Horizontal Spatial Metaphor Effects in Moral Concepts: Evidence from Behavior and ERP

doi:10.12139/j.1672-0628.2024.03.004

Abstract

Abstract:

The horizontal spatial metaphor of morality is the process of mapping from the concept of horizontal spatial orientation as the source domain to the target domain represented by abstract moral concepts. The study set up two experiments using the spatial Stroop paradigm to explore this effect from both behavioral and cognitive neural perspectives. The results showed that: 1) the interaction between vocabulary type and presentation orientation was not significant; 2) there was no significant difference in the activation levels of EEG components P300, N200, and N400 under consistent conditions (moral words appearing on the right and immoral words appearing on the left) and inconsistent conditions (moral words appearing on the left and immoral words appearing on the right). The results indicate that there may not be a horizontal spatial metaphorical effect in Chinese moral concept words, and individuals may not use left and right positions as a reference to represent moral concepts. To some extent, the study provides new empirical references for the study of moral conceptual metaphors and embodied morality.

Key words: moral concepts, horizontal space, conceptual metaphors, event-related potential

摘要：

道德的水平空间隐喻是以左右空间位置概念为始源域向以抽象道德概念为代表的目标域映射的过程。研究设置两个实验，采用空间Stroop范式分别从行为和认知神经层面对该效应进行探究。结果发现：(1)词汇类型与呈现方位之间的交互作用不显著。(2)一致条件(道德词出现在右侧或不道德词出现在左侧)和不一致条件(道德词出现在左侧或不道德词出现在右侧)下，脑电成分P300、N200和N400的激活程度均无显著差异。结果表明，汉语道德概念词中可能不存在水平空间隐喻效应，个体不会以左右位置为参照表征道德概念。

关键词: 道德概念, 水平空间, 概念隐喻, 事件相关电位

Xinlu ZHAO, Junfei LIN, Tuo LIU. Horizontal Spatial Metaphor Effects in Moral Concepts: Evidence from Behavior and ERP[J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2024, 22(3): 312-319.

赵欣璐, 林俊菲, 刘拓. 道德概念中的水平空间隐喻效应探究：来自行为和ERP的证据[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2024, 22(3): 312-319.

Figures/Tables 7

References 0

	丁凤琴, 王冬霞. 道德概念具身隐喻及其影响因素: 来自元分析的证据. 心理科学进展, 2019, 27 (9): 1540- 1555.
	何听雨, 丁一, 李昊堃, 程晓荣, 范炤, 定险峰. 时间的多维度空间表征: 分离的起源与激活机制. 心理科学进展, 2020, 28 (6): 935- 944.
	贺晓玲, 刘奕晴, 那琳娜. 3~5岁幼儿颜色映射道德和权力概念的认知发展. 心理与行为研究, 2021, 19 (5): 636- 641.
	刘静怡, 黄希庭, 杨帅. 社交焦虑障碍中的注意偏差三成分研究述评. 心理科学进展, 2013, 21 (4): 664- 670.
	刘文娟, 沈曼琼, 李莹, 王瑞明. 情绪概念加工与情绪面孔知觉的相互影响. 心理学报, 2016, 48 (2): 163- 173.
	沈曼琼, 谢久书, 张昆, 李莹, 曾楚轩, 王瑞明. 二语情绪概念理解中的空间隐喻. 心理学报, 2014, 46 (11): 1671- 1681.
	施海涛. (2008). 中西方“左”“右”语言文化对比分析. 思想战线, 34(增刊3), 135–137.
	孙潇, 李梓晗, 梁超月, 南艳丽, 宋耀武, 石常秀. 利手与内隐左右空间情感效价关系的眼动研究. 心理科学, 2023, 46 (1): 19- 24.
	王汉林, 蒋泽亮, 冯晓慧, 鲁忠义. 道德概念的空间形象性: 语言因素和具身因素的共同作用. 心理学报, 2020, 52 (2): 128- 138.
	杨继平, 郭秀梅, 王兴超. 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, 2017, 49 (7): 875- 885.
	殷融, 曲方炳, 叶浩生. “右好左坏”和“左好右坏”——利手与左右空间情感效价的关联性. 心理科学进展, 2012, 20 (12): 1971- 1979.
	张锋, 皮瑜, 李小保. 个体与集体时间自我评价: 来自行为和ERP的证据. 心理学报, 2024, 56 (4): 447- 457.
	张亚慧, 鲁忠义. 青少年犯罪者道德概念垂直空间隐喻的心理表征及其原因. 心理发展与教育, 2019, 35 (6): 648- 656.
	Casasanto, D. Embodiment of abstract concepts: Good and bad in right- and left-handers. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 2009, 138 (3): 351- 367. DOI
	Casasanto, D. Different bodies, different minds: The body specificity of language and thought. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 2011, 20 (6): 378- 383. DOI
	Çatak, E. N., Açık, A., & Göksun, T. The relationship between handedness and valence: A gesture study. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 2018, 71 (12): 2615- 2626. DOI
	Chasteen, A. L., Burdzy, D. C., & Pratt, J. Thinking of God moves attention. Neuropsychologia, 2010, 48 (2): 627- 630. DOI
	Chen, R., Sai, J., Zhu, Q., Zhou, R. L., Li, P., & He, S. C. Horizontal spatial metaphors for morality: A cross-cultural study of Han Chinese students and ethnic minority Hui students in China. Frontiers in Psychology, 2018, 9, 1145. DOI
	De La Vega, I., De Filippis, M., Lachmair, M., Dudschig, C., & Kaup, B. Emotional valence and physical space: Limits of interaction. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 2012, 38 (2): 375- 385. DOI
	Fernández, S. R., Kastner, L., Cervera-Torres, S., Müller, J., & Gerjets, P. Moved by emotions: Affective concepts representing personal life events induce freely performed steps in line with combined sagittal and lateral space-valence associations. Frontiers in Psychology, 2019, 10, 2787. DOI
	Folstein, J. R., & van Petten, C. Influence of cognitive control and mismatch on the N2 component of the ERP: A review. Psychophysiology, 2008, 45 (1): 152- 170. DOI
	Hill, P. L., & Lapsley, D. K. The ups and downs of the moral personality: Why it’s not so black and white. Journal of Research in Personality, 2009, 43 (3): 520- 523. DOI
	Hubbard, T. M., Magne, C., & Langston, W. Spatial configuration of vertically related word pairs modulates the N400 component. Neuroreport, 2014, 25 (18): 1424- 1428. DOI
	Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
	Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to western thought. New York: Basic Books.
	Li, Y., Tian, W. J., Liu, B. J., Zhao, S. Y., & Wang, Y. Higher or lower? The relative morality in Chinese metaphorically associated with vertical space. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 2023, 67, 101128. DOI
	Lin, Y., & Oyserman, D. Upright and honorable: People use space to understand honor, affecting choice and perception. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 2021, 47 (1): 3- 19. DOI
	Liu, Y. J., Li, K., Li, L. N., Zhang, J., Lin, Y. R., DiFabrizio, B., & Wang, H. Morphological metaphor mapping of moral concepts in Chinese culture. Frontiers in Psychology, 2020, 11, 554061. DOI
	McCarthy, G., & Donchin, E. A metric for thought: A comparison of P300 latency and reaction time. Science, 1981, 211 (4477): 77- 80. DOI
	Meier, B. P., Sellbom, M., & Wygant, D. B. Failing to take the moral high ground: Psychopathy and the vertical representation of morality. Personality and Individual Differences, 2007, 43 (4): 757- 767. DOI
	Posner, M. I., & Petersen, S. E. The attention system of the human brain. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 1990, 13 (1): 25- 42. DOI
	Rodway, P., Wright, L., & Hardie, S. The valence-specific laterality effect in free viewing conditions: The influence of sex, handedness, and response bias. Brain and Cognition, 2003, 53 (3): 452- 463. DOI
	Wang, H. L., Lu, Y. Q., & Lu, Z. Y. Moral-up first, immoral-down last: The time course of moral metaphors on a vertical dimension. NeuroReport, 2016, 27 (4): 247- 256. DOI
	Wang, W. C., Lu, M., & Peng, H. Brain mechanism contrastive study of Chinese and English metaphor based on ERP. NeuroQuantology, 2018, 16 (5): 664- 668.
	Xie, J. S., Wang, R. M., & Chang, S. The mechanism of valence-space metaphors: ERP evidence for affective word processing. PLoS One, 2014, 9 (6): e99479. DOI
	. . 2018, 9, 1554. DOI
	Zhai, D. X., Guo, Y. L., & Lu, Z. Y. A dual mechanism of cognition and emotion in processing moral-vertical metaphors. Frontiers in Psychology, 2018, 9, 1554. DOI

