Literature DB >> 35862298

COVIDisgust: Language processing through the lens of partisanship.

Veranika Puhacheuskaya1, Isabell Hubert Lyall1, Juhani Järvikivi1.   

Abstract

Disgust is an aversive reaction protecting an organism from disease. People differ in how prone they are to experiencing it, and this fluctuates depending on how safe the environment is. Previous research has shown that the recognition and processing of disgusting words depends not on the word's disgust per se but rather on individual sensitivity to disgust. However, the influence of dynamically changing disgust on language comprehension has not yet been researched. In a series of studies, we investigated whether the media's portrayal of COVID-19 will affect subsequent language processing via changes in disgust. The participants were exposed to news headlines either depicting COVID-19 as a threat or downplaying it, and then rated single words for disgust and valence (Experiment 1; N = 83) or made a lexical decision (Experiment 2; N = 86). The headline type affected only word ratings and not lexical decisions, but political ideology and disgust proneness affected both. More liberal participants assigned higher disgust ratings after the headlines discounted the threat of COVID-19, whereas more conservative participants did so after the headlines emphasized it. We explain the results through the politicization and polarization of the pandemic. Further, political ideology was more predictive of reaction times in Experiment 2 than disgust proneness. High conservatism correlated with longer reaction times for disgusting and negative words, and the opposite was true for low conservatism. The results suggest that disgust proneness and political ideology dynamically interact with perceived environmental safety and have a measurable effect on language processing. Importantly, they also suggest that the media's stance on the pandemic and the political framing of the issue may affect the public response by increasing or decreasing our disgust.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35862298      PMCID: PMC9302854          DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0271206

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  PLoS One        ISSN: 1932-6203            Impact factor:   3.752


  50 in total

1.  Characterization of the affective norms for English words by discrete emotional categories.

Authors:  Ryan A Stevenson; Joseph A Mikels; Thomas W James
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2007-11

2.  Automatic vigilance: the attention-grabbing power of negative social information.

Authors:  F Pratto; O P John
Journal:  J Pers Soc Psychol       Date:  1991-09

3.  Concreteness ratings for 40 thousand generally known English word lemmas.

Authors:  Marc Brysbaert; Amy Beth Warriner; Victor Kuperman
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2014-09

4.  Emotion words and categories: evidence from lexical decision.

Authors:  Graham G Scott; Patrick J O'Donnell; Sara C Sereno
Journal:  Cogn Process       Date:  2013-11-21

5.  Extending the the behavioral immune system to political psychology: are political conservatism and disgust sensitivity really related?

Authors:  Joshua M Tybur; Leslie A Merriman; Ann E Caldwell Hooper; Melissa M McDonald; Carlos David Navarrete
Journal:  Evol Psychol       Date:  2010-10-26

6.  Personality Traits and Emotional Word Recognition: An ERP Study.

Authors:  Li-Chuan Ku; Shiao-Hui Chan; Vicky T Lai
Journal:  Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci       Date:  2020-04       Impact factor: 3.282

7.  Language as context for the perception of emotion.

Authors:  Lisa Feldman Barrett; Kristen A Lindquist; Maria Gendron
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  2007-07-10       Impact factor: 20.229

8.  Beliefs About COVID-19 in Canada, the United Kingdom, and the United States: A Novel Test of Political Polarization and Motivated Reasoning.

Authors:  Gordon Pennycook; Jonathon McPhetres; Bence Bago; David G Rand
Journal:  Pers Soc Psychol Bull       Date:  2021-06-28

9.  The effect of anxiety on emotional recognition: evidence from an ERP study.

Authors:  Qianqian Yu; Qian Zhuang; Bo Wang; Xingze Liu; Guang Zhao; Meng Zhang
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2018-11-01       Impact factor: 4.379

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.