If you can't grab it, it won't grab you: The effect of restricting the dominant hand on target evaluations

Journal of Experimental Social Psychology

Volumn 48, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 525-529

  Shen, Hao ^a   Sengupta, Jaideep ^b  

^a CHINESE UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG   (Hong Kong)

^b HONG KONG UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY   (Hong Kong)

Author keywords

Embodied cognition; Fluency; Mental simulation

Indexed keywords

EID: 84857140291     PISSN: 00221031     EISSN: 10960465     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jesp.2011.11.003     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Baron R.M., Kenny D.A. The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1986, 51:1173-1182.
2. Barsalou L.W. Perceptual symbol systems. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences 1999, 22:637-660.
3. Beilock S.L., Holt L.E. Embodied preference judgments: Can likeability be driven by the motor system?. Psychological Science 2007, 18:51-57.
4. Briñol P., Petty R.E. Embodied persuasion: Fundamental processes by which bodily responses can impact attitudes. Embodiment grounding: Social, cognitive, affective, and neuroscientific approaches 2008, 184-207. Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, US. G.R. Semin, E.R. Smith (Eds.).
5. Casasanto D. Embodiment of abstract concepts: Good and bad in right- and left-handers. Journal of Experimental Psychology. General 2009, 138:351-367.
6. Casasanto D., Chrysikou E. When left is "right": Motor fluency shapes abstract concepts. Psychological Science 2011, 22(4):419-422.
7. Casasanto D., Jasmin K. Good and bad in the hands of politicians: Spontaneous gestures during positive and negative speech. PLoS One 2010, 5:e11805.
8. Gibson J.J. The ecological approach to visual perception 1979, Houghton Mifflin, Boston.
9. Glenberg A.M. What memory is for. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences 1997, 20:1-55.
10. Glenberg A.M., Kaschak M.P. Grounding language in action. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 2002, 9:558-565.
11. Higgins E.T. Beyond pleasure and pain. American Psychologist 1997, 52:1280-1300.
12. Labroo A.A., Nielsen J. Half the thrill is in the chase: Twisted inferences from embodied cognitions and brand evaluation. Journal of Consumer Research 2010, 37:143-157.
13. Niedenthal P.M., Barsalou L.W., Winkielman P., Krauth-Gruber S., Ric F. Embodiment in attitudes, social perception, and emotion. Personality and Social Psychology Review 2005, 9:184-211.
14. Niedenthal P.M., Brauer M., Halberstadt J.B., Innes-Ker Å. When did her smile drop? Facial mimicry and the influences of emotional state on the detection of change in emotional expression. Cognition & Emotion 2001, 15:853-864.
15. Ping R.M., Dhillon S., Beilock S.L. Reach for what you like: The body's role in shaping preferences. Emotion Review 2009, 1:140-150.
16. Preacher K.J., Hayes A.F. SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers 2004, 36(4):717-731.
17. Reber R., Schwarz N., Winkelman P. Processing fluency and aesthetic pleasure: Is beauty in the perceiver's processing experience?. Personality and Social Psychology Review 2004, 8:364-382.
18. Tucker M., Ellis R. On the relations between seen objects and components of potential actions. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance 1998, 24:830-846.
19. Williams L.E., Huang J.Y., Bargh J.A. The scaffolded mind: Higher mental processes are grounded in early experience of the physical world. European Journal of Social Psychology 2009, 39:1257-1267.
20. Zhao X., Lynch J.G., Chen Q. Reconsidering Baron and Kenny: Myths and truths about mediation analysis. Journal of Consumer Research 2010, 37:197-206. (August).