Angeras‘‘seeingred’’:Evidenceforaperceptual
association
AdamK.Fetterman1,MichaelD.Robinson1,andBrianP.Meier212PsychologyDepartment,NorthDakotaStateUniversity,Fargo,ND,USAPsychologyDepartment,GettysburgCollege,Gettysburg,PA,USA
Downloaded by [Staats & Universitatsbibliothek] at 13:56 28 April 2013 Metaphorrepresentationtheorycontendsthatpeopleconceptualisetheirnon-perceptualstates(e.g.,emotionconcepts)inperceptualterms.Thepresentresearchextendsthistheorytocolourmanipulationsanddiscreteemotionalrepresentations.Twoexperiments(N0265)examinedwhetheraredfontcolourwouldfacilitateangerconceptions,consistentwithmetaphorsreferringtoangerto‘‘seeingred’’.Evidenceforanimplicitanger-redassociationwasrobustandemotionallydiscreteinnature.Further,Experiment2examinedthedirectionalityofsuchassociationsandfoundthattheywereasymmetrical:Angercategorisationswerefasterwhenaredfontcolourwasinvolved,butrednesscategorisationswerenotfasterwhenananger-relatedwordwasinvolved.Implicationsformultipleliteraturesarediscussed.
Keywords:Metaphor;Anger;Discreteemotions;Colour;Reactiontime.
BeginningwithJames(1884),psychologistshavesoughttoexplainfeelingsintermsofmoreobservablephenomena,whetherphysiologicalactivationpatterns(Ekman,Levenson,&Friesen,1983),expressivebehaviour(Ekman,1992),oractiontendencies(Frijda,1992).Suchattemptshavenotbeenentirelysuccessful.Perhapsmosttothepoint,themultiplecomponentsofemotiondonotcovarywitheachotherinamannersuggestingacoordinatedinnateemotionprogramme(Barrett,2006;Mauss&Robinson,2009).Tounderstandthesubjectivecomponentofemotions,then,itisnecessarytoprovideanexplanatoryframeworkthatdoesnotreducethemtoitsobservablemanifestations(Barrett,Mesquita,Ochsner,&Gross,2007).
Indeed,thereisanineffabilitytofeelingsthathaslongbeenappreciatedbyconsciousnessscho-larsandresearchers(Chalmers,2007;Searle,1998).Laypeopletoo,wesuggest,faceanepis-temicchallengeinunderstandingtheirfeelingsinamannerthatconnectsthemtoreal-worldreferents(Lambie&Marcel,2002).Thefeelingofanger,forexample,feelslikesomething,butwhatexactlydoesitfeellike?Inrelationtothisquestion,LakoffandJohnson(1980,1999)con-tendthatpeoplethinkmetaphorically.Thatis,theylikentheirfeelingstomoreconcretepercep-tualexperiencesthatprovideapotentiallycrucial
Correspondenceshouldbeaddressedto:AdamFetterman,PsychologyDepartment(Dept.2765),POBox6050,NorthDakotaStateUniversity,Fargo,ND58108-6050,USA.E-mail:Adam.Fetterman@ndsu.eduTheauthorsacknowledgesupportfromNSF(BCS0843982).
#2012PsychologyPress,animprintoftheTaylor&FrancisGroup,anInformabusiness
http://www.psypress.com/cogemotion
1445http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2012.673477
FETTERMAN,ROBINSON,MEIER
scaffolding(Williams,Huang,&Bargh,2009)inunderstandingthem.Accordingtothismetaphorrepresentationtheory,forexample,wethinkofnicepeopleas‘‘sweet’’notbecausetheytastesweet*becausetheymostlikelywouldnotevenifoneatethem*butratherbecauseitissimilarlypleasanttointeractwithnicepeopleandtoeatsweetfoods(Meier,Moeller,Riemer-Peltz,&Robinson,2012).
Howstates?
dopeopleconceptualisetheirangerAngerisasomewhatcommonfeeling(Averill,1983)andonethatoftenleadstoaggressivebehaviours(Berkowitz,1993).Inaddition,angerisdisruptivetosocialrelationships(Smith,Glazer,Ruiz,&Gallo,2004)andperhapsamajorscourgetosocialfunctioningmoregenerally(Tavris,1989).Themannerinwhichindividualsconcep-tualisetheirangrystatesisthusanimportantfocusofresearch.Wedrawfrommetaphorrepresentationtheory(Lakoff&Johnson,1999)inproposingthatpeopleuseperceptualmetaphorstounderstandanger.
Multipleculturesassociatethecolourredwithangeranddanger(Ko¨vecses,2000;Needham,1973).Especiallyangryindividualsarethoughtto‘‘seered’’ortobe‘‘redwithrage’’(Lakoff,1987).Anger’sothermetaphoriclinks*e.g.,toheat,fire,andblood*similarlysuggestanimplicitmappingofthistype(Gibbs,1994).Itislikelynotarbitrary,fromthisperspective,thattheDevil’sskinisred(Meier,Hauser,Robinson,Friesen,&Schjeldahl,2007)orthatpopularmoviesconsis-tentlylinkthecolourredtoangerandaggression(e.g.,StephenKing’sCarrie).Suchmappingsmayhavesomebasisinphysiologyasangeroftenresultsinfacialflushingandthusaredderface(Changizi,Zhang,&Shimojo,2006;Drum-mond,1997).Onthebasisofsuchconsiderations,wesuggest,statesofangermaybeunderstoodintermsofperceptualredness.Suchconsiderationsarerevisitedinthegeneraldiscussion.
Thefeelingofangerisnotredasfeelingshavenocolour.Nonetheless,andonthebasisofalargelyphilosophicviewofmetaphor(Lakoff&
1446
COGNITIONANDEMOTION,2012,26(8)
Johnson,1999),wehypothesisedthatangerconceptionswouldborrowfromtheperceptualdomainanddosoinamannersupportingtheideathatangerisaredemotion.Ifso,presentingangerwordsinaredfontcolourshouldfacilitate(i.e.,speed)theircategorisationeveninthecontextof:(a)nosystematicrelationshipbetweenemotiontypeandfontcolour,and,infact(b)instructionstoignorefontcolour.
Ourpredictionsshouldbeviewedinlightofatensionintheemotionandemotionrepresenta-tionliteratures.Ekman(1992)madeacasefortheideathatemotionalstatesareconceptualisedinadiscretemanner.Forexample,andofparticularrelevancetothepresentexperiments,angerandfearshoulddifferintheircorrelatesandbiases,despitethefactthattheyarebothunpleasantstatesofhigharousal.Morerecently,suchdiscreteemotionperspectiveshavebeenincreasinglyques-tioned,somuchsothatthependulumnowappearstofavourdimensionalratherthandiscreteperspectivesonemotion(Barrett,2006),thoughtheoristscontendthatangermustbedistin-guishedfromothernegativeemotionalstates(Carver&Harmon-Jones,2009).Wesoughttoinvestigatethediscretenessofthepresentassocia-tionsandhypothesisedthatthecolourredwouldfacilitateangercategorisations,butnotfearorsadnesscategorisations,twootherverycommonnegativeemotionalstatesandconcepts.
