Language use and stereotypingthe role of approach and avoidance motivation goals

  1. Gil de Montes Etxaide, Lorena 1
  2. Ortiz Anzola, Garbiñe 1
  3. Valencia Garate, José Francisco 1
  4. Larrañaga Egilegor, Maider 1
  5. Agirrezabal Prado, Arrate 1
  1. 1 Universidad del País Vasco/Euskal Herriko Unibertsitatea
    info

    Universidad del País Vasco/Euskal Herriko Unibertsitatea

    Lejona, España

    ROR https://ror.org/000xsnr85

Revista:
The Spanish Journal of Psychology

ISSN: 1138-7416

Año de publicación: 2012

Volumen: 15

Número: 3

Páginas: 1210-1221

Tipo: Artículo

DOI: 10.5209/REV_SJOP.2012.V15.N3.39527 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openAcceso abierto editor

Otras publicaciones en: The Spanish Journal of Psychology

Resumen

El uso de un lenguaje más abstracto para describir los comportamientos congruentes con las expectativas que los comportamientos incongruentes con las expectativas es una forma de mantener los estereotipos. Esta tendencia se conoce como el sesgo lingüístico de expectativa. Dos experimentos analizan la influencia de las orientaciones motivacionales de aproximación y evitación en la producción del sesgo lingüístico de expectativa. Se predijo que la orientación estratégica de aproximación promovería que comportamientos consistentes con la expectativa se describiesen con un mayor nivel de abstracción lingüística que los comportamientos inconsistentes con la expectativa. En cambio, la orientación estratégica de evitación induciría a que tanto los comportamientos consistentes como los inconsistentes con las expectativas se describiesen a un menor nivel de abstracción, facilitando con ello la desaparición del sesgo lingüístico de expectativa. Los dos experimentos que se presentan confirmaron dichas predicciones utilizando manipulaciones de orientación estratégica de aproximación y evitación formuladas en forma de metas comunicativas y en forma de acción motora. Además, se midió la abstracción lingüística tanto en formato de respuesta de elección múltiple como en descripción libre. El artículo debate las implicaciones de los estudios para la generalización del sesgo lingüístico de expectativa.

€ Ver financiación

Información de financiación

The research reported in this article was supported by a Research Project from the Spanish Ministerio de Educación y Ciencia (SEJ2007-67193/PSIC). The authors would also like to acknowledge the valuable comments made by two anonymous reviewers.

