Emotional valence and physical space: limits of interaction.

According to the body-specificity hypothesis, people associate positive things with the side of space that corresponds to their dominant hand and negative things with the side corresponding to their nondominant hand. Our aim was to find out whether this association holds also true for a response time study using linguistic stimuli, and whether such an association is activated automatically. Four experiments explored this association using positive and negative words. In Exp. 1, right-handers made a lexical judgment by pressing a left or right key. Attention was not explicitly drawn to the valence of the stimuli. No valence-by-side interaction emerged. In Exp. 2 and 3, right-handers and left-handers made a valence judgment by pressing a left or a right key. A valence-by-side interaction emerged: For positive words, responses were faster when participants responded with their dominant hand, whereas for negative words, responses were faster for the nondominant hand. Exp. 4 required a valence judgment without stating an explicit mapping of valence and side. No valence-by-side interaction emerged. The experiments provide evidence for an association between response side and valence, which, however, does not seem to be activated automatically but rather requires a task with an explicit response mapping to occur.

[1]  T. Dalgleish,et al.  The emotional Stroop task and psychopathology. , 1996, Psychological bulletin.

[2]  L. Barsalou Grounded cognition. , 2008, Annual review of psychology.

[3]  Rolf A. Zwaan,et al.  Seeing, acting, understanding: motor resonance in language comprehension. , 2006, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[4]  Michael P. Kaschak,et al.  Grounding language in action , 2002, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[5]  Roberto Nicoletti,et al.  Spatial stimulus-response compatibility. , 1990 .

[6]  Michelle Verges,et al.  Freeze or flee? Negative stimuli elicit selective responding , 2008, Cognition.

[7]  G. Lakoff,et al.  Metaphors We Live by , 1981 .

[8]  Rolf A. Zwaan The Immersed Experiencer: Toward An Embodied Theory Of Language Comprehension , 2003 .

[9]  Michael D. Robinson,et al.  Good things come easy: Subjective exposure frequency and the faster processing of positive information , 2010 .

[10]  Lars Kuchinke,et al.  Incidental effects of emotional valence in single word processing: An fMRI study , 2005, NeuroImage.

[11]  Michael D. Robinson,et al.  Why the Sunny Side Is Up , 2004, Psychological science.

[12]  John E. Laird,et al.  Stimulus-Response Compatibility , 1986 .

[13]  Daniel Casasanto,et al.  Good and Bad in the Hands of Politicians: Spontaneous Gestures during Positive and Negative Speech , 2010, PloS one.

[14]  Daniel Casasanto,et al.  When is a linguistic metaphor a conceptual metaphor , 2009 .

[15]  J. Adelman,et al.  Automatic vigilance for negative words in lexical decision and naming: comment on Larsen, Mercer, and Balota (2006). , 2008, Emotion.

[16]  Julio Santiago,et al.  Flexible Conceptual Projection of Time Onto Spatial Frames of Reference , 2006, Cogn. Sci..

[17]  Javier Valenzuela,et al.  Trends in cognitive linguistics : theoretical and applied models , 2009 .

[18]  Wolfgang Prinz,et al.  Theoretical issues in stimulus-response compatibility: Editors' introduction , 1997 .

[19]  Cristina Soriano Salinas,et al.  Are conceptual metaphors accessible online? A psycholinguistic exploration of the CONTROL IS UP metaphor , 2009 .

[20]  D. Wentura,et al.  Automatic vigilance: the attention-grabbing power of approach- and avoidance-related social information. , 2000, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[21]  P. Lang,et al.  Individual differences in autonomic response: conditioned association or conditioned fear? , 1985, Psychophysiology.

[22]  M. Masson Using confidence intervals for graphically based data interpretation. , 2003, Canadian journal of experimental psychology = Revue canadienne de psychologie experimentale.

[23]  Antonino Vallesi,et al.  An effect of spatial–temporal association of response codes: Understanding the cognitive representations of time , 2008, Cognition.

[24]  Daniel Casasanto,et al.  When Left Is “Right” , 2011, Psychological science.

[25]  P. Lang Behavioral treatment and bio-behavioral assessment: computer applications , 1980 .

[26]  D. Casasanto,et al.  Journal of Experimental Psychology: General © 2009 American Psychological Association , 2022 .

[27]  T. A. Williams,et al.  Technology in mental health care delivery systems , 1980 .

[28]  Norbert Schwarz,et al.  The hedonic marking of processing fluency: Implications for evaluative judgment , 2003 .

[29]  K. C. Klauer,et al.  The Psychology of Evaluation : Affective Processes in Cognition and Emotion , 2003 .

[30]  R. Ulrich,et al.  Left–right coding of past and future in language: The mental timeline during sentence processing , 2010, Cognition.

[31]  de Ritske Jong,et al.  Theoretical issues in stimulus-response compatibility , 1997 .

[32]  A. T. Welford,et al.  Relationships between reaction time and fatigue, stress, age and sex , 1980 .

[33]  Vyvyan Evans,et al.  New directions in cognitive linguistics , 2009 .

[34]  George S. Cree,et al.  Evocation of functional and volumetric gestural knowledge by objects and words , 2008, Cognition.

[35]  R. C. Oldfield The assessment and analysis of handedness: the Edinburgh inventory. , 1971, Neuropsychologia.