Themetaphorrepresentationtheoryguidingourpredictions(Lakoff&Johnson,1999)con-tendsthatconceptionborrowsfromperception,butperceptiondoesnotborrowfromconception.Thisasymmetrymakessensefromwhatweknowtobetrueconcerningthetemporalcourseofprocessinginthebrain(Dehaene,Changeux,Naccache,Sackur,&Sergent,2006).Thecorticesinthebackofthebrainareresponsibleforobjectidentificationprocessesofaparticularlyperceptualtype(Storbeck,Robinson,&McCourt,2006).Subsequently,thetemporalandfrontalcorticesofthebrainthenattempttoassignmeaningtostimulisubsequenttotheirperceptualrecognition(Rolls,1999).Ifso,andtranslatedtothepresentcontext,twopredictionscanbemade.First,colourcategorisationsshouldbefasterthanemotion
Downloaded by [Staats & Universitatsbibliothek] at 13:56 28 April 2013 conceptcategorisations.Second,anasymmetryshouldbeobservedsuchthatperceptuallyredstimulishouldfacilitateangercategorisations,butangerstimulishouldnotfacilitatecategorisingafontcolourasred.ThispredictedasymmetryisexaminedinExperiment2inadditiontoitsmorecrucialpredictionthatangercategorisationsshouldbefacilitatedbyaredfontcolour.
EXPERIMENT1
Totheextentthatangerisconceptualisedintermsofthecolourred,presentingangerwordsinaredfontcolour(relativetoacontrolfontcolour:anachromaticmid-grey)shouldspeedtheircategorisation.Forpurposesofdiscriminantvalidity,twowordcontrolconditionswerealsoused.Somewordswereaffectivelyneutralandwerecategorisedassuch.Totheextentthatthefontcolourmanipulationdoesnotinfluencethespeedwithwhichneutralwordscanbecate-gorised,suchresultswouldruleoutthediffer-entialperceptibilityofthetwofontcolours.Ofadditionalimportance,somewordswereofafear-relatedtypeandwerecategorisedassuch.Onthebasisofmetaphoricassociationslinkingthestateofanger,specifically,tothecolourred(Gibbs,1994;Lakoff,1987),auniqueanddiscreterelationofthistypewashypothesised.
Method
Participantsandgeneralprocedures.Ninety-seven(56female)undergraduatestudentsfromNorthDakotaStateUniversityreceivedcoursecreditfortheirparticipation.Aftergeneralinstructions,participantscompletedtheemotioncategorisationtaskonapersonalcomputer.
Emotioncategorisationtask.Participantswereinstructedtocategorisepresentedwordsasquicklyandaccuratelyaspossiblewithinane-Primeprogram.Theywerealsotoldthatthewordsmightvaryinfontcolourfromtrialtotrial,butthatsuchvariationswereirrelevanttothetaskathand.Againstawhitebackground,wordswere
EVIDENCEFORAPERCEPTUALASSOCIATION
randomlyassignedtoredversusmid-greyfontcoloursina24-pointfontsize.Greywaschosenasacontrolconditionbecauseitwasnon-chromaticinnature,yetclearlydiscernibleagainsttheback-ground.Byimportinge-Prime’sdefaultredandmid-greycoloursintoAdobePhotoshopsoftware,wewereabletoconfirmthatthetwofontcoloursusedcorrespondedtothehuescharacteristicofred(CIEangle0)andgrey(whichhasnoCIEanglebecauseithasnohue)andwerepracticallyequivalentinbrightnessvalues.Therewere120trialsinthetask.
Wordstimuliweretobecategorisedasanger-related,fear-related,orneutral.AngerandfearwordswerechosenonthebasisofmarkersfromthePANAS-X(Watson&Clark,1994),awell-validatedself-reportinventoryofemotion,andonthebasisofadditionalcategorisationnormsfromourlab(e.g.,Wilkowski&Robinson,2007).NeutralwordswerechosensuchthattheywereneitherunpleasantnorpleasantaccordingtothewordnormsofBradleyandLang(1999).Parti-cularlyinrelationtotheangerandfearwords,itwasdeemedimportanttouseonlyhighlyproto-typical,representativestimuli,astheuseoflessprototypicalstimuli(e.g.,theword‘‘contempt’’foranger)wouldundermineaccuracyrates,whichwewantedtobehigh.
Onthebasisofsuchconsiderations,wepresented10angerwordstimuli(angry,annoyed,bitter,furious,hostile,infuriated,irritable,mad,outraged,andscornful),10fearwordstimuli(afraid,fearful,frightened,jittery,jumpy,ner-vous,panicky,scared,shaky,andworried),and10neutralstimuli(author,chart,custom,dense,exposure,garment,proof,swallow,vertical,andviolin).Wordfrequencies(basedonthenormsofKucera&Francis,1967)wereequalforthethreewordcategories,F(2,18)00.03,p0.97,aswerethenumberoflettersforthethreewordcate-gories,F(2,18)00.16,p0.85.Admittedly,theneutralstimuliwerelargelynouns,whereastheemotionalstimuliwerealladjectives.However,ourpredictionswereofaninteractive(wordcategory)fontcolour)typeratherthanofamaineffect(wordcategory)type.Wordswererepeatedfourtimeseach.
COGNITIONANDEMOTION,2012,26(8)
1447
Downloaded by [Staats & Universitatsbibliothek] at 13:56 28 April 2013 FETTERMAN,ROBINSON,MEIER
Wordstimuliwererandomlyassignedtotrialnumberandrandomlyassignedtooneofthetwofontcolours*redorgrey.Suchrandomassign-mentalgorithmsweredifferentforeachpartici-pant,aswastrueinExperiment2aswell.Suchrandomassignmentalgorithmsalsoensuredthatthesamewordstimuluswassometimespairedwithonecolourandsometimeswiththeotheracrossrepetitionsofthewords,evenforaparticularparticipant,andthiswasalsotrueinExperiment2aswell.Responsesweremadeusingthearrowkeysoftheright,lowerportionofthekeyboard.Participantswereinstructedtoplacetheirrightindexfingersonthedownarrowkeyatthestartofeachtrial,whichdidnotbeginuntiltheyhaddoneso.Thereafter,thetrialstimuluswaspresentedatcentrescreen.Ifthestimuluswasperceivedtobeneutral,participantsweretopresstheuparrowkeyimmediatelyabovethedownarrowkey.Angerandfearwordswerecategorisedusingtheleftandrightresponsearrowsofthisportionofthekeyboard,withthesemappingscounterbalancedacrossparticipants.Erroneousresponseswerepenalisedbya1000ms‘‘INCORRECT’’errormessage.
Results
Resultsinvolvingcategorisationspeed.Reactiontimes(RTs)werehandledinaccordancewithrecommendationsintheliterature.Inaccurateresponses(M09.84%)weredeleted,RTswerelog-transformed,andlog-transformedtimes2.5SDsbeloworabovethegrandlatencymeanwerereplacedwiththesevalues(Robinson,2007).A3(WordType))2(FontColour)repeated-measuresanalysisofvariance(ANO-VA)wasthenconductedonthe(trimmed)loglatencymeans,thoughmillisecondmeanswillbereportedforeaseofinterpretation.
TherewasamaineffectforWordType,F(1,95)080.72,pB.01,partialetasquare(h2p)0.46.Neutralwordswerecategorisedfaster(M0983ms)thananger-(M01128ms)orfear-related(M01168ms)words.Thismaineffectisnotimportantinthepresentcontext,butweoffer
1448
COGNITIONANDEMOTION,2012,26(8)
abriefinterpretationofit.Studieshaveshownthatafirststageinaffectiveprocessingseemstoinvolvewhetherstimuliareofanaffectivetypeornot(e.g.,Murphy&Zajonc,1993).Onlywithsubsequentprocessingarediscreteformsofnega-tiveaffectlikelydistinguished(Barrett,2006).Accordingly,theslowerRTsexhibitedinthenegativeaffectconditions,relativetotheneutralcondition,likelyinvolvestheaddedprocessingtimenecessarytodisambiguatethetwotypesofnegativestimuli.
