent conditions, at least in right-handers.
2 Method
As previously stated, Meier’s and Robinson (2004) method was adapted with orien- tational rearrangement: from a vertical orientation to a horizontal one.
Materials
120 emotion-arousing words (60 words arousing positive emotions and 60 arousing negative) controlled for length (vowels and syllables)6 and corpus frequencies7 were presented to 33 Polish native speakers (all of whom were undergraduates, mean age x = 22 years, SD = 1.46, 25 females, 8 males) in an online survey as a task to rate its emotional valence on a 7-point Likert scale (where 1 = negative and 7 = positive). Based on their ratings, we rejected 20 most neutral words (10 positive and 10 negative). Positive words were rated significantly higher (x = 5.84) than negative (x = 1.86), t-test value < 0.001. However, stimuli differed significantly in the power of valence, such that the power of negative words were stronger than the power of positive words.8 That asymmetry effect also called as the negativity bias is often encountered in many studies,9 indicating that negative emotions tend to be stronger and more persistent than the positive ones. Since comparing valencies was not an essential goal of the study, that difference was regarded as irrelevant for our research purposes.
5http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Nicene_Creed
6Average number of vowels in positive words were 5.37, SD = 1.25 and in negative 5.57, SD = 1.36. Syllables, respectively, 2.08, SD = 0.53 and 2.02, SD = 0.77, t-test values were as follow: 0.4 and 0.582, ns.
7Corpus frequencies were distributed as follow: 776.38, SD = 291 for positive and 774.15, SD = 282 for negative, t-test value = 0.966, ns. We used the publicly available IPI PAN Corpus and browsed through the full database consisting of more than 250 million segments, http://http:
//www.korpus.pl/
8The mean for negative word was closer to the respective extremum (0.86) than was the positive (1.16) and the difference 0.28 turned out to be significant, t-test value < 0.001.
9See: Rozin & Royzman (2001).
Study 1
Study 1 was redesigned to examine whether affective evaluations could be facilitated by the congruent horizontal conditions. The task was to evaluate the valence of 100 words and the only factor that we manipulated (by random), was the stimuli’s position of the screen. Our hypothesis predicts that the recognition of positive words will be faster if we present them on the right side on the screen, while the recognition of the negative will be faster, while presented on the left side.
Participants
Participants were 53 right-handed, undergraduate students (all of whom where na- tive Polish speakers, mean age x = 22.78 years, SD = 2.23, 42 females, 11 males) who voluntarily agreed to participate in an experiment.
Procedure
Temporal and spatial parameters of stimuli were taken from the original design.
A fixation cue (+) was presented at the center of the screen for 300ms. Following this cue, the next cue (+) was flashed for 300ms in 1/3 either to the left or right (de- termined at random) from the center of the screen. The last cue (+) was flashed for 300 ms either on left or right part of the screen, 2/3 from the center (in the same hor- izontal direction as the second cue). The word then appeared at the far left or right of the screen (same horizontal direction as the second and third cue). The spatial cues were intended to reduce random visuospatial exploration of the screen and to direct attention to the place of the stimuli’s appearance. Words were presented in white (on a black background), capitalized and centered vertically on the screen. Par- ticipants were instructed to evaluate each word as quickly as possible. They used standard latin computer keyboard, pressing only ’P’ for positive and ’N’ for negative.
If the response was inaccurate (inconsistent with average stimulus evaluation in an online survey), the word ’ŹLE’ (’INCORRECT’) appeared in red font for 1500ms at the center of the screen. If the response was correct, the word ’OK’ appeared in red font for 500ms at the center of the screen.
Results
Incorrect answers were excluded from the analysis. Two male participants misbe- haved during the procedure and for that reason their results were also excluded.
Latencies were then log-transformed to normalize their distribution.
Two-Way (valence: positive vs. negative and position: right vs. left) repeated measures ANOVA was performed.10 The main effect of valence was significant (p = 0.002) indicating that words with positive valence were evaluated faster (x = 792ms) than those with the negative valence (x = 828ms).
The main effect of position was also significant (p = 0.002) indicating that words were processed faster, while flashed at the right side of the screen (x = 799ms), than at the left side (x = 821ms). The most expected interaction effect turned out to be insignificant. (p = 0.66). As shown in Figure 1, not only were the partic- ipants faster while evaluating positive words when presented on the right side (vs.
left side), but they were also faster in evaluating negative words even if presented on the right side. However, if we remove males results, that effect becomes unexpec- etadly significant (p = 0.023).
Figure 1: Reaction times as a function of word valence and position. Errors bars represent the standard error of the difference between two means.
10We used SPSS version 20.0. for statistical analysis.
Study 2
Study 2 was also redesigned to determine whether affective judgements activate spatial attention. We applied a continuous priming paradigm. Having evaluated the valence of a word (prime), participants’ task was to press a button on the keyboard representing the letter that have just appeared on either right or left side of the screen. The sequence of words to evaluate was randomized and so was the location of the target stimuli.
