↓ Skip to main content

Some Insults are Easier to Detect: The Embodied Insult Detection Effect

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, January 2010
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
12 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Some Insults are Easier to Detect: The Embodied Insult Detection Effect
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, January 2010
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2010.00198
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michele Wellsby, Paul D. Siakaluk, Penny M. Pexman, William J. Owen

Abstract

In the present research we examined the effects of bodily experience on processing of insults in a series of semantic categorization tasks we call insult detection tasks (i.e., participants decided whether presented stimuli were insults or not). Two types of insults were used: more embodied insults (e.g., asswipe, ugly), and less embodied insults (e.g., cheapskate, twit), as well as non-insults. In Experiments 1 and 2 the non-insults did not form a single, coherent category (e.g., airbase, polka), whereas in Experiment 3 all the non-insults were compliments (e.g., eyeful, honest). Regardless of type of non-insult used, we observed facilitatory embodied insult effects such that more embodied insults were responded to faster and recalled more often than less embodied insults. In Experiment 4 we used a larger set of insults as stimuli, which allowed hierarchical multiple regression analyses. These analyses revealed that bodily experience ratings accounted for a significant amount of unique response latency, response error, and recall variability for responses to insults, even with several other predictor variables (e.g., frequency, offensiveness, imageability) included in the analyses: responses were faster and more accurate, and there was greater recall for relatively more embodied insults. These results demonstrate that conceptual knowledge of insults is grounded in knowledge gained through bodily experience.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 12 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
France 1 8%
Unknown 11 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 25%
Researcher 2 17%
Professor 2 17%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 8%
Student > Bachelor 1 8%
Other 2 17%
Unknown 1 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 6 50%
Computer Science 2 17%
Linguistics 1 8%
Unspecified 1 8%
Social Sciences 1 8%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 1 8%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 October 2012.
All research outputs
#15,255,201
of 22,684,168 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#18,447
of 29,404 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#134,080
of 163,561 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#46
of 68 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,684,168 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,404 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 163,561 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 68 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.