Interestingly,itwasalsofoundthatangerstimuliwerecategorisedfasterthanfearstimuli,F(1,95)09.84,pB.01,h2p0.09,despitethefactthatsuchstimuliwereequalinwordfrequency,numberofletters,andallwereadjectives.Wearenotawareofanyprecedentforthisfinding,butitmaycomportwithotherresultsshowingthatwordssuggestingamorepalpablethreattotheself,asshouldbethecaseforangerrelativetofearstimuli(Wentura,Rothermund,&Bak,2000),arerecognisedfaster(Wurm&Vakoch,2000).Ontheotherhand,therewasnomaineffectforFontColour,F(1,95)01.51,p0.22.Thus,thetwocolourconditionswerewellmatchedintermsoftheirdiscriminabilityagainstthebackground.OfmostimportancewasthehypothesisedWordTypebyFontColourinteraction,2whichwassignificant,F(1,95)09.40,pB.01,hp0.09.Millisecondmeansforthisinteractionaredis-playedinFigure1.ThemeansreportedinFigure1suggestthataredfontcolourfacilitatedthecategorisationofangerwords,butnotneutralorfearwords.Thisimpressionwasconfirmedbyfollow-uptestsexaminingtheeffectofthefontcolourmanipulationforeachwordtypeseparately.Angercategorisationswerefasterwhenthefontcolourwas2redratherthangrey,F(1,95)017.12,pB.01,hp0.15.Ontheotherhand,thefontcolourmanipulationwasanon-significantpre-dictorofthespeedwithwhichwordscouldbecategorisedasneutral,F(1,95)00.01,p0.91,orfear-related,F(1,95)02.95,p0.09.Wearereluctanttomakemuchofthelattermarginaleffectgiventhesubstantialpoweroftheexperi-ment.Inanycase,thefactthatfearcategorisationswereslightlyfasterwhenstimuliweregreyrather
Downloaded by [Staats & Universitatsbibliothek] at 13:56 28 April 2013 EVIDENCEFORAPERCEPTUALASSOCIATION
Downloaded by [Staats & Universitatsbibliothek] at 13:56 28 April 2013 Figure1.Emotioncategorisationspeedasafunctionoffontcolour,Experiment1.
thanredreinforcesthespecificityoftheangerÁrednessassociation.
Resultsinvolvingaccuracyrates.Thetask,stimu-li,andproceduresweredesignedtoensurehighaccuracyrates.Nonetheless,itmightbeimportanttoexamineaccuracyratesinrelationtopotentialspeedÁaccuracytrade-offs(Pashler,1998).Ac-cordingly,a3(WordType))2(FontColour)ANOVAwasconductedtoexamineaccuracyratesasafunctionofthemanipulations.TheWordTypemanipulationwasagainsignificant,indicatingthatneutralwordscouldbemoreeasilycategorised(Ms095.51%,91.91%,and90.77%forneutral,anger,andfearwords,respectively).TherewasnomaineffectforFontColour,F(1,95)00.00,p0.96,buttherewasaWordTypebyFontColourinteraction,F(1,95)04.14,p0.05,h2p0.12.
Tounderstandthelatterinteraction,follow-upANOVAswereperformed.Thefontcolourmanipulationwasirrelevantinpredictingtheaccuracyofneutralwordcategorisations,F(1,95)00.88,p0.35.Ontheotherhand,angercategorisationsweredirectionally,thoughnotsignificantly,moreaccuratewhenthefontcolourwasred(M092.63%)ratherthangrey(M091.20%),F(1,95)02.45,p0.12.Fearcategorisations,bycontrast,weredirectionally,thoughnotsignificantly,moreaccuratewhen
thefontcolourwasgrey(M091.49%)ratherthanred(M090.05%),F(1,95)03.41,p0.07.Inrelationtoaccuracydata,whichwerenotofcentralinterest,themostimportantpointisthattherewasnohintofaspeedÁaccuracytrade-offforangerwordspresentedinaredfontcolour.
Discussion
Experiment1examinedthenovelideathatpeopleimplicitlyconceptualiseangerintermsofpercep-tualredness.Ifso,anirrelevantmanipulationofperceptualrednessshouldfacilitateangercategor-isations,discretelyso.Justsuchapatternwasobserved,itwasuniquetoangerwordsrelativetofearorneutralwords,anditwasnotassociatedwithaspeedÁaccuracytrade-off.Giventheno-veltyoftheseresults,itwasdeemedimportanttoconceptuallyreplicatethem.
EXPERIMENT2
Experiment1hadincludedaneutralwordcategorisationcondition,whichwasviewedasanimportantcontrolconditioninthisinitialexperi-ment.Ashypothesised,thefontcolourmanipula-tionwasquiteirrelevanttothespeedwithwhichneutralwordscouldbecategorised.Accordingly,wedroppedtheneutralwordconditioninExperiment2.Abenefitofdoingsoisthat
COGNITIONANDEMOTION,2012,26(8)
1449
FETTERMAN,ROBINSON,MEIER
two-alternativechoicetasksaremorecommontothesocialcognitionliterature(Fazio&Olson,2003;Greenwald&Farnham,2000)andtheprocessescontributingtoperformanceinthemarebetterunderstoodthanarechoicetaskswithmorethantworesponseoptions(Luce,1959;Meyer,Irwin,Osman,&Kounois,1988).
Additionally,Experiment1providedimpor-tantsupportforadiscreteemotionsperspectivefavouringtheimplicitassociationofangerandperceptualredness.InExperiment2,wesoughttoprovideadditionalsupportforthisperspective.Wedidsobyaskingindividualstocategoriseemotionalstimuliasanger-orsadness-related.Sadness,likefear,isacommonandbasicnegativeemotion,nonethelessthoughttodifferfromangerintermsofitscorrelates(Ekman,1992).Furthersupportforadiscreteemotionsperspectivewouldthusbefoundtotheextentthataredfontcolourfacilitatesangerword,butnotsadnessword,categorisations.Asacolourcontrolcondition,Experiment1usedanachromaticgrey.ToruleoutthepossibilitythatthefindingsofExperiment1wereduetothepresenceofcolourperse,regardlessofthatcolour,Experiment2presentedangerandsadnesswordsineitherredorbluefontcolours.Blueisasbasicacolourasredandthereisauniquesetofretinalconessensitivetobluewavelengths(Goldstein,1999).
AsecondaryquestionofExperiment2waswhethersadnesscategorisationswouldbefacili-tatedbyablue(relativetoared)fontcolour.Infavourofthispossibilityisthefactthat‘‘blue’’isoftenusedasasynonymforsadness.Disfavouringsuchanassociationaretwoconsiderations.First,culturesagreeontheaffectiveconnotationsofthecolourswhite,black,andredtoafargreaterextentthantheyagreeontheaffectiveconnotationsofothercolourssuchasblue,green,oryellow(Lakoff,1987;Needham,1973).Second,meta-phoricassociationsarelikelyreinforcedbyre-peatedperceptionÁconceptionpairings(Ko¨vecses,2000).Althoughitiseasytoseehowpriorexperiencesgaverisetotheideathatangerisred,itisdifficulttodiscernsystematicreasonsforsadnessbeingblue.Forexample,althoughangryothersmayexhibitfacialflushing,sadothersare
1450
COGNITIONANDEMOTION,2012,26(8)
notlikelytohaveablueskintone.Inaddition,itisquiteunlikelythatpeoplearesadderondaysonwhichclearblueskiespredominate.Inpointoffact,then,wewereuncertainastowhetherasadnessÁblueassociationwouldbefoundinExperiment2.