	反应时(ms)		正确率(%)
	道德词	不道德词	道德词	不道德词
左侧	656±97	682±97	94.83±7.01	93.17±6.36
右侧	660±97	681±98	94.00±9.77	95.17±6.76

	反应时(ms)		正确率(%)
	道德词	不道德词	道德词	不道德词
左侧	656±97	682±97	94.83±7.01	93.17±6.36
右侧	660±97	681±98	94.00±9.77	95.17±6.76

	反应时(ms)		正确率(%)
	道德词	不道德词	道德词	不道德词
左侧	596±51	628±44	94.86±5.16	94.10±4.73
右侧	594±51	623±39	95.35±4.57	93.51±5.72

	反应时(ms)		正确率(%)
	道德词	不道德词	道德词	不道德词
左侧	596±51	628±44	94.86±5.16	94.10±4.73
右侧	594±51	623±39	95.35±4.57	93.51±5.72

		N200				P300				N400
		F	p	${\text{η}}{_{\rm p}^2} $	BF₁₀	F	p	${\text{η}}{_{\rm p}^2} $	BF₁₀	F	p	${\text{η}}{_{\rm p}^2} $	BF₁₀
平均波幅	一致性	0.35	0.557	0.01	0.27	1.09	0.306	0.04	0.26	1.67	0.206	0.05	0.47
	脑区	11.34***	0.000	0.56	>100.00	22.78***	0.000	0.72	>100.00	21.96***	0.000	0.71	>100.00
	一致性×脑区	1.06	0.383	0.11	0.51	0.12	0.947	0.01	0.06	0.94	0.434	0.10	0.37
波峰	一致性	0.11	0.740	0.00	0.30	1.08	0.308	0.04	0.26	0.68	0.415	0.02	0.31
	脑区	16.42***	0.000	0.65	>100.00	16.96***	0.000	0.65	>100.00	21.77***	0.000	0.71	>100.00
	一致性×脑区	0.61	0.613	0.06	0.14	0.07	0.974	0.01	0.05	0.59	0.628	0.06	0.13
潜伏期	一致性	0.79	0.380	0.03	0.26	1.01	0.322	0.03	0.26	0.36	0.551	0.01	0.27
	脑区	3.02*	0.047	0.25	14.76	12.14***	0.000	0.57	>100.00	4.50*	0.011	0.33	14.92
	一致性×脑区	0.63	0.602	0.07	2.19	0.81	0.500	0.08	0.40	2.32	0.098	0.20	2.12