Congruency between word position and meaning is caused by task-induced spatial attention

Frontiers in Psychology

Volumn , Issue SEP, 2010, Pages

  Pecher, Diane ^a   Van Dantzig, Saskia ^b   Boot, Inge ^a   Zanolie, Kiki ^a   Huber, David E ^c  

^a ERASMUS UNIVERSITY ROTTERDAM   (Netherlands)

^b LEIDEN UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Concepts; Grounded cognition; Polarity alignment; Spatial attention

Indexed keywords

EID: 84866765377     PISSN: None     EISSN: 16641078     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2010.00030     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Bae, G. Y., Choi, J. M., Cho, Y. S., and Proctor, R. W. (2009). Transfer of magnitude and spatial mappings to the SNARC effect for parity judgments. J. Exp. Psychol. Learn. Mem. Cogn. 35, 1506-1521.
2. Bar-Anan, Y., Liberman, N., Trope, Y., and Algom, D. (2007). Automatic processing of psychological distance: Evidence from a stroop task. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 136, 610-622.
3. Barsalou, L. W. (1999). Perceptual symbol systems. Behav. Brain Sci. 22, 577-660.
4. Bergen, B. K., Lindsay, S., Matlock, T., and Narayanan, S. (2007). Spatial and linguistic aspects of visual imagery in sentence comprehension. Cogn. Sci. 31, 733-764.
5. Boot, I., and Pecher, D. (2010). Similarity is closeness: metaphorical mapping in a perceptual task. Q. J. Exp. Psychol. 63, 942-954.
6. Chiou, R. Y.-C., Chang, E. C., Tzeng, O. J.-L., and Wu, D. H. (2009). The common magnitude code underlying numerical and size processing for action but not for perception. Exp. Brain Res. 194, 553-562.
7. Craver Lemley, C., and Reeves, A. (1992). How visual imagery interferes with vision. Psychol. Rev. 99, 633-649.
8. Estes, Z., Verges, M., and Barsalou, L. W. (2008). Head up, foot down: object words orient attention to the objects' typical location. Psychol. Sci. 19, 93-97.
9. Fischer, M. H., Castel, A. D., Dodd, M. D., and Pratt, J. (2003). Perceiving numbers causes spatial shifts of attention. Nat. Neurosci. 6, 555-556.
10. Klatzky, R. L., Clark, E. V., and Macken, M. (1973). Asymmetries in the acquisition of polar adjectives: linguistic or conceptual? J. Exp. Child Psychol. 16, 32-46.
11. Landy, D. H., Jones, E. L., and Hummel, J. E. (2008). Why spatial-numeric associations aren't evidence for a mental number line. Proc. 30th Ann. Conf. Cogn. Sci. Soc. 357-362.
12. Loftus, G. R., and Masson, M. E. J. (1994). Using confidence intervals in within-subject designs. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 1, 476-490.
13. Meier, B. P., Hauser, D. J., Robinson, M. D., Friesen, C. K., and Schjeldahl, K. (2007). What's "up" with god? vertical space as a representation of the divine. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 93, 699-710.
14. Meier, B. P., and Robinson, M. D. (2004). Why the sunny side is up: Associations between affect and vertical position. Psychol. Sci. 15, 243-247.
15. Proctor, R. W., and Cho, Y. S. (2006). Polarity correspondence: a general principle for performance of speeded binary classification tasks. Psychol. Bull. 132, 416-442.
16. Richardson, D. C., Spivey, M. J., Barsalou, L. W., and McRae, K. (2003). Spatial representations activated during real-time comprehension of verbs. Cogn. Sci. 27, 767-780.
17. Santens, S., and Gevers, W. (2008). The SNARC effect does not imply a mental number line. Cognition 108, 263-270.
18. Schnall, S., and Clore, G. L. (2004). Emergent meaning in affective space: congruent conceptual relations and spatial relations produce positive evaluations. Proc. 26th Ann. Conf. Cogn. Sci. Soc. 1209-1214.
19. Schubert, T. W. (2005). Your highness: vertical positions as perceptual symbols of power. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 89, 1-21.
20. Šetić, M., and Domijan, D. (2007). The influence of vertical spatial orientation on property verification. Lang. Cogn. Process. 22, 297-312.
21. Van Dantzig, S. (2009). Mind the Body: Grounding Conceptual Knowledge in Perception and Action. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation), Erasmus University, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
22. Van Dantzig, S., Pecher, D., Zeelenberg, R., and Barsalou, L. W. (2008). Perceptual processing affects conceptual processing. Cogn. Sci. 32, 579-590.
23. Zwaan, R. A., and Yaxley, R. H. (2003). Spatial iconicity affects semantic relatedness judgments. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 10, 954-958.