AfinalquestionofinterestinExperiment2wastheideaofLakoffandJohnson(1999)thatmetaphoricassociationsshouldbeasymmetricinthatconceptionisthoughttoborrowfromperception,butnotviceversa.Thebrain,infact,isstructuredsuchthatperceptionprecedescon-ception(Dehaeneetal.,2006;Rolls,1999)andthereforesuchasymmetricpredictionsmakesense.Intwosub-experiments,wepresentedthesamestimuli*angerandsadnesswordspresentedinaredorbluefontcolour*toallparticipants,buteitherinthecontextofaconceptual(i.e.,angervs.sadness)orperceptual(i.e.,redvs.bluefontcolour)categorisationtask.Incomparingtheresultsofthesesub-experiments,wehypothesisedathree-wayinteractionofanasymmetrictype:Angerwordsshouldbecategorisedfasterwhenpresentedinaredfontcolour,butredfontcategorisationsshouldnotbefacilitatedwhentherelevantwordisananger-relatedone.Furtherdiscussionofsuchinteractivepredictionsispre-sentedfollowingtherelevantresults.
Method
Participantsandgeneralprocedures.Datawerecollectedintwosuccessiveweeks.Duringthefirstweekofdatacollection,88participants(33female)wereaskedtocategorise(redorblue)stimuliasanger-orsadness-related.Duringthesecondweekofdatacollection,80participants(35female)wereaskedtocategorise(anger-orsadness-related)stimuliasredorblueinfontcolour.AllparticipantswerefromNorthDakotaStateUniversityandallreceivedcoursecreditbytheirparticipation.
Participantswerenotrandomlyassignedtothetwocategorisationtasks,aswehadinitiallyconsideredthesetobetwoseparateexperiments,albeitofalargelyoverlappingnature.Onthe
Downloaded by [Staats & Universitatsbibliothek] at 13:56 28 April 2013 otherhand,ourparticipantpoolispracticallyidenticalfromweektoweekinage,race,sex,andpersonalitycharacteristics.Accordingly,andgivenasubsetofthetheoreticalgoalsmentionedabove,wecombinedthetwodatasetsforpresentpurposes.Generalproceduresforthetwosub-experimentswereidenticaltothoseofExperiment1.
Categorisationtasks.Whethercategorisingstimulibyemotionorfontcolour,thesameinstructionswereadministered.Participantsweretocategorisepresentedstimuliasquicklyandaccuratelyaspossible.Inthecaseofbothtasks,thestimuliwerethesame.Thereweresixanger-relatedwords(anger,furious,irate,outrage,scornful,andviolent)andsixsadness-relatedwords(depressed,gloomy,lonely,miserable,sad,andsorrowful),chosenonthebasisoftheprototypeanalysisofStormandStorm(1987).Angerandsadnesswordswereequalinwordfrequency,F(1,5)00.00,p0.97andnumberofletters,F(1,5)00.00,p01.00.Wordswererepeatedmultipletimestoproducethedesirednumberoftrials.
Bothtaskswereprogrammedine-Primeusingthedefaultredandbluefontcolouroptionsoftheprogramandamid-greybackgroundwasused.ByimportingstimuliintoAdobePhotoshopsoft-ware,wewereabletoconfirmthatthetwofontcolourswereprototypicallyred(CIEangle0)andblue(CIEangle240)andwereequalinluminance(brightness)values.Stimuliwereidenticalinsize(18point),werecentrallydisplayed,responsemappingswereprovided,aresponseboxwasused,andindividualswerepenalisedwitha1500msvisualerrormessageinthecaseofinaccuratecategorisations.A150msblankinter-valfollowedeachresponseandthepresentationofthenextstimulustobecategorised.
Intheemotion-categorisationtask,wordswerecategorisedasanger-orsadness-related.Inthecolour-categorisationtask,wordswerecategorisedintermsofwhethertheywereredorblueinfontcolour.Inbothtasks,responsesweremadeusingbothindexfingersbypressingthe1or5keysofaresponsebox,withresponsemappingscounter-
EVIDENCEFORAPERCEPTUALASSOCIATION
balancedacrossparticipants.Wordstimuliandfontcolourswererandomlyassignedtotrialnumberforbothtasks.Thenumberoftrialsinvolveddiddifferslightlyacrossthetasks(192fortheemotioncategorisationtaskand120forthecolourcategorisationtask),adesigndifferencefurtherconsideredintheresultssection.
Results
Resultsinvolvingcategorisationspeed.ReactiontimeswerehandledinamanneridenticaltoExperiment1,butseparatelysoforthetwotasksinvolved.FollowingsuchRTtransformationprocedures,responselatencieswereexaminedasafunctionofthe2(Task:emotioncategorisationsvs.fontcolourcategorisations))2(WordType:angervs.sadness))2(FontColour:redvs.blue)mixed-modeldesign.Itwashypothesisedthatfontcolourcategorisationswouldbefasterthanemotioncategorisationsandthiswasthecase,asrevealedbyamaineffectforTask,F(1,166)0433.05,pB.01,h2p0.72(Ms0463msand809ms,respectively).Thus,itwaseasiertocategorisethesamestimuliinperceptualratherthanconnotativeterms,aresultthatcomportswithbrain-basedmodelsofthetimecourseofperceptualversusconceptualachievements(Rolls,1999).
MaineffectsforWordType,F(1,166)00.71,p0.40,andFontColour,F(1,166)00.18,p0.67,werenotsignificant,norweretheWordTypebyFontColour,F(1,166)01.20,p0.27,theTaskbyWordType,F(1,166)00.20,p0.65,ortheTaskbyFontColour,F(1,166)01.00,p0.32,two-wayinteractionssig-nificant.Whatisparticularlyemphasisedisthattheimplicitassociationofangerandperceptualredness(whichwouldhaveinvolvedaWordTypebyFontColourinteraction)wasnotrobustacrossthetwotasks.Instead,andashypothesised,therewasasignificantTaskbyWordTypebyFontColour2interaction,F(1,166)010.53,pB.01,hp0.06.
Tobetterunderstandthenatureofthethree-wayinteractionobservedinExperiment2,2
COGNITIONANDEMOTION,2012,26(8)
1451
Downloaded by [Staats & Universitatsbibliothek] at 13:56 28 April 2013 FETTERMAN,ROBINSON,MEIER
Downloaded by [Staats & Universitatsbibliothek] at 13:56 28 April 2013 (WordType))2(FontColour)repeated-mea-suresANOVAswereconductedforeachtaskseparatelyconsidered.Intheemotioncategorisa-tiontask,maineffectsforWordType,F(1,87)00.62,p0.43,andFontColour,F(1,87)01.11,p0.30,werenotsignificant.Thelatternon-significantmaineffectestablishesthatthetwocoloursmanipulatedwereequallydis-cernable.Ashypothesised,however,therewasasignificantWordTypebyFontColourinterac-tion,F(1,87)08.23,pB.01,h2p0.09.MeansforthisinteractionaredisplayedinFigure2.Follow-uppairwisecomparisonsestablishedthatangercategorisationswerefasterwhenthefontcolourwasredratherthanblue,F(1,87)07.25,pB.01,h2p0.08,butthatfontcolourdidnothaveanimpactonsadnesscategorisationtimes,F(1,87)01.04,p0.31.
