Cover not available
Article published In:
Cognitive Linguistic Studies
Vol. 4:2 (2017) ► pp.293–312

Judgments under emotioncy’s influence

A case of linguistic bias

| Ferdowsi University of Mashhad
| Tarbiat Modares University (Iran)

Following a number of studies on discovering the controlling dormant forces in linguistic biases, this study attempts to introduce the concept of emotioncy as a driving force in explicating the causes of prejudice manifested through biases in speech. To this end, two scales for measuring individuals’ bias and their emotioncy levels were devised and validated through Rasch measurement. A total number of 341 participants were asked to take the scales. Afterward, structural equation modeling (SEM) was employed to investigate the probable relationships between sub-constructs of the scales. The results indicated that as individuals’ emotioncy level increases, the bias level decreases. In other words, involvement slides people toward being less judgmental and thus less biased in language, while exvolvement leads people toward using more abstract words, and therefore more biased language. In the end, implications of the findings were discussed in the realm of judgment and decision making.

Keywords: emotioncy, bias, judgment, avolvement, exvolvement, involvement, decision making
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Theoretical framework
    • 2.1Language and bias
    • 2.2Emotioncy
  • 3.Methodology
    • 3.1Participants
    • 3.2Instruments
      • 3.2.1Bias scale
      • 3.2.2Emotioncy scale
    • 3.3Procedure
  • 4.Results
    • 4.1Descriptive Statistics and Correlations
    • 4.2The model proposed by SEM
  • 5.Discussion
  • 6.Conclusion
  • References


This article is currently available as a sample article.

