Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Vertical metaphor with motion and judgment: a valenced congruency effect with fluency

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Psychological Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Following metaphorical theories of affect, several research studies have shown that the spatial cues along a vertical dimension are useful in qualifying emotional experience (HAPPINESS is UP, SADNESS is DOWN). Three experiments were conducted to examine the role of vertical motion in affective judgment. They showed that positive stimuli moving UPWARD were evaluated more positively than those moving DOWNWARD, whereas negative stimuli moving DOWNWARD were evaluated as less negative than those moving UPWARD. They showed a valenced congruency effect, but an alternative hypothesis in terms of MORE is UP and LESS is DOWN was also examined. Finally, fluency mechanisms were investigated to confirm that relationships between affect and verticality were in accordance with a valenced congruency effect.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alter, A. L., & Oppenheimer, D. M. (2009). Uniting the tribes of fluency to form a metacognitive nation. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 13, 219–235.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Beilock, S. L., & Holt, L. E. (2007). Embodied preference judgments: Can likeability be driven by the motor system? Psychological Science, 18, 51–57.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bradley, M. M., & Lang, P. J. (1999). Affective Norms for English Words (ANEW): Stimuli, instruction manual and affective ratings. Technical report C-1, Gainesville: University of Florida.

  • Cannon, P. R., Hayes, A. E., & Tipper, S. P. (2010). Sensorimotor fluency influences affect: Evidence from electromyography. Cognition and Emotion, 24, 681–691.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Casasanto, D., & Dijkstra, K. (2010). Motor action and emotional memory. Cognition, 115, 179–185.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Centerbar, D. B., & Clore, G. L. (2006). Do approach-avoidance actions create attitudes? Psychological Science, 17, 22–29.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Centerbar, D. B., Schnall, S., Clore, G. L., & Garvin, E. D. (2008). Affective incoherence: When affective concepts and embodied reactions clash. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94, 560–578.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, M., & Bargh, J. A. (1999). Consequences of automatic evaluation: Immediate behavioral predispositions to approach or avoid the stimulus. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25, 215–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chui, K. (2011). Conceptual metaphors in gesture. Cognitive Linguistics, 22, 437–458.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eder, A. B., & Rothermund, K. (2008). When do motor behaviors (mis)match affective stimuli? An evaluative coding view of approach and avoidance reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 137, 262–281.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischer, M. H. (2012). A hierarchical view of grounded, embodied, and situated numerical cognition. Cognitive Processing, 13, 161–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Förster, J. (2004). How body feedback influences consumer’s evaluation of products. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 14, 415–425.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forster, M., Leder, H., & Ansorge, U. (2013). It felt fluent, and I liked it: Subjective feeling of fluency rather than objective fluency determines liking. Emotion, 13, 280–289.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Förster, J., & Strack, F. (1996). Influence of overt head movements on memory for valenced words: A case of conceptual-motor compatibility. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 421–430.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Freddi, S., Tessier, M., Lacrampe, R., & Dru, V. (2013). Affective judgment about information relating to competence and warmth: An embodied perspective. British Journal of Social Psychology. doi:10.1111/bjso.12033.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Freina, L., Baroni, G., Borghi, A. M., & Nicoletti, R. (2009). Emotive concept-nouns and motor responses: Attraction or repulsion? Memory & Cognition, 37, 493–499.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, A. E., Paul, M. A., Beuger, B., & Tipper, S. P. (2008). Self produced and observed actions influence emotion: The roles of action fluency and eye gaze. Psychological Research, 72, 461–472.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Holmes, K. J., & Lourenco, S. F. (2012). Orienting numbers in mental space: Horizontal organization trumps vertical. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 65, 1044–1051.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hommel, B., Müsseler, J., Aschersleben, G., & Prinz, W. (2001). The theory of event coding (TEC): A framework for perception and action planning. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24, 849–878.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ito, Y., & Hatta, T. (2004). Spatial structure of quantitative representation of numbers: Evidence from the SNARC effect. Memory & Cognition, 32, 662–673.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, M. (1987). The body in the mind: The bodily basis of meaning, imagination, and reason. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knops, A., Viarouge, A., & Dehaene, S. (2009). Dynamic representations underlying symbolic and nonsymbolic calculation: Evidence from the operational momentum effect. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 71, 803–821.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koch, S. C., Glawe, S., & Holt, D. (2011). Up and down, front and back. Movement and meaning in the vertical and sagittal axis. Social Psychology, 42, 159–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kövecses, Z. (2002). Metaphor: A practical introduction. NY: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy in the flesh. NY: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lugli, L., Baroni, G., Gianelli, C., Borghi, A. M., & Nicoletti, R. (2012). Self, others, objects: How this triadic interaction modulates our behaviour. Memory & Cognition, 40, 1373–1386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Markman, A. B., & Brendl, C. M. (2005). Constraining theories of embodied cognition. Psychological Science, 16, 6–10.