Inthefollow-upANOVAinvolvingperfor-mancespeedinthecolourcategorisationtask,maineffectsforWordType,F(1,79)00.14,p0.71,andFontColour,F(1,79)00.15,p0.70,werenotsignificant.Therewasamargin-alinteractionofthesetwofactors,F(1,79)02.84,p0.10,butthepatternwasverydifferentthanthatfoundintheemotioncategor-isationtask.Indeed,whencategorisingcolours,therewassometendencyforindividualstobeslowertocategorisestimuliasredinfontcolourwhenthewordswereanger-related(M0468ms)
ratherthansadness-related(M0457ms)*amarginalinterferenceeffectratherthanafacilita-tioneffect.Meanswere463msand465msforthetworemainingcellsoftheinteraction*namely,sadnesswordspresentedinredandbluecolours,respectively.
Recallthatthereweremoretrialsintheemotioncategorisationtaskthanintheperceptualcategorisationtask.Asupplementalanalysiswasthusperformedinwhichtasklengthswereequatedbyusingonlythefirst120trialsoftheemotioncategorisationtask.Again,therewasamaineffectforTask,F(1,166)0430.32,pB.01,h2p0.72,andthehypothesisedthree-wayinter-actionremainedsignificant,F(1,166)09.22,pB.01,h2p0.05.Effectsintheperceptualcate-gorisationtask,whichinvolved120trials,werenecessarilythesameasthosereportedabove.Intheemotioncategorisationtask,maineffectsforWordType,F(1,87)00.13,p0.72,andFontColour,F(1,87)00.68,p0.41,werenotsig-nificant,buttherewasasignificantWordTypebyFontColourinteraction,F(1,87)06.71,pB.01,h2p0.07.Angercategorisationtimeswerefasterwhenstimuliwereredratherthanblue,F(1,87)05.72,pB.01,h2p0.06,butsadnesscate-gorisationtimesdidnotvarybyfontcolour,F(1,87)01.68,p0.20.
Resultsinvolvingaccuracyrates.Aparallel2(Task))2(WordType))2(FontColour)
Figure2.Emotioncategorisationspeedasafunctionoffontcolour,Experiment2.
1452
COGNITIONANDEMOTION,2012,26(8)
ANOVAwasconductedonaccuracyrates.BecausethetasksweredesignedtobesensitivetoRTratherthanaccuracy,andbecauseourprimaryinterestinexaminingaccuracyrateswastoruleoutpotentialspeedÁaccuracytrade-offs,lowerordereffectsarenotreported.Ofmostimportance,therewasasignificantTaskbyWordTypebyFontColourinteraction,F(1,166)05.45,p0.02,h2p0.05.Asinthecaseofreactiontimetendencies,thisthree-wayinterac-tionwasdecomposedbyperformingrepeated-measuresANOVAsforeachtaskconditionseparatelyconsidered.
Intheemotioncategorisationtask,therewasasignificantWordTypebyFontColourinterac-tion,F(1,87)013.81,pB.01,h2p0.03.Angercategorisationsweremoreaccuratewhenthefontcolourwasred(M094.78%)ratherthanblue(M093.66%),F(1,87)04.95,p0.03,h2p0.05,butsadnesscategorisationsweremoreaccuratewhenthefontcolourwasblue(M095.40%)ratherthanred(M093.87%),F(1,87)011.75,pB.01,h2p0.12.Suchresultsfurtherreinforcetheideathatangerandperceptualrednessareimplicitlyassociated,thoughtheydosuggestsomeassociationofsadnessandperceptualblueness,aresultfurtherdiscussedbelow.Inthecolourcategorisationtask,bycontrast,theWordTypebyFontTypeinteractionwasnotsignifi-cant,F(1,87)00.02,p0.88.
Discussion
AsinExperiment1,angercategorisationswerefacilitatedwhensuchwordswerepresentedinaredfontcolour.Thisimplicittendencytocon-ceptualiseangerintermsofperceptualrednessappearstobearobustoneasitwasfoundacrosstwodifferentemotionconceptcontrolconditions(fearinExperiment1andsadnessinExperiment2)andtwodifferentfontcolourcontrolconditions(greyinExperiment1andblueinExperiment2).Moreover,accuracyratestendedtoconfirmanimplicitangerÁrednessassociationratherthansuggestaspeedÁaccuracytrade-off.ThiswasespeciallythecaseinExperiment2.
EVIDENCEFORAPERCEPTUALASSOCIATION
Bycontrast,ourintroductiontoExperiment2shouldhavemadeitclearthatwewerelesscertainastowhetherabluefontcolourwouldfacilitatesadnesscategorisations.Although‘‘blue’’isasynonymforsadnessintheEnglishlanguage,wealsopresentedreasonsfordoubtingthegeneralityofsuchimplicitassociations.Inpointoffact,theevidenceforasadnessÁbluemappingwasmixed:Althoughreactiontimesdidnotfavoursuchanassociation,accuracyratesdidso.Furtherresearchonthepossibilitythatsadnessandthecolourbluearelinked,then,canbeadvocated.Inanycase,allofourresultsareconsistentwiththeideathatperceptualrednessfacilitatesangercategorisations,thecentralhypothesisofourinvestigation.
TurningtoadifferentpurposeofExperiment2,metaphoricassociationsarethoughttobeasymmetricinthatconceptualrepresentationsborrowfromperceptualrepresentationsbutnotviceversa(Lakoff&Johnson,1999).Experiment2includedarelativelydirecttestofthisidea.Usingthesamestimuliinbothconceptualandperceptualcategorisationtasks,itwasfoundthatangercategorisationswerefacilitatedbyaredfontcolour,butcategorisationsofperceptualrednesswerenotfasterinthecontextofangerwords.Thereareatleasttwowaysofviewingsuchasymmetriceffectsandtheyseemcompatibletous.Fromametaphorrepresentationperspective,abstractfeelingstatesaretobeexplained,notperceptualexperiences(Meier&Robinson,2005).Fromabrain-basedview,perceptionprecedesconceptionandthusitisfarmorelikelyforperceptionstoinfluenceconceptionsthanviceversa(Dehaeneetal.,2006;Rolls,1999).Bothsuchviewsassumethatperceptionistheeasierachievementandwefoundsupportforthisideainthatthesamestimuliwereclassifiedasredorbluemuchmorequicklythantheywereemotionallycategorised.Inotherwords,itisperhapspreciselybecausecolourcategorisationsareeasierthanemotioncategorisationsthatweobservedtheasymmetriceffectsthatwedid.Moredifficultperceptualtasksmightrevealthatangerstimulifacilitaterednesscategorisationsandweencouragethisdirectionoffutureresearch,thoughsuch
COGNITIONANDEMOTION,2012,26(8)
1453
Downloaded by [Staats & Universitatsbibliothek] at 13:56 28 April 2013 FETTERMAN,ROBINSON,MEIER
difficultperceptualtaskswouldseemsomewhatunnaturaltotheperceptualenvironment.
GENERALDISCUSSION
Linguistically,peopleoftenrefertoangerintermsofperceptualredness(e.g.,‘‘seeingred’’).Wepursuedtheideathatsuchlinguisticexpressionscaptureanimportanttruth.Namely,theycaptureadeepmappinginwhichperceptualrednessisrecruitedinunderstandingandconceptualisingangerevenintheabsenceofacommunicationcontext.Specifically,wehypothesisedthatperceptuallyredstimuliwouldfacilitateangercategorisations.Thispredictedeffectwascon-firmedintwoexperimentsinvolvingtwocolourcontrolconditions(greyandblue)andtwonegativeemotioncontrolconditions(fearandsadness).Inthegeneraldiscussion,wefocusontheoreticalconsiderations,potentialreasonswhyangerandperceptualrednessarelinked,taskconsiderations,andalsohighlightsomebriefdirectionsforfutureresearch.
