{"id":90,"date":"2014-12-17T12:55:51","date_gmt":"2014-12-17T12:55:51","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/sites.cardiff.ac.uk\/values-in-action\/?p=90"},"modified":"2014-12-17T12:57:20","modified_gmt":"2014-12-17T12:57:20","slug":"cognitive-aspects-of-value-instantiations-hahn-maio","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/sites.cardiff.ac.uk\/values-in-action\/2014\/12\/17\/cognitive-aspects-of-value-instantiations-hahn-maio\/","title":{"rendered":"Cognitive Aspects of Value Instantiations (Hahn, Maio)"},"content":{"rendered":"

Associates: Dr Laurel Evans and\u00a0Dr Lorraine Whitmarsh<\/a><\/strong>
\nStudents<\/strong>:\u00a0Colin Foad<\/a>, Paul Hanel<\/strong><\/p>\n

There are a number of important ways in which instantiations of values may vary.\u00a0 For instance, many English phrases show how the value of freedom can be instantiated as serving exploratory motives (e.g., \u201cfree speech,\u201d \u201cfree will\u201d), self-interest motives (\u201cfree enterprise,\u201d \u201cfree market\u201d), or benevolent motives (e.g., \u201cfree love\u201d). Converging with evidence from prior research on effects of issue framing (Lakoff, 2009<\/a>), these differences in types of instantiation may be key factors in creating polarized views about how values should be applied.\u00a0 This has enormous implications for understanding how social-political communications about values are structured and understood.<\/p>\n

This research project provides a much-needed examination of basic cognitive differences in how values are instantiated. Our past research has provided a provocative insight into the relevance of prior value instantiations, but this research only examined how instantiations vary in typicality or concreteness (for a review, see Maio, 2010); it is important to go further by testing whether other types of differences between instantiations affect subsequent behaviour. Indeed, instantiations of cognitive concepts in general can vary in a number of other ways (Barsalou, 1987). For instance, some instantiations of the value of helpfulness may exhibit better ease of recall (e.g., donating to charity), expression of the ideal (e.g., donating \u00a31000 instead of \u00a31), or fit to the average instantiation (e.g., a perceived average donation of \u00a35).<\/p>\n

In this research, we are exposing participants to instantiations that vary on these dimensions. We then examine the participants\u2019 decisions in new situations that are not directly connected to the prior instantiations, except insofar as they promote the same abstract value (e.g., helpfulness). Together, these experiments assess the extent to which the features of the prior instantiations affect the likelihood of \u2018seeing\u2019 the value\u2019s relevance in a subsequent scenario. The experiments also include measures testing whether the effects of value instantiation depend on individual differences in value endorsement (which may affect ease of recall, the perceived \u201caverage,\u201d or other ways in which the instantiations are interpreted). Overall, the data are helping to solve extant mysteries concerning how people map values from one situation to the next and decide between different behavioural options.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Associates: Dr Laurel Evans and\u00a0Dr Lorraine Whitmarsh Students:\u00a0Colin Foad, Paul Hanel There are a number of important ways in which instantiations of values may vary.\u00a0 For instance, many English phrases show how the value of freedom can be instantiated as serving exploratory motives (e.g., \u201cfree speech,\u201d \u201cfree will\u201d), self-interest motives (\u201cfree enterprise,\u201d \u201cfree market\u201d), or<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1138,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-90","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p5st66-1s","meta_box":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/sites.cardiff.ac.uk\/values-in-action\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/90","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/sites.cardiff.ac.uk\/values-in-action\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/sites.cardiff.ac.uk\/values-in-action\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/sites.cardiff.ac.uk\/values-in-action\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1138"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/sites.cardiff.ac.uk\/values-in-action\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=90"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"http:\/\/sites.cardiff.ac.uk\/values-in-action\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/90\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":94,"href":"http:\/\/sites.cardiff.ac.uk\/values-in-action\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/90\/revisions\/94"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/sites.cardiff.ac.uk\/values-in-action\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=90"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/sites.cardiff.ac.uk\/values-in-action\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=90"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/sites.cardiff.ac.uk\/values-in-action\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=90"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}