Constructing comparative sentences: Linguistic marking and affect

French, Patrice

doi:10.1007/bf01067291

Cited by 5 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Lexical marking theory predicts differences between the processing of comparatives using marked versus unmarked labels. As predicted by the theory, comparative statements referring to the marked pole are more difficult to process than comparatives referring to the unmarked pole (e.g., Carpenter, 1974; Clark, 1969; Flores d′Arcais, 1970; Hunter, 1957; see, however, French, 1981).…”

Section: Easier Processing Of “More Than” Comparative Statements?mentioning

confidence: 82%

Less is more? Think again! A cognitive fluency-based more–less asymmetry in comparative communication.

Hoorens¹,

Bruckmüller²

2015

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Differences between groups, individuals, or objects can be framed in multiple ways. One can, for instance, say that men generally earn more than women or that women generally earn less than men. Showing that these logically equivalent expressions are not psychologically equivalent, we demonstrate a robust more–less asymmetry in the use of and responses to comparative statements. More specifically, we show that people use “more than” statements more often than “less than” statements (Study 1); like “more than” statements better (Studies 2 and 3), agree more with opinions expressed through “more than” statements (Studies 4 and 5), and are more likely to consider factual “more than” statements to be true (Study 6). Supporting a cognitive fluency explanation, a manipulation that makes people expect disfluency while processing “less than” statements reduces this otherwise robust more–less asymmetry (Study 7). By combining comparative framing effects with cognitive fluency, the present research brings together 2 research fields in social cognition, shedding new light on both.

show abstract

Section: Easier Processing Of “More Than” Comparative Statements?mentioning

confidence: 82%

Less is more? Think again! A cognitive fluency-based more–less asymmetry in comparative communication.

Hoorens¹,

Bruckmüller²

2015

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Zajonc (1980) has presented a large body of data suggesting that these two systems have effects which are relatively independent of one another. As numerous investigators have argued (e.g., Osgood & Richards, 1973; French, 1981) the positive-negative distinction is a primary, affective construct out of which other, more particular constructs are differentiated (e.g., DiVesta & Stauber, 1971). The Pollyanna phenomenon can be seen as a primary, affective aspect of word frequency that operates outside of history.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is also usually (but not always) the case that the word labelling the positive pole of a construct enters the language before the word labelling the negative pole (Greenberg, 1966; Hamilton & Deese, 1971; Benjafield, 1983), and is the one which is first used correctly by children (Donaldson & Wales, 1970; Deese, 1973; Klatzky, Clark & Macken, 1973). Since most recent research suggests that the positive-negative distinction is primarily an affective one (e.g., French, 1981), the term "goodness" will be used to denote the variable underlying that distinction (Brown & Ure, 1969; Rubin, 1980).…”

Section: The Development Of Biplor Constructsmentioning

confidence: 99%

An historicodevelopmental study of the frequency with which construct poles are used.

Benjafield

1987

Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science / Revue canadienne des

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Theorists as diverse as Piaget and Kelly believed that both historical and individual development shows an increase in the ability to think scientifically. A central aspect of scientific thought is the formulation of alternative hypotheses. A category is useful to the extent that it can be employed to contrast one set of events with another. Data are presented indicating that the frequency with which a category (e.g., warm) is used is a function of how long its opposite (e.g., cold) has been available for use, as measured by the date at which the opposite entered the English language. This means that the usefulness of a category is partially determined by the length of time it has been possible to employ the category contrastively. Implications of this finding for studies using other developmental variables (e.g., age of acquisition) are discussed.

show abstract

Figure-Ground Asymmetries in the Implicit Association Test (IAT)

Rothermund

Wentura

2001

Experimental Psychology

144

156

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Based on the assumption that binary classification tasks are often processed asymmetrically (figure-ground asymmetries), two experiments showed that association alone cannot account for effects observed in the Implicit Association Test (IAT). Experiment 1 (N = 16) replicated a standard version of the IAT effect using old vs. young names as target categories and good and bad words as attribute categories. However, reliable compatibility effects were also found for a modified version of the task in which neutral words vs. nonwords instead of good vs. bad words were used as attribute categories. In Experiment 2 (N = 8), a reversed IAT effect was observed after the figure-ground asymmetry in the target dimension had been inverted by a previous go/nogo detection task in which participants searched for exemplars of the category “young.\ The experiments support the hypothesis that figure-ground asymmetries produce compatibility effects in the IAT and suggest that IAT effects do not rely exclusively on evaluative associations between the target and attribute categories.

show abstract

Constructing comparative sentences: Linguistic marking and affect

Cited by 5 publications

References 8 publications

Less is more? Think again! A cognitive fluency-based more–less asymmetry in comparative communication.

Less is more? Think again! A cognitive fluency-based more–less asymmetry in comparative communication.

An historicodevelopmental study of the frequency with which construct poles are used.

Figure-Ground Asymmetries in the Implicit Association Test (IAT)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About