Literature DB >> 32820469

Redundancy, isomorphism, and propagative mechanisms between emotional and amodal representations of words: A computational study.

José Á Martínez-Huertas1, Guillermo Jorge-Botana2, José M Luzón3, Ricardo Olmos1.   

Abstract

Some proposals claim that language acts as a link to propagate emotional and other modal information. Thus, there is an eminently amodal path of emotional propagation in the mental lexicon. Following these proposals, we present a computational model that emulates a linking mechanism (mapping function) between emotional and amodal representations of words using vector space models, emotional feature-based models, and neural networks. We analyzed three central concepts within the embodiment debate (redundancy, isomorphism, and propagative mechanisms) comparing two alternative hypotheses: semantic neighborhood hypothesis versus specific dimensionality hypothesis. Univariate and multivariate neural networks were trained for dimensional (N = 11,357) and discrete emotions (N = 2,266), and later we analyzed its predictions in a test set (N = 4,167 and N = 875, respectively). We showed how this computational model could propagate emotional responses to words without a direct emotional experience via amodal propagation, but no direct relations were found between emotional rates and amodal distances. Thereby, we found that there were clear redundancy and propagative mechanisms, but no isomorphism should be assumed. Results suggested that it was necessary to establish complex links to go beyond amodal distances of vector spaces. In this way, although the emotional rates of semantic neighborhoods could predict the emotional rates of target words, the mapping function of specific amodal features seemed to simulate emotional responses better. Thus, both hypotheses would not be mutually exclusive. We also showed that discrete emotions could have simpler relations between modal and amodal representations than dimensional emotions. All these results and their theoretical implications are discussed.

Keywords:  Emotional words; Grounded cognition; Mental lexicon; Neural networks; Vector space models

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 32820469     DOI: 10.3758/s13421-020-01086-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mem Cognit        ISSN: 0090-502X


  40 in total

1.  Checking and bootstrapping lexical norms by means of word similarity indexes.

Authors:  Yves Bestgen; Nadja Vincze
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2012-12

2.  Distinct brain systems for processing concrete and abstract concepts.

Authors:  J R Binder; C F Westbury; K A McKiernan; E T Possing; D A Medler
Journal:  J Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2005-06       Impact factor: 3.225

Review 3.  Grounded cognition.

Authors:  Lawrence W Barsalou
Journal:  Annu Rev Psychol       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 24.137

4.  Are Emotions Natural Kinds?

Authors:  Lisa Feldman Barrett
Journal:  Perspect Psychol Sci       Date:  2006-03

5.  NeuralNetTools: Visualization and Analysis Tools for Neural Networks.

Authors:  Marcus W Beck
Journal:  J Stat Softw       Date:  2018       Impact factor: 6.440

Review 6.  The challenge of abstract concepts.

Authors:  Anna M Borghi; Ferdinand Binkofski; Cristiano Castelfranchi; Felice Cimatti; Claudia Scorolli; Luca Tummolini
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  2017-01-16       Impact factor: 17.737

Review 7.  Reconciling embodied and distributional accounts of meaning in language.

Authors:  Mark Andrews; Stefan Frank; Gabriella Vigliocco
Journal:  Top Cogn Sci       Date:  2014-06-17

8.  Affective norms for 380 Spanish words belonging to three different semantic categories.

Authors:  Pilar Ferré; Marc Guasch; Cornelia Moldovan; Rosa Sánchez-Casas
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2012-06

9.  Moved by words: Affective ratings for a set of 2,266 Spanish words in five discrete emotion categories.

Authors:  Pilar Ferré; Marc Guasch; Natalia Martínez-García; Isabel Fraga; José Antonio Hinojosa
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2017-06

10.  cocor: a comprehensive solution for the statistical comparison of correlations.

Authors:  Birk Diedenhofen; Jochen Musch
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-04-02       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.