Affective Signals of Threat Increase Perceived Proximity

Shana Cole, Emily Balcetis, David Dunning

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Do stimuli appear to be closer when they are more threatening? We tested people's perceptions of distance to stimuli that they felt were threatening relative to perceptions of stimuli they felt were disgusting or neutral. Two studies demonstrated that stimuli that emitted affective signals of threat (e.g., an aggressive male student) were seen as physically closer than stimuli that emitted affective signals of disgust (e.g., a repulsive male student) or no affective signal. Even after controlling for the direct effects of physiological arousal, object familiarity, and intensity of the negative emotional reaction, we found that threatening stimuli appeared to be physically closer than did disgusting ones (Study 2). These findings highlight the links among biased perception, action regulation, and successful navigation of the environment.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)34-40
Number of pages7
JournalPsychological Science
Volume24
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 2013

Fingerprint

Distance Perception
Students
Arousal
Proximity
Threat
Affective
Stimulus
Recognition (Psychology)

Keywords

  • action
  • affect
  • distance perception
  • emotion
  • motivation
  • perception
  • regulation
  • social cognition
  • threat

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Psychology(all)
  • Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous)

Cite this

Affective Signals of Threat Increase Perceived Proximity. / Cole, Shana; Balcetis, Emily; Dunning, David.

In: Psychological Science, Vol. 24, No. 1, 01.2013, p. 34-40.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Cole, Shana ; Balcetis, Emily ; Dunning, David. / Affective Signals of Threat Increase Perceived Proximity. In: Psychological Science. 2013 ; Vol. 24, No. 1. pp. 34-40.
@article{35f1aba53c80433581948f3809faf940,
title = "Affective Signals of Threat Increase Perceived Proximity",
abstract = "Do stimuli appear to be closer when they are more threatening? We tested people's perceptions of distance to stimuli that they felt were threatening relative to perceptions of stimuli they felt were disgusting or neutral. Two studies demonstrated that stimuli that emitted affective signals of threat (e.g., an aggressive male student) were seen as physically closer than stimuli that emitted affective signals of disgust (e.g., a repulsive male student) or no affective signal. Even after controlling for the direct effects of physiological arousal, object familiarity, and intensity of the negative emotional reaction, we found that threatening stimuli appeared to be physically closer than did disgusting ones (Study 2). These findings highlight the links among biased perception, action regulation, and successful navigation of the environment.",
keywords = "action, affect, distance perception, emotion, motivation, perception, regulation, social cognition, threat",
author = "Shana Cole and Emily Balcetis and David Dunning",
year = "2013",
month = "1",
doi = "10.1177/0956797612446953",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "24",
pages = "34--40",
journal = "Psychological Science",
issn = "0956-7976",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Inc.",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Affective Signals of Threat Increase Perceived Proximity

AU - Cole, Shana

AU - Balcetis, Emily

AU - Dunning, David

PY - 2013/1

Y1 - 2013/1

N2 - Do stimuli appear to be closer when they are more threatening? We tested people's perceptions of distance to stimuli that they felt were threatening relative to perceptions of stimuli they felt were disgusting or neutral. Two studies demonstrated that stimuli that emitted affective signals of threat (e.g., an aggressive male student) were seen as physically closer than stimuli that emitted affective signals of disgust (e.g., a repulsive male student) or no affective signal. Even after controlling for the direct effects of physiological arousal, object familiarity, and intensity of the negative emotional reaction, we found that threatening stimuli appeared to be physically closer than did disgusting ones (Study 2). These findings highlight the links among biased perception, action regulation, and successful navigation of the environment.

AB - Do stimuli appear to be closer when they are more threatening? We tested people's perceptions of distance to stimuli that they felt were threatening relative to perceptions of stimuli they felt were disgusting or neutral. Two studies demonstrated that stimuli that emitted affective signals of threat (e.g., an aggressive male student) were seen as physically closer than stimuli that emitted affective signals of disgust (e.g., a repulsive male student) or no affective signal. Even after controlling for the direct effects of physiological arousal, object familiarity, and intensity of the negative emotional reaction, we found that threatening stimuli appeared to be physically closer than did disgusting ones (Study 2). These findings highlight the links among biased perception, action regulation, and successful navigation of the environment.

KW - action

KW - affect

KW - distance perception

KW - emotion

KW - motivation

KW - perception

KW - regulation

KW - social cognition

KW - threat

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84872359873&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84872359873&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/0956797612446953

DO - 10.1177/0956797612446953

M3 - Article

VL - 24

SP - 34

EP - 40

JO - Psychological Science

JF - Psychological Science

SN - 0956-7976

IS - 1

ER -