Published online: 16 March 2018
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/cogls.00006.pis
References
Aronson, E., & Mettee, D. R.
(1968) Dishonest behavior as a function of differential levels of induced self-esteem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 121–127. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Beukeboom, C. J.
(2014) Mechanisms of linguistic bias: How words reflect and maintain stereotypic expectancies. Social Cognition and Communication, 311, 313–330.Google Scholar
Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R.
(1993) Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 136–162). CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Brown, R., & Fish, D.
(1983a) The psychological causality implicit in language. Cognition, 14(3), 237–273. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1983b) Are there universal schemas of psychological causality? Archives de Psychology, 51(196), 145–153.Google Scholar
Collins, K. A., & Clément, R.
(2012) Language and prejudice: Direct and moderated effects. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 31(4), 376–396. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Corrigan, P. W., & Penn, D. L.
(1999) Lessons from social psychology on discrediting psychiatric stigma. American Psychologist, 54(9), 765–776. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Corrigan, P. W., River, L. P., Lundin, R. K., Penn, D. L., Uphoff-Wasowski, K., Campion, J., … & Kubiak, M. A.
(2001) Three strategies for changing attributions about severe mental illness. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 27(2), 187–195. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Corrigan, P. W., & Watson, A. C.
(2002) Understanding the impact of stigma on people with mental illness. World Psychiatry, 1(1), 16–20.Google Scholar
Ferstl, E. C., Garnham, A., & Manouilidou, C.
(2011) Implicit causality bias in English: A corpus of 300 verbs. Behavior Research Methods, 43(1), 124–135. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Feshbach, N. & Roe, K.
(1968) Empathy in six-and seven-year olds. Child Development, 39(1), 133–145. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Greene, J., & Haidt, J.
(2002) How (and where) does moral judgment work?. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 6 (12), 517–523. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Greenspan, S. I.
(1992) Infancy and early childhood: The practice of clinical assessment and intervention with emotional and developmental challenges. Madison, CT: International Universities Press.Google Scholar
Hartshorne, J. K., Sudo, Y., & Uruwashi, M.
(2013) Are implicit causality pronoun resolution biases consistent across languages and cultures?. Experimental Psychology, 60(3), 179–196. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hodges, S. D., Kiel, K. J., Kramer, A. D. I., Veach, D., & Villaneuva, B. R.
(2010) Giving birth to empathy: The effects of similar experience on empathic accuracy, empathic concern, and perceived empathy. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36(3), 398–409. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M.
(1999) Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1–55. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kelley, H. H.
(1972) Causal schemata and the attribution process. (pp. 151–174). Morristown, NJ: General Learning Press.Google Scholar
Keltner, D., & Lerner, J. S.
(2010) Emotion. In S. T. Fiske, D. T. Gilbert, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), (5th ed.). Handbook of social psychology, Vol. 1. (pp. 317–352). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons Inc. DOI logo.Google Scholar
Kraut, R. E.
(1973) Effects of social labeling on giving to charity. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 9(6), 551–562. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kross, E., Ayduk, O., & Mischel, W.
(2005) When asking “why” does not hurt: Distinguishing rumination from reflective processing of negative emotions. Psychological Science, 161, 709–715. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Libby, L. K., Shaeffer, E. M., & Eibach, R. P.
(2009) Seeing meaning in action: A bidirectional link between visual perspective and action identification level. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 138(4), 503–516. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Linacre, J. M.
(2009) WINSTEPS Rasch programme. Version 3.63.0.Google Scholar
Loewenstein, G.
(1996) Out of control: Visceral influences on behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 65(3), 272–292. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2005) Hot-cold empathy gaps in medical decision making. Health Psychology, 241, S49–S56. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McArthur, L. A., Kiesler, C. A., & Cook, B. P.
(1969) Acting on an attitude as a function of self-percept and inequity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 12(4), 295–302. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Moll, J., Oliveira‐Souza, D., & Zahn, R.
(2008) The neural basis of moral cognition. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1124(1), 161–180. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Piaget, J.
(1926) The language and thought of the child. London: Routledge and Kegan.Google Scholar
Pishghadam, R.
(2015, October) Emotioncy in language education: From exvolvement to involvement. Paper presented at the 2nd Conference of Interdisciplinary Approaches to Language Teaching, Literature, and Translation Studies. Iran, Mashhad.
(2016a, May) Emotioncy, extraversion and anxiety in willingness to communicate in English. Paper presented at the 5th International Conference on Language, Education and Innovation. England, London.
(2016b, September) Introducing emotioncy tension as a potential source of identity crisis. Paper presented at the 16th Interdisciplinary Conference on Cultural Identity and Philosophy of the Self. Turkey, Istanbul.
Pishghadam, R., & Abbasnejad, H.
(2016) Emotioncy: A potential measure of readability. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 9(1), 109–123.Google Scholar
(2017) Introducing emotioncy as an invisible force controlling causal decisions: A case of attribution theory. Polish Psychological Bulletin, 48(1), 129–140. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pishghadam, R., Adamson, B., & Shayesteh, Sh.
(2013) Emotion-based language instruction (EBLI) as a new perspective in bilingual education. Multilingual Education, 3(9), 1–16. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pishghadam, R., Baghaei, P., & Seyednozadi, Z.
(2017) Introducing emotioncy as a potential source of test bias: A mixed-Rasch modeling. International Journal of Testing. 17(2), 127–140. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pishghadam, R., Jajarmi, H., & Shayesteh, Sh.
(2016) Conceptualizing sensory relativism in light of emotioncy: A movement beyond linguistic relativism. International Journal of Society, Culture & Language, 4(2), 11–21.Google Scholar
Pishghadam, R., & Shayesteh, Sh.
(2016) Emotioncy: A post-linguistic approach toward vocabulary learning and retention. Sri Lanka Journal of Social Sciences, 39(1), 27–36. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pishghadam, R., Tabatabaeyan, M. S., & Navari, S.
(2013) A critical and practical analysis of first language acquisition theories: The origin and development. Iran, Mashhad: Ferdowsi University of Mashhad Publications.Google Scholar
Pratkanis, A. R.
(Ed.) (2007) The science of social influence. New York, NY: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Rudolph, U., & Försterling, F.
(1997) The psychological causality implicit in verbs: A review. Psychological Bulletin, 121(2), 192–218. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Saito, Y., Yuki, S., Seki, Y., Kagawa, H., & Okanoya, K.
(2016) Cognitive bias in rats evoked by ultrasonic vocalizations suggests emotional contagion. Behavioral Processes, 1321, 5–11. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Seih, Y. T., Beier, S., & Pennebaker, J. W.
(2017) Development and examination of the linguistic category model in a computerized text analysis method. Journal of Language and Social Psychology. 36(3), 343–355.Google Scholar
Semin, G. R., & Fiedler, K.
(1988) The cognitive functions of linguistic categories in describing persons: Social cognition and language. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(4), 558–568. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1989) Relocating attributional phenomena within a language‐cognition interface: The case of actors’ and observers’ perspectives. European Journal of Social Psychology, 19(6), 491–508. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1991) The linguistic category model, its bases, applications and range. European Review of Social Psychology, 2(1), 1–30. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sutton, R. M.
(2010) The creative power of language in social cognition and intergroup relations. In H. Giles, S. A. Reid, & J. Harwood (Eds.), The dynamics of intergroup communication (pp. 105–115). New York, NY: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Thelen, E., Schöner, G., Scheier, C., & Smith, L. B.
(2001) The dynamics of embodiment: A field theory of infant perseverative reaching. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24(1), 1–34. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Trope, Y., & Liberman, N.
(2003) Temporal construal. Psychological Review, 110(3), 403–421. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2010) Construal-level theory of psychological distance. Psychological Review, 117(2), 440–463. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ugazio, G., Lamm, C., & Singer, T.
(2012) The role of emotions for moral judgments depends on the type of emotion and moral scenario. Emotion, 12(3), 579–590. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van Boven, L., Kane, J., McGraw, A. P., & Dale, J.
(2010) Feeling close: Emotional intensity reduces perceived psychological distance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98(6), 872–885. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van Boven, L., Loewenstein, G.
(2005) Empathy gaps in emotional perspective taking. In B. F. M. a. S. D. Hodges (Ed.), Other minds: How humans bridge the divide between self and others (pp. 284–297). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Van Boven, L., Loewenstein, G., Dunning, D., & Nordgren, L. F.
(2013) Changing places: A dual judgment model of empathy gaps in emotional perspective taking. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 471, 117–171. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van der Pligt, J.
(2015) Psychology of decision making. In International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences. (2nd ed., pp., 917–922). Retrieved from. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Whorf, B.
(1956) Language, thought, and reality: Selected writings of Benjamin Lee Whorf. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 2 other publications

Miri, Mir Abdullah & Reza Pishghadam
2021. Toward an Emotioncy Based Education: A Systematic Review of the Literature. Frontiers in Psychology 12 DOI logo
Pishghadam, Reza, Jawad Golzar & Mir Abdullah Miri
2022. A New Conceptual Framework for Teacher Identity Development. Frontiers in Psychology 13 DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 15 march 2023. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.