10 years of BAWLing into affective and aesthetic processes in reading: what are the echoes? - PubMed (original) (raw)

10 years of BAWLing into affective and aesthetic processes in reading: what are the echoes?

Arthur M Jacobs et al. Front Psychol. 2015.

Abstract

Reading is not only "cold" information processing, but involves affective and aesthetic processes that go far beyond what current models of word recognition, sentence processing, or text comprehension can explain. To investigate such "hot" reading processes, standardized instruments that quantify both psycholinguistic and emotional variables at the sublexical, lexical, inter-, and supralexical levels (e.g., phonological iconicity, word valence, arousal-span, or passage suspense) are necessary. One such instrument, the Berlin Affective Word List (BAWL) has been used in over 50 published studies demonstrating effects of lexical emotional variables on all relevant processing levels (experiential, behavioral, neuronal). In this paper, we first present new data from several BAWL studies. Together, these studies examine various views on affective effects in reading arising from dimensional (e.g., valence) and discrete emotion features (e.g., happiness), or embodied cognition features like smelling. Second, we extend our investigation of the complex issue of affective word processing to words characterized by a mixture of affects. These words entail positive and negative valence, and/or features making them beautiful or ugly. Finally, we discuss tentative neurocognitive models of affective word processing in the light of the present results, raising new issues for future studies.

Keywords: Berlin Affective Word List (BAWL); aesthetics; emotion; lexical decision task; neurocognitive poetics; reading; valence decision task; word recognition models.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1

(A,B) Valence and arousal ratings (_z_-values) for children as a function of the original BAWL ratings (adults).

Figure 2

Figure 2

Distribution of valence ratings (1–5) for two example words from the kidBAWL.

Figure 3

Figure 3

Boxplot of valence ratings (−3 to +3) as a function of NNC type. −−, NN; −+, NP; +−, PN; ++, PP.

Figure 4

Figure 4

(A–C) Diagrams showing hypothetical relations between affective word variables and their effects at the behavioral, brain-electrical, and neurofunctional levels. Continuous-line arrows assume strong relations, interrupted and dotted lines weaker, more questioneable ones. Abbreviations: (A) EDA, Electrodermal activity; Amy, amygdala; aIns, anterior insula; EPN, early posterior negativity; LPC, late posterior complex; OFC, orbitofrontal cortex; vACC; ventral anterior cingulate cortex. (B) BG, basal ganglia; VS, ventral striatum; lFP, left frontal pole; mOFC, medial orbitofrontal cortex; vmPFC, ventromedial prefrontal cortex; pCC, posterior cingulate cortex; SMA, supplementary motor area; rAMy, right amygdala; PAG, periaqueductal gray; rdACC, right dorsal anterior cingulate cortex; lOFC, left orbitofrontal cortex; dmPFC, dorsomedial prefrontal cortex; Cereb, cerebellum. (C) PosLoAro, positive valence, low arousal; NegHiAro, negative valence, high arousal; PosHiAro, positive valence, high arousal; NegLoAro, negative valence, low arousal; rIns, right Insula; lphG, left parahippocampal gyrus.

References

    1. Altmann U., Bohrn I. C., Lubrich O., Menninghaus W., Jacobs A. M. (2012). The power of emotional valence–from cognitive to affective processes in reading. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 6:192. 10.3389/fnhum.2012.00192 -DOI -PMC -PubMed
    1. Altmann U., Bohrn I. C., Lubrich O., Menninghaus W., Jacobs A. M. (2014). Fact vs fiction–how paratextual information shapes our reading processes. Soc. Cogn. Affect. Neur. 9, 22–29. 10.1093/scan/nss098 -DOI -PMC -PubMed
    1. Anderson M. L. (2010). Neural reuse: a fundamental organizational principle of the brain. Behav. Brain Sci. 33, 245–266. 10.1017/S0140525X10000853 -DOI -PubMed
    1. Andrews M., Vigliocco G., Vinson D. (2009). Integrating experiential and distributional data to learn semantic representations. Psychol. Rev. 116, 463–498. 10.1037/a0016261 -DOI -PubMed
    1. Aryani A., Jacobs A. M., Conrad M. (2013). Extracting salient sublexical units from written texts: “Emophon,” a corpus-based approach to phonological iconicity. Front. Psychol. 4:654. 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00654 -DOI -PMC -PubMed

LinkOut - more resources