Financiadores

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Beukeboom, C. J., & de Jong, E. M. (2008). When feelings speak: How affective and proprioceptive cues change language abstraction. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 27, 110-122. http://dx.doi. Org/10. 1177%2F0261927X080270020301
  • Beukeboom, C. J., & Semin, G. R. (2006). How mood turns on language. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 42, 553-566. http://dx.doi.org/10. 1016%2Fj.jesp. 2005.09.005 (Pubitemid 44145281)
  • Brendl, C. M., & Higgins, E. T. (1996). Principles of judging valence: What makes events positive or negative? Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 28, 95-160. http://dx.doi.org/10. 1016%2FS0065-2601 %2808%2960237-3
  • Cacioppo, J. T., Priester, J. R., & Berntson, G. G. (1993). Rudimentary determinants of attitudes: Arm flexion and arm extension have differential effects on attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 5-17. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037%2F%2F0022-3514.65.1.5
  • Carver, C. S., & White, T. L. (1994). Behavioral inhibition, behavioral activation, and affective responses to impending reward and punishment: The BIS/BAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 319-333. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037%2F0022-3514.67.2.319
  • Douglas, K. M., & Sutton, R. M. (2003). Effects of communication goals and expectancies on language abstraction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 682-696. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037%2F0022-3514.84.4.682 (Pubitemid 38397251)
  • Douglas, K. M., Sutton, R. M., & Wilkin, K. (2008). Could you mind your language? An investigation of communicators' ability to inhibit linguistic bias. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 27, 123-139. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177%2F026 1927X07313655
  • Fiedler, K., Semin, G. R., & Finkenauer, C. (1993). The battle of words between gender groups: A language-based approach to intergroup processes. Human Communication Research, 19, 409-441. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111 %2Fj. 1468-2958.1993.tb00308.x
  • Förster, J., Grant, H., Idson, L. C, & Higgins, E. T. (2001). Success/failure feedback, expectancies, and approach/avoidance motivation: How regulatory focus moderates classic relations. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 37, 253-260. http://dx.doi.org/10.1006%2Fjesp. 2000.1455
  • Förster, J., Higgins, E. T., & Idson, L. C. (1998). Approach and avoidance strength during goal attainment: Regulatory focus and the 'goal looms larger' effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 1115-1131. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037%2F%2F0022-3514.75.5.1115
  • Förster, J., & Strack, F. (1996). Influence of overt head movements on memory of valenced words: A case of conceptual-motor compatibility. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 421-430. httpy/dx.doi.org/10. 1037%2P/o2F0022-3514.71.3.421 (Pubitemid 126443609)
  • Franco, F. M., & Maass, A. (1996). Implicit versus explicit strategies of out-group discrimination. The role of intentional control in biased language use and reward allocation. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 15, 335-359. http://dx. doi.org/10.1177%2F0261927X960153007
  • Friedman, R. S., & Forster, J. (2000). The effects of approach and avoidance motor actions on the elements of creative insight. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 477-492. http://dx.doi. Org/10.1037%2F%2F0022-3514.79.4.477
  • Friedman, R. S., & Forster, J. (2002). The influence of approach and avoidance motor actions on creative cognition. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 41-55. http://dx.doi.org/10.1006%2Fjesp. 2001.1488
  • Greitemeyer, T, & Weiner, B. (2003). Asymmetrical attributions for approach versus avoidance behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 1371-1382. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177 %2F0146167203255766 (Pubitemid 37331480)
  • Higgins, E. T. (1997). Beyond pleasure and pain. American Psychologist, 52, 1280-1300. http://dx.doi.org/I0.1037%2F%2F0003-066X.52.12.1280
  • Higgins, E. T. (1999). Promotion and prevention as a motivational duality: Implications for evaluative processes. In S. Chaiken & Y. Trope (Eds.), Dual-process theories in social psychology (pp. 503-525). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
  • Maass, A., & Arcuri, L. (1992). The role of language in the persistence of stereotypes. In G. R. Semin & K. Fiedler (Eds.), Language, interaction and social cognition (pp. 129-143). London, England: Sage Publications.
  • Maass, A., Ceccarelli, R., & Rudin, S. (1996). Linguistic intergroup bias: Evidence for in-group-protective motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 512-526. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037%2F0022-3514.71.3.512
  • Maass, A., Milesi, A., Zabbini, S., & Stahlberg, D. (1995). Linguistic intergroup bias: Differencial expectancies or in-group protection. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 116-126. http://dx.doi.org/10. 1037%2F%2F0022-3514.68.1.116
  • Maass, A., Salvi, D., Arcuri, L., & Semin, G. (1989). Language use in intergroup contexts: The linguistic intergroup bias. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 981-993. http://dx.doi. Org/10.1037%2F%2F0022-3514.57.6. 981
  • Mann, T., Sherman, D., & Updegraff, J. (2004). Dispositional motivations and message framing: A test of the congruency hypothesis in college students. Health Psychology, 23, 330-334. http://dx.doi. Org/10.1037%2F0278- 6133.23.3.330 (Pubitemid 38542367)
  • Priester, J. B., Cacioppo, J. T, & Petty, R. E. (1996). The influence of motor processes on attitudes toward novel versus familiar semantic stimuli. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 442-447. http://dx.doi.org/10. 1177%2F0146167296225002