Theoreticalconsiderations
Itisimportanttomentionthatmetaphorrepresentationtheory(Lakoff&Johnson,1999)isjustthat*atheory.Goodtheoriesaccountforimportantfactsandmakespecificpredictions.Themetaphorrepresentationtheoryfulfilssuchcriteria.Peopleveryfrequentlythinkandtalkabouttheirexperiencesinmetaphoricterms(Ko¨vecses,2000).Justhowfrequentlytheydosocanbeappreciatedbynotingthat‘‘closeness’’isasurprisinglycommonwayofconceptualisingandreferringtointimaterelationships(Williams&Bargh,2008),thatreferencesto‘‘seeing’’aresurprisinglycommonwhenpeopleseektochar-acteriseexperiencesofinsightandunderstanding(Lakoff,1987),andthatthecontainmentmeta-phorof‘‘in’’isremarkableforitsextendeduseinreferringtostatesandrelationshipcommitmentsthatarenotthemselvesbasedonanysortofcontainmentwithinaphysicalspace(Lakoff&Johnson,1999).
1454
COGNITIONANDEMOTION,2012,26(8)
Anadmirablefeatureofmetaphorrepresenta-tiontheory,further,isthatitmakesspecificpredictions:Totheextentthatlinguisticmeta-phorsareconsistent(e.g.,dominancebeing‘‘up’’,nicepeoplebeing‘‘sweet’’,andsoon),specificandnovelpredictionscanbemade.Forexample,Meieretal.(2012)wereabletoshowthatniceindividuals,asdefinedintermsofthepersonalitytraitofagreeableness,actuallydidlikesweetfoods(e.g.,chocolatecake)toagreaterextent,butdidnotlikespicy,sour,bitter,orsaltyfoodstoagreaterextent.Themetaphorlinkingnicenesstosweetness,then,provedtobehighlyinformativeingeneratingnovelempiricalresults.Thepresentresultsshouldbeviewedassupportiveofalinkbetweenangerandperceptualrednessthat(1)isconsistentwithcommonlinguisticmetaphors,(2)hadnotbeenpreviouslyinvestigated,andyet(3)doesnot‘‘prove’’thetheorythatwedrewfrom.Ontheotherhand,asfindingsconsistentwiththistheoryaccumulate,thetheoryshouldbeaccordedmoreweightinfuturestudiesofaffectiveprocessingandsocialfunctioning.Infact,predic-tionsderivedfrommetaphorrepresentationthe-ory(orrelatedtheories)havebeensupportedinstudieslinkingpositiveaffecttoperceptuallight-ness(Meier,Robinson,&Clore,2004),domi-nancetohigherverticalpositions(Schubert,2005),intimacyandperspectivetakingtopercep-tualcloseness(Williams&Bargh,2008),andmoralitytocleanliness(Zhong&Liljenquist,2006).Itisunlikelythatsuchdiverseresultscansimplybeduetocovariationsinpastexperience,atleastinasimplisticmanner.Forexample,manyverypositiveexperiences(e.g.,lovemakingorpartying)occurafternightfall,aperiodofdark-ness.Suchissues,though,shouldbediscussedinamorenuancedmanner,whichwedonext.
Whylinked?
areangerandperceptualrednessOfalltheemotions,angerisquitelikelytheonethatbestpredictsbehavioursintendedtophysi-callyharmanotherperson(Berkowitz,1993).Angeristhusanespeciallydangerousinterperso-nalemotion(Tavris,1989).Perceptualredness
Downloaded by [Staats & Universitatsbibliothek] at 13:56 28 April 2013 signalsdangerinseveralcontexts.Toxicplantsandanimalsareoftenred-colouredinnature.Aparticularlyinjuriousportionoffireisredororangeinitscolouration.Harmedindividualsbleedandbloodisredwhenitexitsthebody.Itisnotlikelyacoincidence,then,thatredisusedtosignaldangerinmoresymboliccontexts*suchasredstopsigns,stoplights,orfiretrucks(Elliot&Maier,2007).Itisequallyunderstandable,fromthisperspective,whyangermetaphorsfrequentlyreferenceredness(e.g.,‘‘seeingred’’),whyredisviewedasangryinmanycultures(Needham,1973),andwhythepresentexperimentalresultsinvolvingangercategorisationsweresorobustinnature.
Inaddition,though,angerandrednessmightbelinkedforphysiologicalreasons.Angeroftenproducesfacialflushing,whichrendersfacesperceptuallyredder(Changizietal.,2006;Drum-mond,1997).Ontheotherhand,facialflushingalsooccursinnon-angrystatessuchassexualexcitement(Katchadourian,1987).Perhaps,then,statesconsideredpassionate,aqualityofbothangerandsexualexcitement,co-optperceptualrednessandthisassociationhasapossiblephy-siological(andobservable)origin.Regardless,ourresultssupportedadiscreteperspectiveoftherelevantresultsinthataredfontcolourfacilitatedangercategorisations,butdidnotfacilitatefearcategorisations,thoughbothstatesarenegative/higharousalones.
Taskconsiderations
TheresultsshouldbeviewedasquitedistinctfromemotionalStroopeffects(seeWilliams,Mathews,&MacLeod,1996,forareview).InanemotionalStrooptask,emotionalwords(mosttypicallythreateningwords)arepresentedindifferentfontcoloursandthetaskistonamethefontcolourswhileignoringthewords.Itisoftenobservedthatanxiousindividualsexhibitslowercolour-namingperformancewhenthewordstobeignoredarethreateninginnaturerelativetonon-threatening,aresultthatisnottypicallyobservedamongnon-anxiousindividuals
EVIDENCEFORAPERCEPTUALASSOCIATION
(MacLeod,1999).Ourparticipants,however,wererequiredtocategoriseemotionalwords,notnamefontcolours.Inaddition,responsefacilita-tionratherthanslowedreactiontimeswereobserved.Finally,resultswerespecifictoagivenfontcolour*red*thatismetaphoricallylinkedtoanger,andwerethereforenotofthesortshowninemotionalStrooptasks,inwhichtheactualfontcolourisquiteirrelevanttopredictions(Williamsetal.,1996).Forallofthesereasons,wesuggestthatemotionalStroopprocessesandfindingsareirrelevanttoourresults.
