“Mother nature doesn’t have a bullet with your name on it”: Coding with reference to one’s name or object location?

In spatial compatibility tasks, the Reaction Time to right-side stimuli is shorter for right key responses (compatible condition) than for left key responses (incompatible condition) and vice-versa for left-side stimuli. Similar results have been found when the stimulus location is not relevant for response selection, such as in the Simon task. The Simon effect is the difference between the reaction times for non-corresponding and corresponding conditions. The Simon effect and its variants may be modulated by using emotional stimuli. However, until now, no work has studied how the affective valence of a stimulus influences spatial compatibility effects along the horizontal dimension. The present study investigated this issue by using small lateralized figures of soccer team players as stimuli. In the experiment, a compatible or incompatible response was chosen according to the team shirt. In one block, for the Favorite team, the volunteers had to press the key on the same side as the stimulus hemifield but the opposite-side key for the Rival team. In the other block, a reverse code had to be used. Fourteen right-handed volunteers were tested. Mean reaction times were subjected to analysis of variance with the following variables: Preference (Favorite/Rival), Hemifield (Left/Right), and Response Key (Left/Right). A three-way interaction was found (F 1,13 = 6.60, p = .023), showing that the spatial compatibility effects depended on Preference. The Favorite team player elicited the usual spatial compatibility pattern, but for the Rival team player, the reverse effect was found, with incompatible responses being faster than compatible responses. We propose that this modulation may result from approach/avoidance reactions to the Favorite and Rival teams, respectively. Moreover, we suggest as a corollary that the classic spatial compatibility task is a powerful tool for investigating approach/ avoidance effects.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 60%

Stimulus affective valence reverses spatial compatibility effect.

Conde¹,

Jazenko²,

Filho³

et al. 2011

Psychology & Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…They found that automatic valence evaluation results in faster approach responses to positive valence stimuli and faster avoidance responses to negative valence stimuli. These results were supported by Markman and Brendl (2005) and Proctor and Zhang (2010). In a previous paper , we proposed a modifi ed version of the spatial compatibility task in order to study the infl uence of affective valence of stimuli on the spatial compatibility effect.…”

mentioning

confidence: 52%

“…Even for short-time course processes, such as those studied in reaction time experiments, the valence of the stimulus affects responses, which might be associated to approach and avoidance behaviors (see Alves, Fukusima, & Aznar-Casanova, 2008;Markman & Brendl, 2005;Proctor & Zhang, 2010, for reviews). For instance, people are faster in making approach responses to positive stimuli and avoidance responses to negative stimuli than to the opposite mapping (Chen & Bargh, 1999;de Houwer, Crombez, Baeyens, & Hermans, 2001;Müsseler, Aschersleben, Arning, & Proctor, 2009;Y.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…valence of the stimulus and that stimulus valence is linked with avoidance/approach behaviors (Chen & Barg, 1999;Markman & Brendl, 2005;Proctor & Zhang, 2010). For instance, Chen and Bargh (1999) used a lever that had to be pushed away (avoidance) or pulled toward (approach) the participant's body according to the affective valence of a centrally presented word.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Affective Spatial Compatibility Task (AffSCt): Theory and applications

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Emotional stimuli are processed very effi ciently, infl uencing physiological and behavioral responses as well as attention, perceptual processes and sensory-motor integration. In a previous work, we introduced a new paradigm, the Affective Spatial Compatibility task (AffSCt), to study whether the affective valence of the stimulus infl uences spatial compatibility effects. By using fi gures of soccer players of Favorite and Rival Teams as positive and negative valence stimuli, we found a normal Spatial Compatibility effect for the Favorite team and a reversed one for the Rival team. Here, we analyzed the time course of inhibitory and facilitatory effects of emotional valence by the Vincentization method. We found that for Favorite team, the facilitatory effect for the compatible condition, as compared to the incompatible one, 1 Mailing address: Centro de Filosofi a e

show abstract

“…No mention was made that the faces varied along the dimension of perceived trustworthiness. To eliminate ambiguity about the meaning of pushing versus pulling the joystick (see Eder & Rothermund, 2008;Krieglmeyer, Deutsch, De Houwer, & De Raedt, 2010;Markman & Brendl, 2005;Proctor & Zhang, 2010), the picture either grew or shrank in size as the joystick was moved. When the joystick was pushed away, the image progressively shrank over the course of a second until reaching 20% of its original size and then disappeared-providing the illusion of pushing the face/house away.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Embodied Impression Formation: Social Judgments and Motor Cues to Approach and Avoidance

Slepian

Young²,

Rule³

et al. 2012

Social Cognition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Motor movements that embody approach and avoidance shape individuals' affective and evaluative responses to objects. In two studies we investigate how approach and avoidance impact participants' judgments of ecologically valid targets: other humans. One trait relevant to the approach or avoidance of other humans is trustworthiness. Trustworthy people can be safely approached, and untrustworthy people should be avoided. We examined whether arm contractions of approach and avoidance enhanced or diminished trust toward others, respectively. Perceived trustworthiness, relative to untrustworthiness, potentiated arm flexion (approach; Study 1). conversely, arm flexion relative to extension led to increased perceptions of trust (Study 2). Thus, beyond motivational, cognitive, and emotional processes, embodied cues impact impression formation.

show abstract

“Mother nature doesn’t have a bullet with your name on it”: Coding with reference to one’s name or object location?

Cited by 18 publications

References 26 publications

Stimulus affective valence reverses spatial compatibility effect.

Stimulus affective valence reverses spatial compatibility effect.

Affective Spatial Compatibility Task (AffSCt): Theory and applications

Embodied Impression Formation: Social Judgments and Motor Cues to Approach and Avoidance

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About