  • Rothbart, M., & Park, B. (1986). On the confirmability and disconfirmability of trait concepts. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 131-142. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037% 2F%2F0022-3514.50.1.131
  • Ruscher, J. B., & Duval, L. L. (1998). Multiple communicators with unique target information transmit less stereotypical impressions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 329-344. http://dx.doi.org/10. 1037%2F%2F0022-3514.74. 2.329
  • Schwarz, N., & Bless, H. (1991). Happy and mindless, but sad and smart? The impact of affective states on analytic reasoning. In J. P. Forgas (Ed.), Emotion and social judgments. International Series in Experimental Social Psychology (pp. 55-71). Oxford: Pergamon Press.
  • Schwarz, N., & Bohner, G. (1996). Feelings and their motivational implications. In P. M. Gollwitzer, & J. A. Bargh (Eds.), The psychology of action: Linking cognition and motivation to behavior (pp. 119-145). New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
  • Schwarz, N., & Clore, G. L. (1996). Feelings and phenomenal experiences. In E. T. Higgins & A. W. Kruglanski (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (pp. 433-465). New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
  • Seibt, B., & Forster, J. (2004). Stereotype threat and performance. How self-stereotypes influence processing by inducing regulatory foci. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 38-56. http://dx.doi.org/10. 1037%2F0022-3514.87. L38 (Pubitemid 38883642)
  • Semin, G. R. (1995). Interfacing language and social cognition. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 14, 182-194. http://dx.doi.org/10. 1177%2F0261927X95141010
  • Semin, G. R. (2000). Agenda 2000: Communication: Language as an implementational device for cognition. European Journal of Social Psychology, 30, 595-612. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002% 2F1099- 0992%28200009%2F10%2930%3A5%3C595% 3A%3AAID-EJSP23%3E3.0. CO%3B2-A
  • Semin, G. R. (2004). The self-in-talk: Toward an analysis of interpersonal language and its use. In J. T. Jost, M. R. Banaji, & D. Prentice (Eds.), Perspectivism in social psychology: The yin andyang of scientific progress (pp. 143-160). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
  • 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, 558-568. http://dx.doi. Org/10.1037%2F0022-3514.54.4.558
  • Semin, G. R., & Fiedler, K. (1991). The linguistic category model, its bases, applications and range. In W. Stroebe & M. Hewstone (Eds.), European review of social psychology (pp. 1-50). Chichester, England: Wiley.
  • Semin, G. R., & Fiedler, K. (1992). The inferential properties of interpersonal verbs. In G. R. Semin & K. Fiedler (Eds.), Language, interaction and social cognition (pp. 58-78). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
  • Semin, G. R., Gil de Montes, L., & Valencia, J. F. (2003). Communication constraints on the linguistic intergroup bias. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 39, 142-148. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016%2FS0022- 1031 %2802%2900523-1 (Pubitemid 36445987)
  • Semin, G. R., Higgins, E. T., Gil de Montes, L., Estourget, Y., & Valencia, J. F. (2005). Linguistic signatures of regulatory focus: How abstraction fits promotion more than prevention. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 36-45. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037%2F0022-3514.89.1.36 (Pubitemid 41168525)
  • Sherman, D. K., Mann, T., & Updegraff, J. A. (2006). Approach/avoidance motivation, message framing, and health behavior: Understanding the congruency effect. Motivation and Emotion, 30, 165-169. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007%2Fs11031-006-9001-5 (Pubitemid 44546744)
  • Strack, F., Martin, L. L., & Stepper, S. (1988). Inhibiting and facilitating conditions of facial expressions: A nonobstrusive test of the facial feedback hypothesis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 768-777. http://dx.doi.org/10. 1037%2F%2F0022-3514.54.5.768
  • Updegraff, J. A., Gable, S. L., & Taylor, S. E. (2004). What makes experiences satisfying? The interaction of approach-avoidance motivations and emotions in well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 496-504. http://dx.doi.org/10. 1037%2F0022-3514.86.3.496 (Pubitemid 38397482)
  • van Prooijen, J., Karremans, J. C., & van Beest, I. (2006). Procedural justice and the hedonic principle: How approach versus avoidance motivation influences the psychology of voice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 686-697. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037%2F0022-3514.91.4.686 (Pubitemid 44600894)
  • von Hippel, W., Sekaquaptewa, D., & Vargas, P. (1997). The linguistic intergroup bias as an implicit indicator of prejudice. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 33, 490-509. http://dx.doi.org/10.1006%2Fjesp. 1997.1332
  • Wenneker, C. P. J., Wigboldus, D. H. J., & Spears, R. (2005). Biased language use in stereotype maintenance: The role of encoding and goals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 504-516. http://dx.doi.org/10. 1037%2F0022-3514.89.4.504 (Pubitemid 41677533)
  • Wigboldus, D., Semin, G. R., & Spears, R. (2000). How do we communicate stereotypes? Linguistic bases and inferential consequences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 5-18. http://dx.doi. Org/10.1037%2F0022-35I4.78.1.5
  • Wyer, R. S., Clore, G. L., & Isbell, L. M. (1999). Affect and information processing. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 31, 1-77. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016%2FS0065-2601%2808%2960271-3
Fuente de los datos: Dialnet