Similarly,ourresultsarequitedifferentfromthosereportedinthecolour-wordStroopliterature(seeMacLeod,1991,forareview).TheStroopeffectisoneinwhichindividualsareslowertonamefontcolourswhentheprintedwordinquestionisincongruentratherthancongruentwiththefontcolourinvolved.Bycontrast,ourparticipantswererequiredtocategoriseemotionalwords,nottonamefontcolours.Inaddition,ourtaskdidnotmanipulateresponsecongruenciesorincongruencies(MacLeod,1991)inthatfontcolourswereirrelevanttotheemotionalcategor-isationstobemade.AlthoughStroop-relatedfacilitationeffectshavebeenobserved,noneoftherelevantmechanismsproposed*inadvertentreadingprocesses(Kane&Engle,2003),conver-genceofsourcesofinformation(Melara&Algom,2003),orlexicalitycosts(Brown,Gore,&Carr,2002)canbeviewedasrelevanttoourresults.Wemanipulatedfontcoloursandreadingprocessesarethusirrelevant.Convergenceisdefinedintermsofaverydirectoverlapbetweenirrelevantandrelevantsourcesofinformation(e.g.,thewordredinaredfontcolour)andourtasksdidnotinvolvesuchdirectsourcesofoverlap.Finally,theto-be-ignoredsourceofinformation(fontcolour)wasnotlexicalandourresultscannotthereforebeunder-stoodintermsoflexicalprocessingcosts.Insum,althoughourtasksinvolvedfontcoloursandwords,resultscannotbeascribedtoemotionalorcolour-wordStroop-likeprocesses(DeHouwer,2003).Ourdesignswerewithin-subjectdesigns,commontothecognitionandaffectiveprocessingliteratures.Thebenefitsofwithin-subjectdesigns
COGNITIONANDEMOTION,2012,26(8)
1455
Downloaded by [Staats & Universitatsbibliothek] at 13:56 28 April 2013 FETTERMAN,ROBINSON,MEIER
areseveralandwementionaparticularlyimpor-tantonehere.Within-subjectdesignscontrolforindividualdifferencesinoverallspeed,whichcanbepronounced(Robinson&Oishi,2006)andthereforeasourceofunwantedanduncontrollednoise.Astowhetherwithin-subjectdesignssomehowreinforceassociationsofthepresenttype,wedonotthinkso.Thefactisthatword/colourpairingsweremadeonarandomisedbasisandtherewasthusnosystematicrelationbetweenaparticularemotioncategory(e.g.,anger)andaparticularperceptualcolour(e.g.,red).Itremainstobeseenwhethersimilarresultsmightbefoundwhenmanipulatingcolourinabetween-subjectsmanner,however,andthisfuturedirectionofresearchmightbeadvocatedinexaminingbound-aryconditions.
Futureresearchdirections
Weconcludebymentioningsomedirectionsforfutureresearch,albeitbrieflyso.Itwouldbeusefultoexaminewhetherthelocusofoureffectsismoreperception-orresponse-related,whichcanbedoneusingelectrophysiologicalmeasuresandsuitableparadigms(Luck,2005).AlthoughLakoff(1986)suggestedthatmetaphoricassocia-tionswithinagivenculturearelikelytobesomewhatuniversal,wehavefoundthatsuchmetaphoriceffectsvarybyindividualsinaninformativemanner(e.g.,Meier&Robinson,2006;Robinson,Zabelina,Ode,&Moeller,2008).ItwouldthusseemusefultodeterminewhetherindividualdifferencesinthemagnitudeofredÁangerfacilitationeffectsobservedcanbeusedtounderstandandpredictindividualdiffer-encesinanger.AfinaldirectionofresearchfollowsfromtheworkofElliotandcolleagues(e.g.,Elliot&Maier,2007).Itwouldbeinfor-mativetothesocialpsychologyliteraturetodeterminewhetherperceptualrednesscuesresultinhigherlevelsofanger,socialjudgementsrelatedtoanger,oraggression.Weviewindividuals,asdoGibbs(1994)andLakoffandJohnson(1999),assubtlyyetprofoundlytrappedbytheirconceptualmetaphors.Ifso,manipulationsofperceptualrednessarelikelytoinfluenceanger-related
1456
COGNITIONANDEMOTION,2012,26(8)
judgementsandoutcomesbeyondthosefoundinthepresentinvestigation.
Manuscriptreceived23May
2011Revisedmanuscriptreceived20February
2012Manuscriptaccepted1March2012Firstpublishedonline7June
2012
REFERENCES
Averill,J.(1983).Studiesonangerandaggression:Implicationsfortheoriesofemotion.AmericanPsychologist,38,1145Á1160.
Barrett,L.(2006).Areemotionsnaturalkinds?PerspectivesonPsychologicalScience,1,28Á58.
Barrett,L.F.,Mesquita,B.,Ochsner,K.N.,&Gross,J.J.(2007).Theexperienceofemotion.AnnualReviewofPsychology,58,373Á403.
Berkowitz,L.(1993).Aggression:Itscauses,consequences,andcontrol.NewYork,NY:McGraw-Hill.
Bradley,M.M.,&Lang,P.J.(1999).AffectivenormsforEnglishwords.Gainesville,FL:TheNationalInstituteofMentalHealthCenterfortheStudyofEmotionandAttention,UniversityofFlorida.
Brown,T.,Gore,C.,&Carr,T.(2002).VisualattentionandwordrecognitioninStroopcolornaming:Iswordrecognition‘‘automatic?’’JournalofExperimentalPsychology:General,131,220Á240.Carver,C.S.,&Harmon-Jones,E.(2009).Angerisanapproach-relatedaffect:Evidenceandimplications.PsychologicalBulletin,135,183Á204.
Chalmers,D.(2007).Thepuzzleofconsciousexperi-ence.InB.Gertler&L.Shapiro(Eds.),Arguingaboutthemind(pp.15Á26).NewYork,NY:Routledge/Taylor&FrancisGroup.
Changizi,M.A.,Zhang,Q.,&Shimojo,S.(2006).Bareskin,bloodandtheevolutionofprimatecolourvision.BiologyLetters,2,217Á221.
DeHouwer,J.(2003).Astructuralanalysisofindirectmeasureofattitudes.InJ.Musch&C.Klauer(Eds.),Thepsychologyofevaluation:Affectiveprocessesincognitionandemotion(pp.219Á244).Mahwah,NJ:LawrenceErlbaumAssociates,Inc.
Dehaene,S.,Changeux,J.,Naccache,L.,Sackur,J.,&Sergent,C.(2006).Conscious,preconscious,andsubliminalprocessing:Atestabletaxonomy.TrendsinCognitiveSciences,10,204Á211.
Drummond,P.D.(1997).Correlatesoffacialflushingandpallorinanger-provokingsituations.PersonalityandIndividualDifferences,23,575Á582.
Downloaded by [Staats & Universitatsbibliothek] at 13:56 28 April 2013 Ekman,P.(1992).Aretherebasicemotions?Psycholo-gicalReview,99,550Á553.
Ekman,P.,Levenson,R.,&Friesen,W.(1983).Autonomicnervoussystemactivitydistinguishesamongemotions.Science,221,1208Á1210.
Elliot,A.,&Maier,M.(2007).Colorandpsycholo-gicalfunctioning.CurrentDirectionsinPsychologicalScience,16,250Á254.
Fazio,R.H.,&Olson,M.A.(2003).Implicitmeasuresinsocialcognitionresearch:Theirmeaninganduses.AnnualReviewofPsychology,54,297Á327.Frijda,N.(1992).Theempiricalstatusofthelawsofemotion.CognitionandEmotion,6,467Á477.
Gibbs,R.(1994).Thepoeticsofmind:Figurativethought,language,andunderstanding.Cambridge,UK:CambridgeUniversityPress.
Goldstein,E.B.(1999).Sensation&perception.PacificGrove,CA:Brooks/Cole.
Greenwald,A.,&Farnham,S.(2000).UsingtheImplicitAssociationTesttomeasureself-esteemandself-concept.JournalofPersonalityandSocialPsychology,79,1022Á1038.
James,W.(1884).Whatisanemotion?Mind,9,188Á205.
Kane,M.,&Engle,R.(2003).Working-memorycapacityandthecontrolofattention:Thecontribu-tionsofgoalneglect,responsecompetition,andtasksettoStroopinterference.JournalofExperimentalPsychology:General,132,47Á70.
Katchadourian,H.(1987).Biologicalaspectsofhumansexuality(3rded.).FortWorth,TX:Holt,Rinehart&WinstonInc.Ko¨vecses,Z.(2000).Metaphorandemotion:Language,culture,andbodyinhumanfeeling.NewYork,NY:CambridgeUniversityPress.
Kucera,H.,&Francis,W.N.(1967).Computationalanalysisofpresent-dayAmericanEnglish.Providence,RI:BrownUniversityPress.
