The "plus polar self": A reinterpretation of the self-prioritization effect as a polarity correspondence effect.

IF 3.7 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL
Journal of Experimental Psychology: General Pub Date : 2025-03-01 Epub Date: 2024-12-30 DOI:10.1037/xge0001713
Marcel Pauly, Dirk Wentura
{"title":"The \"plus polar self\": A reinterpretation of the self-prioritization effect as a polarity correspondence effect.","authors":"Marcel Pauly, Dirk Wentura","doi":"10.1037/xge0001713","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>We suggest that the polarity correspondence principle (PCP; Proctor & Cho, 2006) can explain the self-prioritization effect (SPE), that is, that matching responses for self-labels and self-assigned shapes are faster than matching responses for other labels and other-assigned shapes. According to PCP, one can argue that self-label, self-shape, and the \"yes, match\" responses are all + polar (hence full correspondence is given), whereas other label and other shape are both-polar, which does not correspond to the + polarity of the \"yes\" response. Our argument is based on a structural analogy of the self-matching task with an experiment by Seymour (1969)-a pillar of the PCP-who conducted an experiment where participants determined if the location of a dot (above or below a rectangle) matched the word (\"above\" or \"below\") presented within the rectangle. Faster reactions occurred in above-above matching trials than in below-below or nonmatching trials. We replicated this finding (Experiment 1A) and showed the close analogy to the self-matching task by replicating the SPE with a single \"other\" category. In Experiment 2, we showed that the SPE disappears if participants are instructed to respond with \"no\" to matches. Experiment 3 replicated Experiment 2 with two instead of one \"other\" category (which is more common in SPE research). Again, the SPE in the \"yes\" condition significantly exceeded the one in the \"no\" condition. However, the latter SPE was still significant, suggesting that part of the SPE might be due to the PCP, but a small self-related effect remains. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":15698,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Experimental Psychology: General","volume":"154 3","pages":"672-685"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Experimental Psychology: General","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0001713","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/12/30 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

We suggest that the polarity correspondence principle (PCP; Proctor & Cho, 2006) can explain the self-prioritization effect (SPE), that is, that matching responses for self-labels and self-assigned shapes are faster than matching responses for other labels and other-assigned shapes. According to PCP, one can argue that self-label, self-shape, and the "yes, match" responses are all + polar (hence full correspondence is given), whereas other label and other shape are both-polar, which does not correspond to the + polarity of the "yes" response. Our argument is based on a structural analogy of the self-matching task with an experiment by Seymour (1969)-a pillar of the PCP-who conducted an experiment where participants determined if the location of a dot (above or below a rectangle) matched the word ("above" or "below") presented within the rectangle. Faster reactions occurred in above-above matching trials than in below-below or nonmatching trials. We replicated this finding (Experiment 1A) and showed the close analogy to the self-matching task by replicating the SPE with a single "other" category. In Experiment 2, we showed that the SPE disappears if participants are instructed to respond with "no" to matches. Experiment 3 replicated Experiment 2 with two instead of one "other" category (which is more common in SPE research). Again, the SPE in the "yes" condition significantly exceeded the one in the "no" condition. However, the latter SPE was still significant, suggesting that part of the SPE might be due to the PCP, but a small self-related effect remains. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).

“正极性自我”:将自我优先化效应重新解释为极性对应效应。
我们提出极性对应原理(PCP;Proctor & Cho, 2006)可以解释自我优先效应(SPE),即对自我标签和自我分配形状的匹配反应比对其他标签和其他分配形状的匹配反应更快。根据PCP,人们可以认为自我标签、自我形状和“是,匹配”反应都是+极性(因此给出了完全对应),而其他标签和其他形状都是两极性,这并不对应于“是”反应的+极性。我们的论点是基于Seymour(1969)的一个自匹配任务的结构类比,Seymour是pcp的支柱,他进行了一个实验,参与者决定一个点(在矩形上方或下方)的位置是否与矩形内呈现的单词(“上方”或“下方”)相匹配。在以上匹配试验中,反应速度比在以下或不匹配试验中更快。我们复制了这一发现(实验1A),并通过复制具有单个“其他”类别的SPE,展示了与自匹配任务的密切类比。在实验2中,我们表明,如果参与者被指示对匹配回答“不”,SPE就会消失。实验3重复了实验2,使用了两个而不是一个“其他”类别(这在SPE研究中更常见)。同样,“是”条件下的SPE显著超过“否”条件下的SPE。然而,后一种SPE仍然显著,这表明部分SPE可能是由于PCP引起的,但仍然存在较小的自我相关效应。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA,版权所有)。
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
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
4.90%
发文量
300
期刊介绍: The Journal of Experimental Psychology: General publishes articles describing empirical work that bridges the traditional interests of two or more communities of psychology. The work may touch on issues dealt with in JEP: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, JEP: Human Perception and Performance, JEP: Animal Behavior Processes, or JEP: Applied, but may also concern issues in other subdisciplines of psychology, including social processes, developmental processes, psychopathology, neuroscience, or computational modeling. Articles in JEP: General may be longer than the usual journal publication if necessary, but shorter articles that bridge subdisciplines will also be considered.
×
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