Verticality and Construal Level
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
ATTITUDES AND SOCIAL COGNITION Cognition From on High and Down Low: Verticality and Construal Level Michael L. Slepian E. J. Masicampo Columbia University Wake Forest University Nalini Ambady Stanford University Across 7 studies, the authors examined the relationship between experiences of verticality and abstract versus concrete processing. Experiencing high, relative to low, verticality led to higher level identifica- tions for actions (Study 1), greater willingness to delay short-term monetary gains for larger long-term monetary gains (Studies 2 and 5), and more frequent perceptions of meaningful relationships between objects and categories (Studies 3, 4, and 6), demonstrating that high verticality leads to more high-level construals. Mechanisms of these effects were explored, and the studies present evidence suggesting that mood (Studies 3 and 4), felt power (Study 4), arousal (Study 4), perceptual scope (Study 4), superficial semantic associations (Study 5), and movement (Study 5) do not mediate these effects. Instead, we found that even minimal experiences of verticality influence construal level (Study 6) and that verticality can influence construal level independent of the many plausible mediators. Furthermore, the relationship is reciprocal with abstract and concrete processing influencing the verticality of one’s visual perspective (Study 7), suggesting an intimate link between construal level (abstract vs. concrete processing) and experiences of verticality. Keywords: construal level, cognitive processing, verticality, metaphor A common belief is that wisdom is gained from up on high. this link and introduce new concepts and theory that extend work In his final speech, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., for example, on processing style, construal level, perceptual symbols, and met- proclaimed that he had been to the mountaintop and had gained aphor. We examined whether experiences of high verticality pro- there a vision of where humankind ought to be. Likewise, mote an abstract processing style and an awareness of superordi- numerous religions suggest enlightenment is achieved through nate relationships, whereas experiences of low verticality induce a ascension, or learning to exist at a higher plane. Transcenden- focus on more concrete details. The current work thus examines talists such as Ralph Waldo Emerson urged people to move the correspondence between verticality (from high to low) and beyond physical, concrete knowledge so as to realize human- construal level (from high to low). kind’s true relation to the world. Psychologists have made Across seven studies spanning numerous domains, we demon- similar suggestions. For example, Abraham Maslow proposed strate a bidirectional influence between experienced verticality and that peak experiences allow people to gain greater coherence construal level. We propose that construal level might be related to and meaning in life. experiences of verticality by means of sensorimotor and metaphor Drawing from work that examines the relationship between mechanisms that originate from a relationship between verticality, conceptual and perceptual processing (e.g., Trope & Liberman, perceptual scope, and construal level. That is, we propose that 2010) and integrating it with recent insights into the interplay through the simple increased probability of attaining greater per- This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its alliedbetween publishers. sensorimotor and conceptual processes (Barsalou, 2008; ceptual scope during experiences of relatively high verticality, This article is intended solely for the personal use ofLee the individual user and is not& to be disseminatedSchwarz, broadly. 2012; Slepian & Ambady, 2014), we suggest that such experiences will become associated with greater conceptual experiences of verticality might enable people to perceive greater scope, or relatively high construal levels (e.g., Derryberry & meaning and coherence around them. We provide an account for Tucker, 1994). Crucially, however, we suggest that through this relationship a sensorimotor metaphor for processing style will develop, whereby later experiences of verticality can still enhance construal level, Michael L. Slepian, Management Division, Columbia Business School; even if those experiences do not actually allow people to see more E. J. Masicampo, Department of Psychology, Wake Forest University; Nalini Ambady, Department of Psychology, Stanford University. (i.e., increase perceptual scope). In examining this relationship, we Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Michael assess several alternative hypotheses, testing for roles of mood, Slepian, Columbia Business School 3022 Broadway, Manhattan, NY movement, arousal, felt power, and perceptual scope. Over and 10027. E-mail: [email protected] above any influence of other potential mediators, we find the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2015, Vol. 108, No. 1, 1–17 © 2015 American Psychological Association 0022-3514/15/$12.00 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0038265 1 2 SLEPIAN, MASICAMPO, AND AMBADY predicted relationship between verticality and construal level. We tively negative connotations (e.g., “liar”), which are associated thus propose that the experience of verticality is linked with metaphorically with lower verticality, are categorized more information processing style via sensorimotor metaphor mecha- quickly when in the lower portion of the screen, demonstrating nisms, which brings a number of implications for research on conceptual metaphors for affect (Meier & Robinson, 2004; see also construal level, psychological distance, and grounded cognition as Meier & Robinson, 2006). Similarly, powerful groups are judged well as creativity, insight, categorization, action identification, as powerful more quickly when high on a computer screen than decision making, and person perception. when low, and the converse is true for powerless groups (Schubert, 2005). Along the lines of the virtue and divinity is up metaphor, Concrete Versus Abstract Construals participants judged individuals presented in the upper, relative to lower, portion of the screen as having stronger beliefs in God People can construe objects, actions, and events at concrete or (Meier, Hauser, Robinson, Friesen, & Schjeldahl, 2007). abstract levels (i.e., at low or high levels; Trope & Liberman, Prior work has examined the relationship between verticality 2010; Vallacher & Wegner, 1987). College students might con- and a variety of concepts. The present work, in contrast, examines strue their actions in relatively concrete terms by thinking of whether verticality might be related to construal level, that is, a themselves as sitting in a classroom and listening to a professor. processing style that can apply to any concept. Using a linguistic Others might construe the same actions more abstractly as getting analysis, as did Lakoff and Johnson (1980), one can see that there an education and learning about psychology. Descriptions of ob- is clear metaphorical language relating construal level to vertical- jects might likewise vary. A textbook might be thought of con- ity. Many authors label abstract construals as high-level construals cretely at a low level, as papers bound together, or abstractly at a and concrete construals as low-level construals (e.g., Trope & high level, as a pedagogical device. Liberman, 2010; Vallacher & Wegner, 1987). Lay psychologists Abstract and concrete representations trade off in details and too use similar language when describing gaining insight, mean- meaning. Concrete representations favor details: they capture spe- ing, or transcendent, abstract thought (as in the opening examples). cific features, behaviors, and contexts, but they do not capture We suggest that this metaphor is likely founded on an experi- information about meaning or goal relevance. Abstract represen- ential correlation between verticality and construal level. We pro- tations sacrifice behavioral and contextual details to favor infor- pose that the tendency for verticality to cause shifts in construal mation about why the action is taking place, what purpose the level derives from experiences in which verticality and construal action is serving, and how it might relate to other events and level have been linked by a third variable: perceptual scope. Prior behaviors. work demonstrates that increased perceptual scope (which allows How a person construes an object or event has implications for one to see more and hence to see greater coherence rather than a variety of processes, ranging from decision making to creativity details) can enhance conceptual scope (appreciating the larger, to person perception to self-regulation (Trope & Liberman, 2010). abstract meaning, rather than concrete low-level details; e.g., see- A concrete processing style, for instance, facilitates difficult motor ing the forest for the trees; see Friedman et al., 2003). In this way, actions (Vallacher & Wegner, 1987) and tasks that require attend- because high verticality affords greater perceptual scope, it should ing closely to the immediate environment (e.g., vigilance tasks; afford greater conceptual scope, or higher construal levels. Schmeichel, Vohs, & Duke, 2011). An abstract processing style, in Experiences of relatively high verticality afford greater percep- contrast, facilitates the pursuit of meaningful, long-term goals over tual scope than is available when vertically low (e.g., seeing many short-term gains