删除或更新信息,请邮件至freekaoyan#163.com(#换成@)

概念加工深度影响道德概念水平方位隐喻联结

本站小编 Free考研考试/2022-01-01

王丛兴, 马建平, 邓珏, 杨众望, 叶一舵()
福建师范大学心理学院, 福州 350000
收稿日期:2019-07-05出版日期:2020-04-25发布日期:2020-02-25
通讯作者:叶一舵E-mail:yeyiduo@163.com



The depth of conceptual processing affects the metaphorical connection between moral concepts and horizontal orientation

WANG Congxing, MA Jianping, DENG Jue, YANG Zhongwang, YE Yiduo()
School of Psychology, Fujian Normal University, Fuzhou 350000, China
Received:2019-07-05Online:2020-04-25Published:2020-02-25
Contact:YE Yiduo E-mail:yeyiduo@163.com






摘要/Abstract


摘要: 通过6个实验探究了不同概念加工深度下道德概念与水平方位的隐喻联结。实验1采用迫选任务范式, 实验2、实验3和实验4均采用空间Stroop范式, 实验5和实验6均采用启动范式。结果发现:(1)在思维迫选中存在道德与左、不道德与右的隐喻联结; (2)在较深、中等概念加工深度下发现了隐喻一致性效应, 在较浅概念加工深度下未发现这种效应; (3)在较浅概念加工深度下始源域和目标域之间的映射均不存在, 即未在启动范式中发现隐喻联结。结果表明:道德概念与水平方位存在隐喻联结, 这种隐喻联结中左表征道德、右表征不道德, 并同时受到始源域和目标域加工深度的影响。



图1纸笔测验图
图1纸笔测验图


表1迫选任务中将词汇放置于左右水平方位的个数
水平方位 词汇类型
道德词 不道德词
左侧 443 228
右侧 217 432

表1迫选任务中将词汇放置于左右水平方位的个数
水平方位 词汇类型
道德词 不道德词
左侧 443 228
右侧 217 432


表2词性判断的平均反应时和标准差
水平方位 词汇类型
道德词 不道德词
左侧 846.37 ± 194.13 933.44 ± 232.75
右侧 880.53 ± 209.41 922.30 ± 216.77

表2词性判断的平均反应时和标准差
水平方位 词汇类型
道德词 不道德词
左侧 846.37 ± 194.13 933.44 ± 232.75
右侧 880.53 ± 209.41 922.30 ± 216.77


表3词性判断的平均反应时和标准差
水平方位 词汇类型
道德词 不道德词
左侧 752.85 ± 105.45 810.31 ± 124.02
右侧 775.43 ± 130.71 795.48 ± 128.06

表3词性判断的平均反应时和标准差
水平方位 词汇类型
道德词 不道德词
左侧 752.85 ± 105.45 810.31 ± 124.02
右侧 775.43 ± 130.71 795.48 ± 128.06


表4词汇分类判断的平均反应时和标准差
水平方位 词汇类型
道德词 不道德词 假词
左侧 751.09 ± 60.86 814.12 ± 63.54 822.75 ± 54.00
右侧 769.77 ± 54.81 824.21 ± 56.74 840.91 ± 73.62

表4词汇分类判断的平均反应时和标准差
水平方位 词汇类型
道德词 不道德词 假词
左侧 751.09 ± 60.86 814.12 ± 63.54 822.75 ± 54.00
右侧 769.77 ± 54.81 824.21 ± 56.74 840.91 ± 73.62


表5词汇分类判断的平均反应时和标准差
水平方位 词汇类型
道德词 不道德词 假词
左侧 619.54 ± 73.28 633.32 ± 80.49 681.36 ± 84.25
右侧 624.40 ± 79.87 648.10 ± 77.23 681.54 ± 78.12

表5词汇分类判断的平均反应时和标准差
水平方位 词汇类型
道德词 不道德词 假词
左侧 619.54 ± 73.28 633.32 ± 80.49 681.36 ± 84.25
右侧 624.40 ± 79.87 648.10 ± 77.23 681.54 ± 78.12


表6字母分类判断的平均反应时和标准差
水平方位 词汇类型
道德词 不道德词 假词
左侧 651.40 ± 191.68 650.80 ± 187.16 655.40 ± 191.43
右侧 633.96 ± 191.71 619.23 ± 159.43 640.55 ± 181.27

