How emotional are words ambiguous on the spaces of valence, origin and activation?

IF 2.6 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL
Adrianna Wielgopolan, Kamil K Imbir
{"title":"How emotional are words ambiguous on the spaces of valence, origin and activation?","authors":"Adrianna Wielgopolan,&nbsp;Kamil K Imbir","doi":"10.1080/02699931.2023.2216928","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Not all of the stimuli that we encounter are unequivocal; some of them may be ambiguous. In a series of two experiments, we investigated how people perceive and assess the emotionality of the words ambiguous on three emotional spaces: valence (dimensions of positivity and negativity), origin (automaticity and reflectiveness), and activation (arousal and subjective significance). Using two types of measurement - behavioural and webcam-based eye tracking - we compared words of moderate and high ambiguity on each of those spaces with control (uniequivocal) words. The behavioural measurements indicated that reaction times were significantly longer for the control words than for all the ambiguous words; the emotionality of words of ambiguous valence and origin was rated as significantly lower than the control words and words of ambiguous activation. The eye-tracking measurements indicated that words of ambiguous valence and origin caused significantly more and longer eye fixations than control words and words of ambiguous activation. The results showed the visible distinctiveness of the ambiguous words compared with the control words; they also showed differences between words of various ambiguities, verifying the proposed new model for the emotional ambiguity and presenting the behavioral and eye tracking correlates for each of the three ambiguities.</p>","PeriodicalId":48412,"journal":{"name":"Cognition & Emotion","volume":"37 5","pages":"891-907"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cognition & Emotion","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2023.2216928","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Not all of the stimuli that we encounter are unequivocal; some of them may be ambiguous. In a series of two experiments, we investigated how people perceive and assess the emotionality of the words ambiguous on three emotional spaces: valence (dimensions of positivity and negativity), origin (automaticity and reflectiveness), and activation (arousal and subjective significance). Using two types of measurement - behavioural and webcam-based eye tracking - we compared words of moderate and high ambiguity on each of those spaces with control (uniequivocal) words. The behavioural measurements indicated that reaction times were significantly longer for the control words than for all the ambiguous words; the emotionality of words of ambiguous valence and origin was rated as significantly lower than the control words and words of ambiguous activation. The eye-tracking measurements indicated that words of ambiguous valence and origin caused significantly more and longer eye fixations than control words and words of ambiguous activation. The results showed the visible distinctiveness of the ambiguous words compared with the control words; they also showed differences between words of various ambiguities, verifying the proposed new model for the emotional ambiguity and presenting the behavioral and eye tracking correlates for each of the three ambiguities.

词在价、源、激活空间上的歧义程度如何?
并非我们遇到的所有刺激都是明确的;其中一些可能是模棱两可的。在两个系列实验中,我们研究了人们如何在三个情感空间上感知和评估歧义词的情绪性:效价(积极和消极的维度)、起源(自动性和反思性)和激活(唤醒和主观意义)。使用两种类型的测量方法——行为和基于网络摄像头的眼动追踪——我们将每个空间中中度和高度模糊的单词与控制(明确的)单词进行了比较。行为测量表明,对照词的反应时间明显长于所有歧义词的反应时间;效价和来源模棱两可的词的情绪性显著低于对照词和激活模棱两可的词。眼动追踪结果表明,效价和来源模糊的词比对照词和激活模糊的词引起的注视时间更长,注视时间更长。结果表明,歧义词与对照词相比具有明显的显著性;他们还展示了不同歧义词之间的差异,验证了提出的情感歧义新模型,并展示了三种歧义的行为和眼动追踪相关性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Cognition & Emotion
Cognition & Emotion PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
7.70%
发文量
90
期刊介绍: Cognition & Emotion is devoted to the study of emotion, especially to those aspects of emotion related to cognitive processes. The journal aims to bring together work on emotion undertaken by researchers in cognitive, social, clinical, and developmental psychology, neuropsychology, and cognitive science. Examples of topics appropriate for the journal include the role of cognitive processes in emotion elicitation, regulation, and expression; the impact of emotion on attention, memory, learning, motivation, judgements, and decisions.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信