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Meier, B. P., Hauser, D. J., Robinson, M. D., Friesen, C. K., & Schjeldahl, K. (2007a). What’s ‘up’ with God? Vertical space as a representation of the divine. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 699–710.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Meier, B. P., & Robinson, M. D. (2004). Why the sunny side is up: Associations between affect and vertical position. Psychological Science, 15, 243–247.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Meier, B. P., & Robinson, M. D. (2005). The metaphorical representation of affect. Metaphor and Symbol, 20, 239–257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meier, B. P., Sellbom, M., & Wygant, D. B. (2007b). Failing to take the moral high ground: Psychopathy and the vertical representation of morality. Personality and Individual Differences, 43, 757–767.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moeller, S. K., Robinson, M. D., & Zabelina, D. L. (2008). Personality dominance and preferential use of the vertical dimension of space: Evidence from spatial attention paradigms. Psychological Science, 19, 355–361.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Neumann, R., & Strack, F. (2000). Approach and avoidance: The influence of proprioceptive and exteroceptive cues on encoding of affective information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 39–48.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2004). SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36, 717–731.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quadflieg, S., Etzel, J. A., Gazzola, V., Keysers, C., Schubert, T. W., Waiter, G. D., et al. (2011). Puddles, parties and professors: Linking word categorization to neural patterns of visuospatial coding. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 23, 2636–2649.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Reber, R., Winkielman, P., & Schwarz, N. (1998). Effects of perceptual fluency on affective judgments. Psychological Science, 9, 45–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Regenberg, N. F. E., Häfner, M., & Semin, G. R. (2012). The groove move: Action affordances produce fluency and positive affect. Experimental Psychology, 59, 30–37.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, M. D., Zabelina, D. L., Ode, S., & Moeller, S. K. (2008). The vertical nature of dominance-submission: Individual differences in vertical attention. Journal of Research in Personality, 42, 933–948.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schnall, S., & Clore, G. L. (2004). Emergent meaning in affective space: Conceptual and spatial congruence produces positive evaluations. In K. Forbus, D. Gentner, & T. Regier (Eds.), Proceedings of the Twenty-Six Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 1209–1214). Mahwah: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seamon, J. G., McKenna, P. A., & Binder, N. (1998). The mere exposure effect is differentially sensitive to different judgment tasks. Consciousness and Cognition, 7, 85–102.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Seibt, B., Neumann, R., Nussinson, R., & Strack, F. (2008). Movement direction or change in distance? Self and object related approach-avoidance movements. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44, 713–720.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Semin, G. R., & Fiedler, K. (1988). The cognitive functions of linguistic categories in describing persons: Social cognition and language. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 558–568.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simons, R. F., Detenber, B. H., Cuthbert, B. N., Schwartz, D. D., & Reiss, J. E. (2003). Attention to television: Alpha power and its relationship to image motion and emotional content. Media Psychology, 5, 283–301.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simons, R. F., Detenber, B. H., Reiss, J. E., & Shults, C. W. (2000). Image motion and context: A between- and within-subject comparison. Psychophysiology, 37, 706–710.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Simons, R. F., Detenber, B. H., Roedema, T. M., & Reiss, J. E. (1999). Emotion processing in three systems: The medium and the message. Psychophysiology, 36, 619–627.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tom, G., Pettersen, P., Lau, T., Burton, T., & Cook, J. (1991). The role of overt head movement in the formation of affect. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 12, 281–289.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Dantzig, S., Pecher, D., & Zwaan, R. A. (2008). Approach and avoidance as action effects. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 61, 1298–1306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wells, G. L., & Petty, R. E. (1980). The effects of head movement on persuasion: Compatibility and incompatibility of responses. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 1, 219–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, N. L., & Gibbs, R. W. (2007). Real and imagined body movement primes metaphor comprehension. Cognitive Science, 31, 721–731.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Winkielman, P., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2001). Mind at ease puts a smile on the face: Psychophysiological evidence that processing facilitation increases positive affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 989–1000.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Winkielman, P., Schwarz, N., Fazendeiro, T., & Reber, R. (2003). The hedonic marking of processing fluency: Implications for evaluative judgment. In J. Musch & K. C. Klauer (Eds.), The psychology of evaluation: Affective processes in cognition and emotion (pp. 189–217). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank R. Sanz for her technical assistance.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. U. F. R. STAPS, Université Paris Ouest, Nanterre, France