Participants
Participants were 37 right-handed, undergraduate students, (native Polish speakers, mean age x = 22.35 years, SD = 1.82, 30 females, 7 males) who voluntarily agreed to participate in an experiment.
Procedure
100 stimuli were presented (one at a time) with the instruction to evaluate each word as quickly as possible. The words appeared in the middle of the screen, capi- talized in white and on a black background. Subjects used standard latin computer keyboard, pressing only ’P’ for positive evaluation, and ’N’ for negative evaluation.
Immediately after evaluation, a letter ’Z’ or ’X’ (randomly) was flashed on the left or right side centered vertically. Participants were instructed to react as quickly as possible by pressing respective button on the keyboard. If the wrong letter was pressed, the word ’ŹLE’ (’INCORRECT’) appeared in red font for 1500ms at the center of the screen. If the responses were correct, the word ’OK’ appeared in red font for 500ms at the center of the screen.
Results
Two-Way (valence: positive vs. negative and position: right vs. left) repeated mea- sures ANOVA was performed. The only significant statistical difference was found, as predicted, in the interaction of Valence x Position (p = 0.001). It therefore in- dicates that the discrimination of letters was faster in the right location if primed by correct positive evaluation, while discrimination in the left location was faster if primed by the correct negative evaluation (See Fig.2).
Figure 2: Reaction times (discrimination of letters) as a funcion of position and valence of the prime. Errors bars represent the standard error of the difference between two means.
3 Discussion
In a series of 2 experiments, we tried (by expanding Meier & Robinson’s paradigm) to find empirical evidence for affective horizontal priming, based on a putative con- ceptual metaphors GOOD IS RIGHT and BAD IS LEFT. Results of our preliminary study are regarded with moderate cautiousness as corroborative to the sensomotoric basis of affect.
The unexpected main effect of site found in Study 1 could be possibly explained by the culturally imposed habit to read and write from left to right in, i.e. Mid- Eastern Europe. It becomes therefore automatic for participants to read by following their gaze in a well-used and default direction, while following gaze in a reverse direction in order to read becomes more effortful and demanding, which could result in making regressions and hence longer reaction times.
The second main effect of valence, (also appeared in Meier & Robinson’s (2004) study) described as positivity offset has been often found in other studies,11 indicat- ing that the negative emotions are processed longer, because of its highly demanding cognitive load.
The interaction effect was insignificant, but even if it were not so (as obtained in females only), our predictions would be confirmed to a very limited extent, since we found contradictory results in the negative condition. We do not consider this
interaction effect as a merely summation of the main effects. Notwithstanding the artifacts that were encountered, we regard the procedure used here as reliable. Ap- parently, if used in a horizontally oriented tasks, that paradigm requires further refinements, which we propose in the next section.
Our results in Study 2 were analogous to the original ones in Study 2, for we obtained the only predicted statistical significance in the interaction effect. These results suggest that, regardless of the site of the screen where the stimulus was flashed, affective judgments activated spatial attention. We therefore infer that the right-handers tend to associate affect also within the horizontal dimension. Having found such a difference, we consider the notion of linking valence with senosomotoric grounding as plausible. Yet, since we used verbal stimuli, our preliminary study could not unequivocally determine the nature and source of such a linking. Does it arise from personal bodily experience only or is it just aquired during language development and use? Therefore, it is not clear, how a metaphor GOOD IS RIGHT might be represented in a mind and brain of right-handers, but our study was not intended to result in such a far-reaching conclusions. In Study 2, we have primarily investigated whether affective evaluation could activate spatial attention. We infer that some kind of metaphorical reasoning must have played a significant role there, but its impact remains yet undiscovered (See also: Discussion in Casasanto 2009 for detailed analysis of that issue). However, using nonverbal stimuli (as done in Casasanto 2009) would result in a conclusions free of linguistic or even cultural biases.
We must also admit that the disproportion between the number of men and women responding to an on-line survey and participating in our study is a serious limitation. It might be so that our results are biased and limit itself to the female population only. Although, in our opinion, this is just a matter of time to construct a similar, but sex-balanced set of affective stimuli and to obtain an analogous effects in males.
4 Further research
We propose several improvements to avoid the main effect of site in Study 1. It would be fruitful to investigate whether that pattern also occurs in right-to-left reading population, i.e. in Israel or muslim countries. Prolonged times for presenting visual cues might also possibly facilitate that effect, but further eye-tracking study would provide convincing physiological data of how the gaze followed the stimuli. We could infer from such data about the possible occurence of regressions or any relevant gaze-related factor, i.e. number of saccades, that might probably differientiate the
performance on a task between the sides.
