空间隐喻中的权力、性别和个体差异:感知刻板印象和语言统计的作用

IF 2.2 3区 文学 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS Metaphor and Symbol Pub Date : 2020-07-02 DOI:10.1080/10926488.2020.1794319
Bodo Winter, Sarah E. Duffy, J. Littlemore
{"title":"空间隐喻中的权力、性别和个体差异:感知刻板印象和语言统计的作用","authors":"Bodo Winter, Sarah E. Duffy, J. Littlemore","doi":"10.1080/10926488.2020.1794319","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT English speakers use vertical language to talk about power, such as when speaking of people being “at the bottom of the social hierarchy” or “rising to the top.” Experimental research has shown that people automatically associate higher spatial positions with more powerful social groups, such as doctors and army generals, compared to lower spatial positions, which are associated with relatively less powerful groups, such as nurses and soldiers. However, power as a social dimension is also associated with gender. Here, by means of a reaction-time study and a corpus study, we show that professions that display greater gender asymmetries, such as doctor/nurse, exhibit stronger vertical associations. Moreover, we show that people’s perception of vertical metaphors for power depends on their own gender, with male participants having stronger vertical biases than female participants, which we propose is due to the fact that men are more prone to thinking about power in bodily terms, and to associate it with physical dominance. Our results provide clear evidence for individual differences in metaphor comprehension, thus demonstrating empirically that the same metaphor is understood differently by different people.","PeriodicalId":46492,"journal":{"name":"Metaphor and Symbol","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2020-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10926488.2020.1794319","citationCount":"9","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Power, Gender, and Individual Differences in Spatial Metaphor: The Role of Perceptual Stereotypes and Language Statistics\",\"authors\":\"Bodo Winter, Sarah E. Duffy, J. Littlemore\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10926488.2020.1794319\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT English speakers use vertical language to talk about power, such as when speaking of people being “at the bottom of the social hierarchy” or “rising to the top.” Experimental research has shown that people automatically associate higher spatial positions with more powerful social groups, such as doctors and army generals, compared to lower spatial positions, which are associated with relatively less powerful groups, such as nurses and soldiers. However, power as a social dimension is also associated with gender. Here, by means of a reaction-time study and a corpus study, we show that professions that display greater gender asymmetries, such as doctor/nurse, exhibit stronger vertical associations. Moreover, we show that people’s perception of vertical metaphors for power depends on their own gender, with male participants having stronger vertical biases than female participants, which we propose is due to the fact that men are more prone to thinking about power in bodily terms, and to associate it with physical dominance. Our results provide clear evidence for individual differences in metaphor comprehension, thus demonstrating empirically that the same metaphor is understood differently by different people.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46492,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Metaphor and Symbol\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-07-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10926488.2020.1794319\",\"citationCount\":\"9\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Metaphor and Symbol\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10926488.2020.1794319\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Metaphor and Symbol","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10926488.2020.1794319","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

摘要

摘要英语使用者使用垂直语言来谈论权力,例如当谈到人们“处于社会等级的底层”或“上升到高层”时。实验研究表明,与较低的空间职位相比,人们会自动将较高的空间职位与更强大的社会群体联系起来,如医生和军队将领,这些组织与护士和士兵等相对较弱的团体有关联。然而,权力作为一个社会层面也与性别有关。在这里,通过反应时间研究和语料库研究,我们发现,表现出更大性别不对称的职业,如医生/护士,表现出更强的垂直关联。此外,我们发现,人们对权力的垂直隐喻的感知取决于他们自己的性别,男性参与者比女性参与者具有更强的垂直偏见,我们认为这是因为男性更倾向于用身体的角度思考权力,并将其与身体支配联系起来。我们的研究结果为隐喻理解的个体差异提供了明确的证据,从而从经验上证明了不同的人对同一个隐喻的理解不同。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Power, Gender, and Individual Differences in Spatial Metaphor: The Role of Perceptual Stereotypes and Language Statistics
ABSTRACT English speakers use vertical language to talk about power, such as when speaking of people being “at the bottom of the social hierarchy” or “rising to the top.” Experimental research has shown that people automatically associate higher spatial positions with more powerful social groups, such as doctors and army generals, compared to lower spatial positions, which are associated with relatively less powerful groups, such as nurses and soldiers. However, power as a social dimension is also associated with gender. Here, by means of a reaction-time study and a corpus study, we show that professions that display greater gender asymmetries, such as doctor/nurse, exhibit stronger vertical associations. Moreover, we show that people’s perception of vertical metaphors for power depends on their own gender, with male participants having stronger vertical biases than female participants, which we propose is due to the fact that men are more prone to thinking about power in bodily terms, and to associate it with physical dominance. Our results provide clear evidence for individual differences in metaphor comprehension, thus demonstrating empirically that the same metaphor is understood differently by different people.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
23
期刊介绍: Metaphor and Symbol: A Quarterly Journal is an innovative, multidisciplinary journal dedicated to the study of metaphor and other figurative devices in language (e.g., metonymy, irony) and other expressive forms (e.g., gesture and bodily actions, artworks, music, multimodal media). The journal is interested in original, empirical, and theoretical research that incorporates psychological experimental studies, linguistic and corpus linguistic studies, cross-cultural/linguistic comparisons, computational modeling, philosophical analyzes, and literary/artistic interpretations. A common theme connecting published work in the journal is the examination of the interface of figurative language and expression with cognitive, bodily, and cultural experience; hence, the journal''s international editorial board is composed of scholars and experts in the fields of psychology, linguistics, philosophy, computer science, literature, and media studies.
期刊最新文献
Metaphor signalling constructions in discourse related to the experience of depersonalization/derealization “Living with HIV” – Changes in HIV and AIDS Metaphors in South African Educational Policy Is That a Genuine Smile? Emoji-Based Sarcasm Interpretation Across the Lifespan Metaphorical Mapping and Cultural Significance in Chinese Death-Related Idiomatic Expressions Slowing Metaphor Down: Elaborating Deliberate Metaphor Theory Slowing Metaphor Down: Elaborating Deliberate Metaphor Theory , by Gerard J., Steen Amsterdam/Philadelphia, John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2023, xv, 355 pp., $165 (hardbound), ISBN: 9789027213853, $165 (e-Book), ISBN: 9789027249777.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1