Emotional valence and physical space: Limits of interaction

According to the body-specificity hypothesis, people associate positive things with the side of space that corresponds to their dominant hand, and negative things with the side corresponding to their non-dominant hand. Our aim was to find out whether this association holds also true for a response time study employing linguistic stimuli, and whether such an association is activated automatically. Four experiments explored this association using positive and negative words. In Exp. 1, right-handers made a lexical judgment by pressing a left or right key. Attention was not explicitly drawn to the valence of the stimuli. No valence-by-side interaction emerged. In Exp. 2 and 3, right-handers and left-handers made a valence judgment by pressing a left or a right key. A valence-by-side interaction emerged: For positive words, responses were faster when participants responded with their dominant hand, whereas for negative words, responses were faster for the non-dominant hand. Exp. 4 required a valence judgment without stating an explicit mapping of valence and side. No valence-by-side interaction emerged. The experiments provide evidence for an association between response side and valence, which, however, does not seem to be activated automatically but rather requires a task with an explicit response mapping to occur

Keep your hands crossed: The valence-by-left/right interaction is related to hand, not side, in an incongruent hand-response key assignment

The body-specificity hypothesis (Casasanto, 2009) associates positive emotional valence and the space surrounding the dominant hand, and negative valence and the space surrounding the nondominant hand. This effect has not only been found for manual responses, but also for the left and right side. In the present study, we investigated whether this compatibility effect still shows when hand and side carry incongruent information, and whether it is then related to hand or to side. We conducted two experiments which used an incongruent hand – response key assignment, that is, participants had their hands crossed. Participants were instructed to respond with their right vs. left hand (Experiment 1) or with the right vs. left key (Experiment 2). In both experiments, a compatibility effect related to hand emerged, indicating that the association between hand and valence overrides the one between side and valence when hand and side carry contradicting information

Manipulating the alpha level cannot cure significance testing

We argue that making accept/reject decisions on scientific hypotheses, including a recent call for changing the canonical alpha level from p = 0.05 to p = 0.005, is deleterious for the finding of new discoveries and the progress of science. Given that blanket and variable alpha levels both are problematic, it is sensible to dispense with significance testing altogether. There are alternatives that address study design and sample size much more directly than significance testing does; but none of the statistical tools should be taken as the new magic method giving clear-cut mechanical answers. Inference should not be based on single studies at all, but on cumulative evidence from multiple independent studies. When evaluating the strength of the evidence, we should consider, for example, auxiliary assumptions, the strength of the experimental design, and implications for applications. To boil all this down to a binary decision based on a p-value threshold of 0.05, 0.01, 0.005, or anything else, is not acceptable

Datasets: How body orientation affects concepts of space, time and valence: functional relevance of integrating sensorimotor experiences during word processing.

40 trials of each participant in each body position in long format. Each trial is the production of one word of word category up or down (experiment 1), future or past (experiment 2) or positive or negative (experiment 3)

Valence-space associations in touchscreen interactions: Valence match between emotional pictures and their vertical touch location leads to pictures' positive evaluation.

Embodied cognition research suggests that bodily experiences might ground mental representations of emotional valence in the vertical dimension of space (i.e., positive is up and negative is down). Accordingly, recent studies show that upward and downward arm movements may also influence the evaluation of valence-laden stimuli, suggesting that upward (downwards) movements lead to more positive (negative) evaluations. Interestingly, these studies typically did not investigate paradigms that require a direct hand interaction with the stimuli. With the advent of touchscreen devices and their use for experimental environments, however, a direct and more natural hand interaction with the stimuli has come to the fore. In this regard, the goal of the present study is to examine how direct hand interaction with valence-laden stimuli on a touchscreen monitor affects their perceived valence. To do so, participants evaluated emotional pictures after touching and moving them either upwards or downwards across a vertically mounted touchscreen. In contrast to previous findings, the results suggest that positive pictures were evaluated as more positive after downward movements while negative pictures were evaluated as less negative following upward movements. This finding may indicate that a matching between the pictures' valence and the valence associated with their vertical touch location leads to more positive evaluations. Thus, the present study extends earlier results by an important point: Touching the emotional pictures during movement may influence their valence processing