    Sébastien Freddi, Joël Cretenet & Vincent Dru

Authors
  1. Sébastien Freddi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Joël Cretenet
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Vincent Dru
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Vincent Dru.

Additional information

S. Freddi, J. Cretenet and V. Dru contributed equally to this research.

Appendix: Valenced categorization of the different words taken from Affective Norms for English Words for Study 1a, 1b, and 2

Appendix: Valenced categorization of the different words taken from Affective Norms for English Words for Study 1a, 1b, and 2

Negative words: 55 (2.50, 5.63, burdened), 92 (1.97, 5.68 cruel), 275 (2.88, 5.52, menace), 337 (2.38, 5.74, putrid), 345 (3.02, 4.95, rat), 382 (2.42, 5.50, selfish), 590 (3.08, 4.88, dirty)

Neutral words: 198 (4.88, 4.58, hammer), 613 (5.16, 4.88, tank), 674 (5.17, 4.84, busybody), 957 (4.81, 5.36, razor), 974 (5.05, 4.47, scissors), 1,001 (4.98, 4.51, stove), 1,004 (5.14, 4.86, swamp)

Positive words: 6 (8.03, 5.12, adorable), 31 (8.22, 5.53, baby), 77 (8.37, 5.85, comedy), 105 (8.26, 5.44, delight), 117 (7.92, 5.53, diamond), 218 (8.00, 5.35, hug), 487 (7.88, 5.37, waterfall)

The numbers given for each stimulus are referenced in the Affective Norms for English Words (ANEW, Bradley & Lang, 1999). The values in brackets are, respectively, scores of valence and arousal given by Bradley and Lang (1999) scored from 1 (leading to feeling unhappy/dissatisfied and calm/relaxed) to 9 (happy/satisfied and stimulated/excited). All these words were rated around the middle of the scale for the arousal and dominance dimensions (around a score of 4 to 6) for controlling these factors.

French Negative Words: ennuyé (2.87, 4.14), cruel (2.07, 5.90), menace (1.67, 6.04), pourri (1.77, 5.20), rat (2.80, 5.74), égoïste (2.70, 5.11), sale (2.17, 5.27)

French Neutral Words: marteau (4.57, 5.64), réservoir (5.03, 4.73), curieux (5.85, 5.76), rasoir (4.22, 5.50), ciseaux (4.57, 5.37), fourneau (5.40, 4.63), marais (4.19, 4.60)

French Positive Words: adorable (8.10, 5.41), bébé (7.86, 5.23), comédie (7.67, 5.96), délice (7.87, 5.53), diamant (7.53, 5.91), câlin (8.47, 4.65), cascade (7.60, 4.41)

The values in brackets are, respectively, scores of valence and arousal observed in the French Norming Study.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Freddi, S., Cretenet, J. & Dru, V. Vertical metaphor with motion and judgment: a valenced congruency effect with fluency. Psychological Research 78, 736–748 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-013-0516-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-013-0516-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation