道德概念垂直空间隐喻对空间关系判断的影响
|
摘要
本研究通过三个实验考察道德概念垂直空间隐喻对空间关系判断的影响。涉及的空间关系判断包括上下关系判断、远近关系判断和距离判断。研究结果显示:(1)上下判断中,在空间上方时,道德词的反应快于不道德词;在空间下方时,不道德词的反应快于道德词;(2)远近判断中,在空间上方时,个体更倾向于将道德词判断为"远",即道德词更偏上;在空间下方时,没有显著的偏向;(3)在距离判断中,个体对道德词的判断出现显著的向上偏移,对不道德词的判断则出现显著的向下偏移。由此得出结论:道德概念的垂直空间隐喻会影响个体对空间关系的判断,具体来说是"道德是上"的隐喻会导致空间关系判断产生"向上"的偏移效应;而"不道德是下"的隐喻则会导致空间关系判断产生"向下"的偏移效应。
Metaphor is pervasive in everyday life,not just in language,but also in thoughts and actions( Lakoff and Johnson,1980,1999). Our ordinary conceptual system,in terms of which we think and act,is fundamentally metaphorical in nature. Thus,metaphors are not simply a rhetorical or communicative tool,but an important way to represent concepts. Spatial metaphors are a type of image schema metaphor that map spatial concepts in the source domain( e. g. up-down,front-back,center-periphery,etc.) onto abstract target domains( Lakens,Semin,& Foroni,2011; Lakoff & Turner,1989; Schubert,2005). Recently,spatial metaphors have received particular attention in the field of social cognition,because of its critical role in the formation of human moral concepts.In the past,researchers paid more attention to the psychological reality of moral concept metaphors,and the influence of spatial position on the processing the( im) moral words. The current study focused on the influence of moral metaphors on the judgment of spatial relationships. We examine two issues: first,whether moral concept spatial metaphors exist in psychological reality; second,whether moral metaphors cause a bias in spatial relationship judgments.The present study utilized a visuospatial relation judgments paradigm,namely the Bar-Dot task( Hellige &Michimata,1989; Katie & Itiel,2011). In this paradigm,participants were asked to estimate the position of a dot relative to a bar in three dimensions: above/below judgment( Experiment 1),near/far judgment( Experiment 2),and precise distance estimation( Experiment 3). The above/below judgment task requires participants to estimate whether a dot is above or below the bar. The accuracy and reaction time of estimation were recorded to provide a coarse spatial judgment. The near/far judgment task requires participants to judge whether the dot is within or outside of a specific distance( such as 3. 5 cm) of the bar and the number of far and near distance judgments was recorded. Relative to the above/below judgment task,the near/far judgment task includes judging a more refined spatial relationship. The precise distance estimation requires participants to accurately estimate the distance of a dot from the bar,and the estimated distance was recorded. Relative to the near/far judgment task that provides a qualitative estimate of cognitive bias( i. e.,whether near/far),the precise distance estimation task can provide a quantitative measure of cognitive biases( i. e.,how near/far).The results showed that:( 1) In the verticality( above/below) judgment,moral words were responded to faster than immoral words when the words were presented above the bar; in contrast,when the words were presented below the bar,immoral words were responded to faster;( 2) in the proximity( near/far) judgment,more moral than immoral words were judged to be"far"( an upward bias) when words were presented above the bar; but when the words were presented below the bar,no significant bias was found for moral or immoral words;( 3) in precise distance estimation,an overestimation was observed when participants were primed with moral words and an underestimation was observed when participants were primed with immoral words. The current results demonstrated that vertical spatial metaphor of moral concepts influences various dimensions of our spatial relation judgments. The Study extend research on moral metaphor and embodied cognition by using Chinese traditional moral concepts and the classical spatial relation judgment task.
Metaphor is pervasive in everyday life,not just in language,but also in thoughts and actions( Lakoff and Johnson,1980,1999). Our ordinary conceptual system,in terms of which we think and act,is fundamentally metaphorical in nature. Thus,metaphors are not simply a rhetorical or communicative tool,but an important way to represent concepts. Spatial metaphors are a type of image schema metaphor that map spatial concepts in the source domain( e. g. up-down,front-back,center-periphery,etc.) onto abstract target domains( Lakens,Semin,& Foroni,2011; Lakoff & Turner,1989; Schubert,2005). Recently,spatial metaphors have received particular attention in the field of social cognition,because of its critical role in the formation of human moral concepts.In the past,researchers paid more attention to the psychological reality of moral concept metaphors,and the influence of spatial position on the processing the( im) moral words. The current study focused on the influence of moral metaphors on the judgment of spatial relationships. We examine two issues: first,whether moral concept spatial metaphors exist in psychological reality; second,whether moral metaphors cause a bias in spatial relationship judgments.The present study utilized a visuospatial relation judgments paradigm,namely the Bar-Dot task( Hellige &Michimata,1989; Katie & Itiel,2011). In this paradigm,participants were asked to estimate the position of a dot relative to a bar in three dimensions: above/below judgment( Experiment 1),near/far judgment( Experiment 2),and precise distance estimation( Experiment 3). The above/below judgment task requires participants to estimate whether a dot is above or below the bar. The accuracy and reaction time of estimation were recorded to provide a coarse spatial judgment. The near/far judgment task requires participants to judge whether the dot is within or outside of a specific distance( such as 3. 5 cm) of the bar and the number of far and near distance judgments was recorded. Relative to the above/below judgment task,the near/far judgment task includes judging a more refined spatial relationship. The precise distance estimation requires participants to accurately estimate the distance of a dot from the bar,and the estimated distance was recorded. Relative to the near/far judgment task that provides a qualitative estimate of cognitive bias( i. e.,whether near/far),the precise distance estimation task can provide a quantitative measure of cognitive biases( i. e.,how near/far).The results showed that:( 1) In the verticality( above/below) judgment,moral words were responded to faster than immoral words when the words were presented above the bar; in contrast,when the words were presented below the bar,immoral words were responded to faster;( 2) in the proximity( near/far) judgment,more moral than immoral words were judged to be"far"( an upward bias) when words were presented above the bar; but when the words were presented below the bar,no significant bias was found for moral or immoral words;( 3) in precise distance estimation,an overestimation was observed when participants were primed with moral words and an underestimation was observed when participants were primed with immoral words. The current results demonstrated that vertical spatial metaphor of moral concepts influences various dimensions of our spatial relation judgments. The Study extend research on moral metaphor and embodied cognition by using Chinese traditional moral concepts and the classical spatial relation judgment task.
引文
Buschman,T.J.,&Miller,E.K.(2007).Top-down versus bottomup control of attention in the prefrontal and posterior parietal cortices.Science,31(5),1860-1862.
Chasteen,A.L.,Burdzy,D.C.,&Pratt,J.(2010).Thinking of God moves attentions.Neuropsychologia,48(2),627-630.
Huang,Y.,&Tse,C.S.(2015).Re-examining the automaticity and directionality of the activation of the spatial-valence“good is up”metaphoric association.Plos One,10(4),e0123371.
Hellige,J.B.,&Michimata,C.(1989).Categorization versus distance:Hemispheric differences for processing spatial information.Memory&Cognition,17(6),770-776.
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.
Katie,L.M.,Itiel,E.D.,Romola,S.B.,&Simon,P.L.(2011).Eye movements during visuospatial judgements.Journal of Cognitive Psychology,23(1),92-101.
Lakoff.G.,&Johnson,M.(1980).Conceptual Metaphor in Everyday Language.The Journal of Philosophy,77(8),453-486.
Lakoff.G.,&Johnson,M.(1999).Philosophy in the flesh:The embodied mind and its challenge to western thought.New York:Basic Books.
Li,H.,&Cao,Y.(2017).Who’s holding the moral higher ground:religiosity and the vertical conception of morality.Personality&Individual Differences,106(1),178-182.
Meier,B.P.,Hauser,M.D.,Robinson,M.D.,Friesen,C.K.,&Schjeldahl,K.(2007).What’s“UP”with God?Vertical space as a representation of the divine.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,93(5),699-710.
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.
Schnall,S.,&Benton,J.,&Harvey,S.(2008).With a Clean Conscience:Cleanliness Reduces the Severity of Moral Judgments.Psychological Science,19(12),1219-1222.
Seidel,A.,&Prinz,J.(2018).Great works:a reciprocal relationship between spatial magnitudes and aesthetic judgment.Psychology of Aesthetics Creativity&the Arts,12(1),2-10.
Slepian,M.L.,&Ambady,N.(2014).Simulating sensorimotor metaphors:novel metaphors influence sensory judgments.Cognition,130(3),309-314.
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.
Wang,H.L.,Lu,Y.Q.,&Lu,Z.Y.(2016).Moral-up first,immoral-down last:the time course of moral metaphors on a vertical dimension.NeuroReport,27(4),247-256.
Yu,N.,Wang,T.,&He,Y.(2016).Spatial subsystem of moral metaphors:a cognitive semantic study.Metaphor&Symbol,31(4),195-211.
Yu,N.(2016).Spatial metaphors for morality:a perspective from chinese.Metaphor&Symbol,31(2),108-125.
Zhong,C.B.,&Liljenquist,K.(2006).Washing away your sins:threatened morality and physical cleansing.Science,313(5792),1451-1452.
北京语言学院编印.(1986).现代汉语频率词典.北京语言学院.
丁凤琴,王喜梅,刘钊.(2017).道德概念净脏隐喻及其对道德判断的影响.心理发展与教育,33(6),666-674.
方溦,葛列众,甘甜.(2016).道德具身认知的理论研究.心理与行为研究,14(6),765-772.
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.
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.
鲁忠义,郭娟,冯晓慧.(2017).卷入欺负行为儿童道德概念垂直空间隐喻的心理表征.心理科学,40(5),1123-1128.
唐芳贵.(2017).高上会使人更高尚吗?---垂直空间的道德隐喻.苏州大学学报(教育科学版),(4),106-111.
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,5(45),538-545.
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.
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.
张付海,张积家,董琳,赵瑜,李艳梅.(2016).盲青少年道德概念的垂直空间隐喻---兼论社会环境和生活经验对空间意象图式发展的影响.中国特殊教育,(6),38-43.
翟冬雪,鲁雅乔,鲁忠义.(2016).儿童道德概念垂直空间隐喻的认知发展.心理科学,39(5),1171-1176.
郑皓元,叶浩生,苏得权.(2017).有关具身认知的三种理论模型.心理学探新,37(3),195-199.
Chasteen,A.L.,Burdzy,D.C.,&Pratt,J.(2010).Thinking of God moves attentions.Neuropsychologia,48(2),627-630.
Huang,Y.,&Tse,C.S.(2015).Re-examining the automaticity and directionality of the activation of the spatial-valence“good is up”metaphoric association.Plos One,10(4),e0123371.
Hellige,J.B.,&Michimata,C.(1989).Categorization versus distance:Hemispheric differences for processing spatial information.Memory&Cognition,17(6),770-776.
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.
Katie,L.M.,Itiel,E.D.,Romola,S.B.,&Simon,P.L.(2011).Eye movements during visuospatial judgements.Journal of Cognitive Psychology,23(1),92-101.
Lakoff.G.,&Johnson,M.(1980).Conceptual Metaphor in Everyday Language.The Journal of Philosophy,77(8),453-486.
Lakoff.G.,&Johnson,M.(1999).Philosophy in the flesh:The embodied mind and its challenge to western thought.New York:Basic Books.
Li,H.,&Cao,Y.(2017).Who’s holding the moral higher ground:religiosity and the vertical conception of morality.Personality&Individual Differences,106(1),178-182.
Meier,B.P.,Hauser,M.D.,Robinson,M.D.,Friesen,C.K.,&Schjeldahl,K.(2007).What’s“UP”with God?Vertical space as a representation of the divine.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,93(5),699-710.
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.
Schnall,S.,&Benton,J.,&Harvey,S.(2008).With a Clean Conscience:Cleanliness Reduces the Severity of Moral Judgments.Psychological Science,19(12),1219-1222.
Seidel,A.,&Prinz,J.(2018).Great works:a reciprocal relationship between spatial magnitudes and aesthetic judgment.Psychology of Aesthetics Creativity&the Arts,12(1),2-10.
Slepian,M.L.,&Ambady,N.(2014).Simulating sensorimotor metaphors:novel metaphors influence sensory judgments.Cognition,130(3),309-314.
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.
Wang,H.L.,Lu,Y.Q.,&Lu,Z.Y.(2016).Moral-up first,immoral-down last:the time course of moral metaphors on a vertical dimension.NeuroReport,27(4),247-256.
Yu,N.,Wang,T.,&He,Y.(2016).Spatial subsystem of moral metaphors:a cognitive semantic study.Metaphor&Symbol,31(4),195-211.
Yu,N.(2016).Spatial metaphors for morality:a perspective from chinese.Metaphor&Symbol,31(2),108-125.
Zhong,C.B.,&Liljenquist,K.(2006).Washing away your sins:threatened morality and physical cleansing.Science,313(5792),1451-1452.
北京语言学院编印.(1986).现代汉语频率词典.北京语言学院.
丁凤琴,王喜梅,刘钊.(2017).道德概念净脏隐喻及其对道德判断的影响.心理发展与教育,33(6),666-674.
方溦,葛列众,甘甜.(2016).道德具身认知的理论研究.心理与行为研究,14(6),765-772.
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.
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.
鲁忠义,郭娟,冯晓慧.(2017).卷入欺负行为儿童道德概念垂直空间隐喻的心理表征.心理科学,40(5),1123-1128.
唐芳贵.(2017).高上会使人更高尚吗?---垂直空间的道德隐喻.苏州大学学报(教育科学版),(4),106-111.
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,5(45),538-545.
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.
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.
张付海,张积家,董琳,赵瑜,李艳梅.(2016).盲青少年道德概念的垂直空间隐喻---兼论社会环境和生活经验对空间意象图式发展的影响.中国特殊教育,(6),38-43.
翟冬雪,鲁雅乔,鲁忠义.(2016).儿童道德概念垂直空间隐喻的认知发展.心理科学,39(5),1171-1176.
郑皓元,叶浩生,苏得权.(2017).有关具身认知的三种理论模型.心理学探新,37(3),195-199.