Matthew D. Rocklage

On the Dominance of Attitude Emotionality

Many situations in our lives require us to make relatively quick decisions as whether to approach or avoid a person or object, buy or pass on a product, or accept or reject an offer. These decisions are particularly difficult when there are both positive and negative aspects to the object. How do people go about navigating this conflict to come to a summary judgment? Using the Evaluative Lexicon (EL), we demonstrate across three studies, 7,700 attitude expressions, and nearly 50 different attitude objects that when positivity and negativity conflict, the valence that is based more on emotion is more likely to dominate. Furthermore, individuals are also more consistent in the expression of their univalent summary judgments when they involve greater emotionality. In sum, valence that is based on emotion tends to dominate when resolving ambivalence and also helps individuals to remain consistent when offering quick judgments.

Attitude Accessibility as a Function of Emotionality

Despite the centrality of both attitude accessibility and attitude basis to the last 30 years of theoretical and empirical work concerning attitudes, little work has systematically investigated their relation. The research that does exist provides conflicting results and is not at all conclusive given the methodology that has been used. The current research uses recent advances in statistical modeling and attitude measurement to provide the most systematic examination of the relation between attitude accessibility and basis to date. Specifically, we use mixed-effects modeling which accounts for variation across individuals and attitude objects in conjunction with the Evaluative Lexicon (EL)—a linguistic approach that allows for the simultaneous measurement of an attitude’s valence, extremity, and emotionality. We demonstrate across four studies, over 10,000 attitudes, and nearly 50 attitude objects that attitudes based on emotion tend to be more accessible in memory, particularly if the attitude is positive.

The Evaluative Lexicon 2.0: The measurement of emotionality, extremity, and valence in language

The rapid expansion of the Internet and the availability of vast repositories of natural text provide researchers with the immense opportunity to study human reactions, opinions, and behavior on a massive scale. To help researchers take advantage of this new frontier, the present work introduces and validates the Evaluative Lexicon 2.0 (EL 2.0)—a quantitative linguistic tool that specializes in the measurement of the emotionality of individuals’ evaluations in text. Specifically, the EL 2.0 utilizes natural language to measure the emotionality, extremity, and valence of evaluative reactions and attitudes. The present article describes how we used a combination of 9 million real-world online reviews and over 1,500 participant judges to construct the EL 2.0 and an additional 5.7 million reviews to validate it. To assess its unique value, the EL 2.0 is compared with two other prominent text analysis tools—LIWC and Warriner et al.’s (Behavior Research Methods, 45, 1191–1207, 2013) wordlist. The EL 2.0 is comparatively distinct in its ability to measure emotionality and explains a significantly greater proportion of the variance in individuals’ evaluations. The EL 2.0 can be used with any data that involve speech or writing and provides researchers with the opportunity to capture evaluative reactions both in the laboratory and “in the wild.” The EL 2.0 wordlist and normative emotionality, extremity, and valence ratings are freely available from www.evaluativelexicon.com.

Persuasion, Emotion, and Language: The Intent to Persuade Transforms Language via Emotionality:

Persuasion is a foundational topic within psychology, in which researchers have long investigated effective versus ineffective means to change other people’s minds. Yet little is known about how individuals’ communications are shaped by the intent to persuade others. This research examined the possibility that people possess a learned association between emotion and persuasion that spontaneously shifts their language toward more emotional appeals, even when such appeals may be suboptimal. We used a novel quantitative linguistic approach in conjunction with controlled laboratory experiments and real-world data. This work revealed that the intent to persuade other people spontaneously increases the emotionality of individuals’ appeals via the words they use. Furthermore, in a preregistered experiment, the association between emotion and persuasion appeared sufficiently strong that people persisted in the use of more emotional appeals even when such appeals might backfire. Finally, direct evidence was provided for an association in memory between persuasion and emotionality.