Congruency between word position and meaning is caused by task Induced spatial attention

Pecher, Diane; Dantzig, Saskia van; Boot, Inge; Zanolie, Kiki; Huber, David E.

doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2010.00030

Cited by 45 publications

(89 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Polarity differences have often been discussed as an alternative explanation for metaphor congruency effects (e.g., Pecher, Van Dantzig, Boot, Zanolie, & Huber, 2010;Schubert, 2005;Ulrich & Maienborn, 2010;Vallesi et al, 2008;Van Dantzig, Zeelenberg, & Pecher, 2009;Weger & Pratt, 2008), but whether polarity differences can explain previously observed metaphor congruency effects has never been examined. Given that most studies have examined how concepts are structured in vertical space (see Landau, Meier, & Keefer, 2010), this article examines the mechanisms through which the vertical position of stimuli influence the speed with which abstract bi-polar concepts are categorized.…”

Section: Polarity Differences Vs Interference Effectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Polarity correspondence in metaphor congruency effects: Structural overlap predicts categorization times for bipolar concepts presented in vertical space.

Lakens¹

2012

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cogni

100

143

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous research has shown that words presented on metaphor congruent locations (e.g., positive words UP on the screen and negative words DOWN on the screen) are categorized faster than words presented on metaphor incongruent stimuli (e.g., positive words DOWN and negative words UP). These findings have been explained in terms of an interference effect:The meaning associated with UP and DOWN vertical space can automatically interfere with the categorization of words with a metaphorically incongruent meaning. The current studies test an alternative explanation for the interaction between the vertical position of abstract concepts and the speed with which these stimuli are categorized. Research on polarity differences (basic asymmetries in the way dimensions are processed) predicts that +polar endpoints of dimensions (e.g., positive, moral, UP) are categorized faster than -polar endpoints of dimensions (e.g., negative, immoral, DOWN). Furthermore, the polarity correspondence principle predicts that stimuli where polarities correspond (e.g., positive words presented UP) provide an additional processing benefit compared to stimuli where polarities do not correspond (e.g., negative words presented UP). A meta-analysis (Study 1) shows that a polarity account provides a better explanation of reaction times patterns in previous studies than an interference explanation. An experiment (Study 2) reveals that controlling for the polarity benefit of +polar words compared to -polar words did not only remove the main effect of word polarity, but also the interaction between word meaning and vertical position due to polarity correspondence. These results reveal that metaphor congruency effects should not be interpreted as automatic associations between vertical locations and word meaning, but are more parsimoniously explained by their structural overlap in polarities.

show abstract

Section: Polarity Differences Vs Interference Effectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Polarity correspondence in metaphor congruency effects: Structural overlap predicts categorization times for bipolar concepts presented in vertical space.

Lakens¹

2012

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cogni

100

143

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Of relevance to the current inquiry, the precise mechanism supporting word verticality mappings remains a matter of debate (see Pecher, van Dantzig, Boot, Zanolie, & Huber, 2010). Most commonly, it has been suggested that retrieving the meaning of object, valence, and power words may activate spatial representations that either conflict or converge with those elicited by different screen positions (Schubert, 2005;Meier & Robinson, 2004;Zwaan & Yaxley, 2003).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 95%

Puddles, Parties, and Professors: Linking Word Categorization to Neural Patterns of Visuospatial Coding

Quadflieg

Etzel

Gazzola

et al. 2011

Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract■ Behavioral evidence suggests that during word processing people spontaneously map object, valence, and power information to locations in vertical space. Specifically, whereas "overhead" (e.g., attic), positive (e.g., party), and powerful nouns (e.g., professor) are associated with "up," "underfoot" (e.g., carpet), negative (e.g., accident), and powerless nouns (e.g., assistant) are associated with "down." What has yet to be elucidated, however, is the precise nature of these effects. To explore this issue, an f MRI experiment was undertaken, during which participants were required to categorize the position in which geometrical shapes appeared on a computer screen (i.e., upper or lower part of the display). In addition, they also judged a series of words with regard to location (i.e., up vs. down), valence (i.e., good vs. bad), and power (i.e., powerful vs. powerless). Using multivoxel pattern analysis, it was found that classifiers that successfully distinguished between the positions of shapes in subregions of the inferior parietal lobe also provided discriminatory information to separate location and valence, but not power word judgments. Correlational analyses further revealed that, for location words, pattern transfer was more successful the stronger was participantsʼ propensity to use visual imagery. These findings indicate that visual coding and conceptual processing can elicit common representations of verticality but that divergent mechanisms may support the reported effects. ■

show abstract

“…1 flying/non-flying; Exp. 2 living/nonliving) was faster when the words were presented in a spatially compatible location (e.g., flying animal in the top half of the screen) (cf., Pecher, Van Dantzig, Boot, Zanolie, & Huber, 2010). Estes et al (2008) first reported that even when word meaning is task-irrelevant, implicit location words (e.g., hat, shoe) still serve as spatial cues for involuntary attentional orientation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

What's up? Emotion-specific activation of vertical space during language processing

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Congruency between word position and meaning is caused by task Induced spatial attention

Cited by 45 publications

References 21 publications

Polarity correspondence in metaphor congruency effects: Structural overlap predicts categorization times for bipolar concepts presented in vertical space.

Polarity correspondence in metaphor congruency effects: Structural overlap predicts categorization times for bipolar concepts presented in vertical space.

Puddles, Parties, and Professors: Linking Word Categorization to Neural Patterns of Visuospatial Coding

What's up? Emotion-specific activation of vertical space during language processing

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About