Semantic Prosody: How Neutral Words With Collocational Positivity/Negativity Color Evaluative Judgments

Abstract

We like people and objects more when they are described in positive than in negative terms. But even seemingly neutral words can elicit positive or negative responses. This is the case for words that predominantly occur alongside positive (or negative) words in natural language. Despite lacking positivity/negativity when evaluated in isolation, such semantically prosodic words activate the evaluative associations of their usual company, which can color judgment in unrelated domains. For example, people are more likely to infer that “endocrination” (a fictional medical outcome) is negative when it is “caused” (a word with negative semantic prosody) rather than “produced” (a synonymous word without semantic prosody). We review what is known about the influence of semantically prosodic words and highlight their importance for judgment and decision making.

The uncertainty-dissuasion model of reactance inhibition.

“…Studies have shown that such uncertainty can be generated by using linguistic forms that are causally more neutral (Hauser & Schwarz, 2016), and act by “masking” the agency of a message’s source in generating the prescription. For instance, individuals are more likely to infer that a fictional medical condition labeled “endocrination of abdominal lipid tissue” is more negative when words to describe its origin state it is “caused” rather than when it is said to be “produced” (Hauser & Schwarz, 2018, 2023). Accordingly, other studies in applied persuasive contexts demonstrated how using nouns instead of verbs when describing conflict resolution policies generate increased policy support and decrease resistance to the message (e.g., “I support the division of Jerusalem” vs. “I support dividing Jerusalem,” see Idan et al, 2018).…”