表6字母分类判断的平均反应时和标准差
水平方位 词汇类型
道德词 不道德词 假词
左侧 651.40 ± 191.68 650.80 ± 187.16 655.40 ± 191.43
右侧 633.96 ± 191.71 619.23 ± 159.43 640.55 ± 181.27







[1] Banerjee P., Chatterjee P., & Sinha J . (2012). Is it light or dark? Recalling moral behavior changes perception of brightness. Psychological Science, 23(4), 407-409.
[2] Bargh J. A., & Tota M. E . (1988). Context-dependent automatic processing in depression: Accessibility of negative constructs with regard to self but not others. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(6), 925-939.
[3] Barsalou L. W . (1999). Perceptual symbol systems. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22(4), 577-660.
[4] Barsalou L. W . (2008). Grounded cognition. Annual Review of Psychology, 59(1), 617-645.
[5] Boroditsky L . (2000). Metaphoric structuring: Understanding time through spatial metaphors. Cognition, 75(1), 1-28.
[6] Casasanto D . (2009). Embodiment of abstract concepts: Good and bad in right- and left-handers. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 138(3), 351-367.
[7] Casasanto D . (2011). Different bodies, different minds: The body specificity of language and thought. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 20(6), 378-383.
[8] Casasanto D., & Henetz T . (2012). Handedness shapes children’s abstract concepts. Cognitive Science, 36(2), 359-372.
[9] Chen X., Jiang Q., Hou M., & Zhu M. Y . (2014). Embodied morality: A new approach in moral psychology. Psychological Development and Education, 30(6), 664-672.
[ 陈潇, 江琦, 侯敏, 朱梦音 . (2014). 具身道德: 道德心理学研究的新取向. 心理发展与教育, 30(6), 664-672.]
[10] Craik F. I. M., & Lockhart R. S . (1972). Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11(6), 671-684.
[11] Gibbs R. W. Jr. , (Eds).(2006) . Embodiment and cognitive science. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
[12] He X. L., Chen J., Zhang E. T., & Li J. N . (2015). Bidirectional associations of power and size in a priming task. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 27(3), 290-300.
[13] Hill P. L., & Lapsley D. K . (2009). The ups and downs of the moral personality: Why it's not so black and white. Journal of Research in Personality, 43(3), 520-523.
[14] Holyoak K. J., & Stamenković D . (2018). Metaphor comprehension: A critical review of theories and evidence. Psychological Bulletin, 144(6), 641-671.
[15] Huang Y., Tse C.-S., & Xie J . (2018). The bidirectional congruency effect of brightness-valence metaphoric association in the Stroop-like and priming paradigms. Acta Psychologica, 189(10), 76-92.
[16] Hyde T. S., & Jenkins J. J . (1973). Recall for words as a function of semantic, graphic, and syntactic orienting tasks. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 12(5), 471-480.
[17] Jia L, & Jiang G. F . (2016). The vertical spatial metaphor of moral concepts: Psychological reality and bidirectional mapping. Psychological Development and Education, 32(2), 158-165.
[ 贾宁, 蒋高芳 . (2016). 道德概念垂直空间隐喻的心理现实性及双向映射. 心理发展与教育, 32(2), 158-165.]
[18] Jin H., & Huang X. T . (2012). A new issue in the study of the spatial metaphor of time: The left-and-right representation of time. Advances in Psychological Science, 20(9), 1364-1371.
[ 金泓, 黄希庭 . (2012). 时空隐喻研究的新问题: 时间表征的左右方向性. 心理科学进展, 20(9), 1364-1371.]
[19] Lakoff G., & Johnson M . (Eds). (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
[20] Lakoff G., & Johnson M . (Eds). (1999). Philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to western thought. New York: Basic Books.
[21] Lee S. W. S., & Schwarz N . (2012). Bidirectionality, mediation, and moderation of metaphorical effects: The embodiment of social suspicion and fishy smells. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 103(5), 737-749.
[22] Li, J. X., & Wang, Z. H . (2015). Spatial-temporal association of response codes effect: Manifestation, influencing factors and its theories. Advances in Psychological Science, 23(1), 30-40.
[ 李金星, 王振宏 . (2015). 空间-时间联合编码效应:表现、影响因素及其理论. 心理科学进展, 23(1), 30-40.]
[23] Li, Y. Zhang, C., & Wang Y . (2019). The effect of moral emotions on the metaphorical mapping of morality and its neural mechanism. Advances in Psychological Science, 27(7), 1224-1231.
[ 李莹, 张灿, 王悦 . (2019). 道德情绪在道德隐喻映射中的作用及其神经机制. 心理科学进展, 27(7), 1224-1231.]
[24] Liljenquist K., Zhong C. B., & Galinsky A. D . (2010). The smell of virtue: Clean scents promote reciprocity and charity. Psychological Science, 21(3), 381-383.
[25] Liu W. J., Shen M. Q., Li Y., & Wang R. M . (2016). The interaction between emotional concept processing and emotional face perception. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 48(2), 163-173.
[ 刘文娟, 沈曼琼, 李莹, 王瑞明 . (2016). 情绪概念加工与情绪面孔知觉的相互影响. 心理学报, 48(2), 163-173.]
[26] Lu Z. Y., Guo S. P., & Jiang Z. L . (2017). The size metaphor of moral concepts: Psychological reality and mapping relationship. Journal of South China Normal University (Social Science Edition), 49(2), 70-78.
[ 鲁忠义, 郭少鹏, 蒋泽亮 . (2017). 道德概念大小隐喻的心理现实性及映射关系. 华南师范大学学报(社会科学版), 49(2), 70-78.]
[27] Lu Z. Y., Jia L. L., & Zhai D. X . (2017). The mapping for vertical spatial metaphor of the moral concepts: Bidirectional and unbalanced. ActaPsychologica Sinica, 49(2), 186-196.
[ 鲁忠义, 贾利宁, 翟冬雪 . (2017). 道德概念垂直空间隐喻理解中的映射:双向性及不平衡性. 心理学报, 49(2), 186-196.]
[28] Meier B. P., Sellbom M., & Wygant D. B . (2007). Failing to take the moral high ground: Psychopathy and the vertical representation of morality. Personality and Individual Differences, 43(4), 757-767.
[29] Mills M., Boychuk P., Chasteen A. L., & Pratt J . (2017). Attention goes both ways: Shifting attention influences lexical decisions. Journal of Experimental Psychology General, 147(2), 282-291.
[30] Mills M., Smith K. B., Hibbing J. R., & Dodd M. D . (2015). Obama cares about visuo-spatial attention: Perception of political figures moves attention and determines gaze direction. Behavioural Brain Research, 278, 221-225.
[31] Seidenberg M. S. (2011). Reading in different writing systems: One architecture, multiple solutions. In P. McCardle, J. Ren, & O. Tzeng (Eds.), Dyslexia across language: Orthography and the gene-brain-behavior link (pp. 151-174). Baltimore, MD: Paul Brooke Publishing.
[32] Sherman G. D., & Clore G. L . (2009). The color of sin: White and black are perceptual symbols of moral purity and pollution. Psychological Science, 20(8), 1019-1025.
[33] Wang X. J . (2004). Complexity of relationship between language and culture from the point of right and left. Journal of Xinjiang University (Social Science Edition), 32(2), 125-130.
[ 王希杰 . (2004). 就左和右说语言和文化关系的复杂性. 新疆大学学报(社会科学版), 32(2), 125-130.]
[34] Wang Z., & Lu Z. Y . (2013). The vertical spatial metaphor of moral concepts and its influence on cognition. ActaPsychologica Sinica, 45 (5), 538-545.
[ 王锃, 鲁忠义 . (2013). 道德概念的垂直空间隐喻及其对认知的影响. 心理学报, 45(5), 538-545.]
[35] Williams L. E., Huang J. Y., & Bargh J. A . (2009). The scaffolded mind: Higher mental processes are grounded in early experience of the physical world. European Journal of Social Psychology, 39(7), 1257-1267.
[36] Wilson M . (2002). Six views of embodied cognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9(4), 625-636.
[37] Yan S. C . (2011). Physical cleanliness and morality. Advances in Psychological Science, 19(8), 1242-1248.
[ 阎书昌 . (2011). 身体洁净与道德. 心理科学进展, 19(8), 1242-1248.]
[38] Yang J. P., Guo X. M., &Wang X. C . Metaphorical representation of moral concepts: Evidence from red/white color, left/right position and upright/skew font. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 49(7), 875-885.
[ 杨继平, 郭秀梅, 王兴超 . (2017). 道德概念的隐喻表征——从红白颜色、左右位置和正斜字体的维度. 心理学报, 49(7), 875-885.]
[39] Ye H. S. (Ed). (2017). Principles and applications of embodied cognition. Beijing, China : The Commercial Press.
[ 叶浩生 (编).(2017). 具身认知的原理与应用. 北京: 商务印书馆.]
[40] Yin R., & Ye H. S . (2014). The black and white metaphor representation of moral concepts and its influence on moral cognition. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 46 (9), 1331-1346.
[ 殷融, 叶浩生 . (2014). 道德概念的黑白隐喻表征及其对道德认知的影响. 心理学报, 46(9), 1331-1346.]
[41] Yin R., Su D. Q., & Ye H. S . (2013). Conceptual metaphor theory: Basing on theories of embodied cognition. Advances in Psychological Science, 21(2), 220-234.
[ 殷融, 苏得权, 叶浩生 . (2013). 具身认知视角下的概念隐喻理论. 心理科学进展, 21(2), 220-234.]
[42] Yu N., Wang, T F., & He Y. L . (2016). Spatial subsystem of moral metaphors: A cognitive semantic study. Metaphor and Symbol, 31(4), 195-211.
[43] Zhai D. X., Guo Y. L., & Lu, Z Y . (2018). A dual mechanism of cognition and emotion in processing moral-vertical metaphors. Frontiers in Psychology, 9(8), 1-9.
[44] Zhong, C B., Strejcek B., & Sivanathan N . (2010). A clean self can render harsh moral judgment. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46(5), 859-862.




[1]李芮, 夏凌翔. 攻击动机对特质愤怒与反应性攻击关系的中介作用:一项纵向研究[J]. 心理学报, 2021, 53(7): 788-797.
[2]王丛兴, 杨玉琴, 熊猛, 叶一舵. 特征整合与加工深度对道德概念容器隐喻联结的影响[J]. 心理学报, 2021, 53(2): 139-154.
[3]崔芳, 杨佳苗, 古若雷, 刘洁. 右侧颞顶联合区及道德加工脑网络的功能连接预测社会性框架效应:来自静息态功能磁共振的证据[J]. 心理学报, 2021, 53(1): 55-66.
[4]张积家,付雅,王斌. 文化影响亲属词性别概念加工中的空间隐喻与重量隐喻——来自彝族、白族和摩梭人的证据[J]. 心理学报, 2020, 52(4): 440-455.
[5]王汉林, 蒋泽亮, 冯晓慧, 鲁忠义. 道德概念的空间形象性:语言因素和具身因素的共同作用[J]. 心理学报, 2020, 52(2): 128-138.
[6]贺晓玲, 陈俊. 3~5岁幼儿权力概念多重隐喻的认知发展[J]. 心理学报, 2020, 52(2): 149-161.
[7]樊亚凤,蒋晶,崔稳权. 网络公益平台默认选项设置对个人捐赠意愿的影响及作用机制[J]. 心理学报, 2019, 51(4): 415-427.
[8]耿晓伟,房津如,韩彦芳,李中权,赵蜜,杨烨. 道德相对主义和厌恶情绪对道德直觉判断的影响[J]. 心理学报, 2019, 51(4): 517-526.
[9]马利军,马云霄,何晓清,刘海涛,张静宇. 相对熟悉度和同音线索在谐音型歇后语理解中的作用[J]. 心理学报, 2019, 51(12): 1306-1317.
[10]陈斯允,卫海英,孟陆. 社会知觉视角下道德诉求方式如何提升劝捐效果[J]. 心理学报, 2019, 51(12): 1351-1362.
[11]吕小康, 付春野, 汪新建. 反驳文本对患方信任和道德判断的影响与机制[J]. 心理学报, 2019, 51(10): 1171-1186.
[12]黎晓丹,丁道群,叶浩生. 身体姿势启动的内隐权力感对公平决策的影响[J]. 心理学报, 2019, 51(1): 106-116.
[13]汪新筱, 江珊, 张积家. 空间语言标记影响亲属关系的容器隐喻 *[J]. 心理学报, 2018, 50(9): 953-964.
[14]金童林, 陆桂芝, 张璐, 乌云特娜, 金祥忠. 暴力环境接触对大学生网络攻击行为的影响:反刍思维与网络道德的作用 *[J]. 心理学报, 2018, 50(9): 1051-1060.
[15]易仲怡, 杨文登, 叶浩生. 具身认知视角下软硬触觉经验对性别角色认知的影响[J]. 心理学报, 2018, 50(7): 793-802.





PDF全文下载地址:

http://journal.psych.ac.cn/xlxb/CN/article/downloadArticleFile.do?attachType=PDF&id=4683
相关话题/心理 空间 实验 科学 网络