Lakoff,G.(1986).Afigureofthought.MetaphorandSymbolicActivity,1,215Á225.
Lakoff,G.(1987).Women,fire,anddangerousthings:Whatcategoriesrevealaboutthemind.Chicago,IL:UniversityofChicagoPress.
Lakoff,G.,&Johnson,M.(1980).Metaphorsweliveby.Chicago,IL:UniversityofChicagoPress.
Lakoff,G.,&Johnson,M.(1999).Philosophyintheflesh.NewYork,NY:BasicBooks.
Lambie,J.A.,&Marcel,A.J.(2002).Consciousnessandthevarietiesofemotionexperience:Atheore-ticalframework.PsychologicalReview,109,219Á259.EVIDENCEFORAPERCEPTUALASSOCIATION
Luce,R.(1959).Individualchoicebehavior.Oxford,UK:Wiley.
Luck,S.J.(2005).Anintroductiontotheevent-relatedpotentialtechnique.Cambridge,MA:MITPress.MacLeod,C.(1991).HalfacenturyofresearchontheStroopeffect:Anintegrativereview.PsychologicalBulletin,109,163Á203.
MacLeod,C.(1999).Anxietyandanxietydisorders.InT.Dalgleish&M.J.Power(Eds.),Handbookofcognitionandemotion(pp.447Á477).NewYork,NY:Wiley.
Mauss,I.,&Robinson,M.(2009).Measuresofemotion:Areview.CognitionandEmotion,23,209Á237.
Meier,B.P.,Hauser,D.J.,Robinson,M.D.,Friesen,C.K.,&Schjeldahl,K.(2007).What’s‘‘up’’withGod?Verticalspaceasarepresentationofthedivine.JournalofPersonalityandSocialPsychology,93,699Á710.
Meier,B.P.,Moeller,S.K.,Riemer-Peltz,M.,&Robinson,M.D.(2012).Sweettastepreferencesandexperiencespredictpro-socialinferences,per-sonality,andbehavior.JournalofPersonalityandSocialPsychology,102,163Á174.
Meier,B.P.,&Robinson,M.D.(2005).Themetaphoricalrepresentationofaffect.MetaphorandSymbol,20,239Á257.
Meier,B.P.,&Robinson,M.D.(2006).Does‘‘feelingdown’’meanseeingdown?Depressivesymptomsandverticalselectiveattention.JournalofResearchinPersonality,40,451Á461.
Meier,B.P.,Robinson,M.D.,&Clore,G.L.(2004).Whygoodguyswearwhite:Automaticinferencesaboutstimulusvalencebasedonbrightness.Psycho-logicalScience,15,82Á87.
Melara,R.,&Algom,D.(2003).Drivenbyinforma-tion:AtectonictheoryofStroopeffects.Psycholo-gicalReview,110,422Á471.
Meyer,D.,Irwin,D.,Osman,A.,&Kounois,J.(1988).Thedynamicsofcognitionandaction:MentalprocessesinferredfromspeedÁaccuracydecomposi-tion.PsychologicalReview,95,183Á237.
Murphy,S.,&Zajonc,R.(1993).Affect,cognition,andawareness:Affectiveprimingwithoptimalandsuboptimalstimulusexposures.JournalofPersonalityandSocialPsychology,64,723Á739.
Needham,R.(1973).Right&left:Essaysondualsymbolicclassification.Chicago,IL:UniversityofChicagoPress.
Pashler,H.(1998).Thepsychologyofattention.Cambridge,MA:MITPress.
COGNITIONANDEMOTION,2012,26(8)
1457
Downloaded by [Staats & Universitatsbibliothek] at 13:56 28 April 2013 FETTERMAN,ROBINSON,MEIER
Robinson,M.D.(2007).Liveslivedinmilliseconds:Usingcognitivemethodsinpersonalityresearch.InR.W.Robins,R.C.Fraley,&R.Krueger(Eds.),Handbookofresearchmethodsinpersonalitypsychology(pp.345Á359).NewYork,NY:GuilfordPress.Robinson,M.D.,&Oishi,S.(2006).Traitself-reportasa‘‘fillin’’beliefsystem:Categorizationspeedmoderatestheextraversion/lifesatisfactionrelation.SelfandIdentity,5,15Á34.
Robinson,M.D.,Zabelina,D.,Ode,S.,&Moeller,S.(2008).TheverticalnatureofdominanceÁsubmis-sion:Individualdifferencesinverticalattention.JournalofResearchinPersonality,42,933Á948.Rolls,E.T.(1999).Thebrainandemotion.Oxford,UK:OxfordUniversityPress.
Schubert,T.W.(2005).Yourhighness:Verticalpositionsasperceptualsymbolsofpower.JournalofPersonalityandSocialPsychology,89,1Á21.
Searle,J.(1998).Mind,languageandsociety:Philosophyintherealworld.NewYork,NY:BasicBooks.Smith,T.,Glazer,K.,Ruiz,J.,&Gallo,L.(2004).Hostility,anger,aggressiveness,andcoronaryheartdisease:Aninterpersonalperspectiveonpersonality,emotion,andhealth.JournalofPersonality,72,1217Á1270.
Storbeck,J.,Robinson,M.,&McCourt,M.(2006).Semanticprocessingprecedesaffectretrieval:Theneurologicalcaseforcognitiveprimacyinvisualprocessing.ReviewofGeneralPsychology,10,41Á55.Storm,C.,&Storm,T.(1987).Ataxonomicstudyofthevocabularyofemotions.JournalofPersonalityandSocialPsychology,53,805Á816.1458
COGNITIONANDEMOTION,2012,26(8)
Tavris,C.(1989).Anger:Themisunderstoodemotion.NewYork,NY:TouchstoneBooks/Simon&Schuster.
Watson,D.,&Clark,L.A.(1994).ThePANAS-X:ManualforthePositiveandNegativeAffectScheduleÁExpandedForm.Unpublishedmanuscript,UniversityofIowa,IowaCity.
Wentura,D.,Rothermund,K.,&Bak,P.(2000).Automaticvigilance:Theattention-grabbingpowerofapproach-andavoidance-relatedsocialinforma-tion.JournalofPersonalityandSocialPsychology,78,1024Á1037.
Wilkowski,B.,&Robinson,M.(2007).Keepingone’scool:Traitanger,hostilethoughts,andtherecruit-mentoflimitedcapacitycontrol.PersonalityandSocialPsychologyBulletin,33,1201Á1213.
Williams,J.,Mathews,A.,&MacLeod,C.(1996).TheemotionalStrooptaskandpsychopathology.PsychologicalBulletin,120,3Á24.
Williams,L.,&Bargh,J.(2008).Keepingone’sdistance:Theinfluenceofspatialdistancecuesonaffectandevaluation.PsychologicalScience,19,302Á308.
Williams,L.E.,Huang,J.Y.,&Bargh,J.A.(2009).Thescaffoldedmind:Highermentalprocessesaregroundedinearlyexperienceofthephysicalworld.EuropeanJournalofSocialPsychology,39,1257Á1267.Wurm,L.,&Vakoch,D.(2000).Theadaptivevalueoflexicalconnotationinspeechperception.CognitionandEmotion,14,177Á191.
Zhong,C.,&Liljenquist,K.(2006).Washingawayyoursins:Threatenedmoralityandphysicalcleans-ing.Science,313,1451Á1452.
Downloaded by [Staats & Universitatsbibliothek] at 13:56 28 April 2013
因篇幅问题不能全部显示，请点此查看更多更全内容