Does Body-Specificity Stand on Solid Ground? Z-Curving the Association Between Emotional Valence and Lateral Space

IF 2.4 2区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL
Pablo Dapica, Julio Santiago, Pablo Solana
{"title":"Does Body-Specificity Stand on Solid Ground? Z-Curving the Association Between Emotional Valence and Lateral Space","authors":"Pablo Dapica,&nbsp;Julio Santiago,&nbsp;Pablo Solana","doi":"10.1111/cogs.70127","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The body-specificity hypothesis proposes that people with different bodies should also have different conceptual systems. The test case of this hypothesis has been the association of emotional valence (good vs. bad) with lateral space (left vs. right) in people of different handedness. As expected, right-handers tend to associate the good with the right space, whereas left-handers show the opposite association. This body-specific effect has been very influential and followed up by an important number of studies. Here, we undertake a systematic examination of the quality of this literature by means of <i>z</i>-curve analysis. The results show that the expected replicability rate (statistical power) of this literature is reasonably high (71−76%), especially for those studies using binomial tasks and those that entail the severest tests for the hypothesis, whereas it is lower in reaction time studies. Moreover, the presence of publication bias cannot be statistically asserted. All in all, the literature on space-valence body-specificity appears solid, although there is still room for improvement.</p>","PeriodicalId":48349,"journal":{"name":"Cognitive Science","volume":"49 10","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/cogs.70127","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cognitive Science","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cogs.70127","RegionNum":2,"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: 0

Abstract

The body-specificity hypothesis proposes that people with different bodies should also have different conceptual systems. The test case of this hypothesis has been the association of emotional valence (good vs. bad) with lateral space (left vs. right) in people of different handedness. As expected, right-handers tend to associate the good with the right space, whereas left-handers show the opposite association. This body-specific effect has been very influential and followed up by an important number of studies. Here, we undertake a systematic examination of the quality of this literature by means of z-curve analysis. The results show that the expected replicability rate (statistical power) of this literature is reasonably high (71−76%), especially for those studies using binomial tasks and those that entail the severest tests for the hypothesis, whereas it is lower in reaction time studies. Moreover, the presence of publication bias cannot be statistically asserted. All in all, the literature on space-valence body-specificity appears solid, although there is still room for improvement.

Abstract Image

身体特异性有坚实的基础吗?情绪效价与横向空间的z曲线关系
身体特异性假说提出,不同身体的人也应该有不同的概念系统。这一假设的测试案例是不同手性的人的情绪效价(好与坏)与侧空间(左与右)的关联。正如预期的那样,右撇子倾向于将好东西与右空间联系起来,而左撇子则表现出相反的联系。这种身体特异性的效果非常有影响力,并被大量的研究跟进。在这里,我们通过z曲线分析对这篇文献的质量进行了系统的检查。结果表明,该文献的预期可复制率(统计能力)相当高(71 - 76%),特别是对于那些使用二项任务的研究和那些需要对假设进行最严格检验的研究,而在反应时间研究中则较低。此外,发表偏倚的存在不能从统计上断言。总而言之,关于空间价体特异性的文献似乎是可靠的,尽管仍有改进的余地。
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
Cognitive Science
Cognitive Science PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
8.00%
发文量
139
期刊介绍: Cognitive Science publishes articles in all areas of cognitive science, covering such topics as knowledge representation, inference, memory processes, learning, problem solving, planning, perception, natural language understanding, connectionism, brain theory, motor control, intentional systems, and other areas of interdisciplinary concern. Highest priority is given to research reports that are specifically written for a multidisciplinary audience. The audience is primarily researchers in cognitive science and its associated fields, including anthropologists, education researchers, psychologists, philosophers, linguists, computer scientists, neuroscientists, and roboticists.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信