Study 1 also clearly showed the necessity of very rigorous choice of verbal stim- uli. If creating such a set from anew, one must be aware of many possible linguis- tic and hence conceptual properties that could confound the results. It is there- fore vital to control these materials for many factors, including imaginability, since it may be so, as Casasanto assumes (2009), that such an effect may be obtained only by using highly-abstract words. Melissa et al. (2009) proposed also arousal (ranging from calm to exciting) as an important variable to control. These authors also used a bipolar scale instead of a unipolar Likert-scale while evaluating valence, which might better represent the nature of this concept.
Last, but not least, there is an urgent need to conduct these experiments with the left-handers, expecting that they should exhibit a different pattern of results and hence, manifest a reverse metaphor, that is: GOOD IS LEFT and BAD IS RIGHT.
Without such a results it is impossible to provide evidence either against or in favour of the body-specifity hypothesis.
5 Conclusion
The fact that positive or negative concepts are linked with verticality could be explained relatively easily by referring directly to bodily experience, but linking horizontal dimension with affect merits further investigation, since the origin and neural correlates of, i.e. left-handedess are poorly understood. Right-hand domi- nancy is prevalent among most cultures of the world, which could tentatively sug- gest its universality and hence phylogenetic provenience. However, not only the issue of left-handendess, but also the evolutionary origins of the lateralization of the brain functions remain to be investigated more carefully. It may thusly turn out that the notion of horizontal affection is much more intricate than it is known for the time being.
Acknowledgements
We are very grateful to Professor Maciej Karpiński from the Institute of Linguistics for his extremely valuable comments and remarks.
References
Korpus IPI PAN: http://www.korpus.pl.
Nicene Creed: http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Nicene_Creed.
Słownik języka polskiego: http://www.sjp.pwn.pl.
Arabski, J., editor (2010). Polsko-angielski słownik frazeologiczny. SWSPiZ, Łódź–
Warszawa.
Bromberek-Dyzman, K. (2011). Język emocji a język ironii w pragmatyce ekspery- mentalnej. Studia z Kognitywistyki i Filozofii Umysłu, 5(1):5–38.
Casasanto, D. (2009). Embodiment of abstract concepts: Good and band in right- and left-handers. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 138(3):351–367.
Casasanto, D. (2011). Different bodies, different minds:the body specificity of lan- guage and thought. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 20(6):378–383.
Casasanto, D. and Chrysikou, E. G. (2011). When left is "right": Motor fluency shapes abstract concepts. Psychological science, 22(4):419–422.
Casasanto, D. and Jasmin, K. (2010). Good and bad in the hands of politi- cians: Spontaneous gestures during positive and negative speech. PLoS ONE, 5(7):e11805. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0011805.
Evans, V. and Green, M. (2006). Cognitive linguistics an introduction. Edinburgh University Press Ltd.
Ito, T. A., Larsen, J. T., Smith, N. K., and Cacioppo, J. T. (1998). Negative information weighs more heavily on the brain: The negativity bias in evaluative categorizations. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 75:887–900.
Lakoff, G. and Johson, M. (1980). Metaphor we live by. The University of Chicago Press.
Lakoff, G. and Johson, M. (1999). Philosophy in the Flesh: The Embodied Mind and its challenge to western thought. Basic Book, New York.
Meier, B. and Robinson, M. (2004). Why the sunny side is up: Associations between affect and vertical position. Psychological Science, 15(4):243–247.
Melissa, L.-H., Conrad, M., Kuchinke, L., Urton, K., Hofmann, M., and Jacobs, A. (2009). The berlin affective word list reloaded (bawl–r). Behavioral Research Method, 41(2):534–538.
Rozin, P. and Royzman, E. (2001). Negativity bias, negativity dominance and con- tagion. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5(4):296–320.
Schubert, T. (2005). Your highness: Vertical positions as perceptual symbols of power. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89(1):1–21.
Appendix
List of the positive words: anioł, bajka, siła, bohater, chwała, ciepło, cnota, czy- sty, dobro, honor, kwiat, marzenie, mądry, męstwo, miłość, moc, moralność, nagroda, niebo, spokój, piękno, seks, wiedza, pomoc, szczęście, prawda, prezent, przyjaciel, rodzina, rozkosz, rozwój, ogród, serce, słodycze, słońce, sukces, szacunek, śmiech, ulga, sen, urlop, wiara, wierność, wiosna, wolność, zabawa, zachwyt, zdrowie, zwy- cięstwo, życie
List of the negative words: katastrofa, smutek, strach, wojna, brzydki, choroba depresja, diabeł, dług, fałsz, głupi, rozpacz, grób, grzech, gwałt, kłamstwo, koszmar, kradzież, lęk, cierpienie, upadek, żal, nienawiść, niepokój, klęska, oszustwo, paraliż, obawa, pogrzeb, wypadek, więzienie, zamach, pożar, strata, porażka, bieda, zdrada, zazdrość, szantaż, złodziej, zwłoki, nowotwór, groźba, przykro, śmierć, tortury, stres, zło, ból, głód,
