权益分类	功能权益	普通用户	{{item.name}}会员
{{category.name}}	{{benefitItem.name}}

Examining the emotional impact of verbal irony

检查言语讽刺的情感影响

基本信息

批准号：
ES/L000121/1
负责人：
Ruth Filik
金额：
$ 22.95万
依托单位：
University of Nottingham
依托单位国家：
英国
项目类别：
Research Grant
财政年份：
2014
资助国家：
英国
起止时间：
2014 至无数据
项目状态：
已结题

来源：
https://gtr.ukri.org/projects?ref=ES%2FL000121%2F1
关键词：
Examining emotional impact verbal irony

项目摘要

People often use ironic language in everyday conversation. For example, if someone does something stupid, their friend may make the comment "That was clever!", which on the surface of it, is the opposite of what they mean. Understanding ironic comments can be more difficult than if the person had spoken directly, by saying for example, "That was stupid!". Thus, given the risk of misunderstanding, if people choose to use ironic language, it seems likely that they want it to serve some other function that would not be achieved by speaking directly, such as eliciting a particular emotional response in the recipient.In this project, we aim to investigate the emotional impact of verbal irony using a number of techniques which can tell us about the person's immediate emotional response as they are reading or listening to ironic comments. Some theorists propose that the function of irony is to mute the emotional force of a comment, for example, to make a criticism seem less harsh, whereas others argue that it may increase the feeling of condemnation felt by the recipient. Thus, it is currently unclear whether irony enhances or mutes the emotional force of an utterance. Little is also known about which factors can affect this process, and exactly which emotions are involved. To address these issues, in Experiment 1, we will examine whether people's emotional responses to being criticised or praised are heightened, or reduced, by the comment being delivered ironically rather than directly. We will also examine whether emotional responses are influenced by whether the ironic comment is directed at the participant themselves, or at another person. We will do this by measuring people's electrical skin conductance response, which is a direct indicator of emotional arousal, while they are listening to spoken ironies. In Experiment 2, we will use the same technique to examine people's emotional responses to written irony. We will also assess how these responses are affected by commonly used devices such as emoticons. In Experiments 3 and 4 we wish to examine in more detail precisely which emotions are elicited by the use of irony. In Experiment 3, we will look at whether people expect characters in a story to find ironic comments more amusing than direct comments. We will again look at both written and spoken irony. In Experiment 3a, we will record people's eye movements while they are reading conversations between characters, to examine whether they expect the recipient of an ironic comment to be amused, compared to when the same message is delivered literally. We would expect to observe more disruption to eye movements during reading in cases where the character's described emotional response to the comment does not match with the reader's expectations. We will also look at whether this expectation for amusement differs depending on whether the participant takes the perspective of the person delivering the comment, or the person who is receiving it. In Experiment 3b, we will examine people's electrical brain activity while they are listening to spoken irony. This will tell us whether expectations for particular emotional responses differ across written and spoken irony, where different cues are involved (e.g., tone of voice).In Experiment 4, in contrast to amusement, we will examine whether people expect characters to be more upset by ironic comments than direct comments. Again, we will look at both written (Experiment 4a) and spoken (Experiment 4b) irony, and will examine whether results differ depending on whether the participant takes the perspective of the speaker or the recipient of the ironic comment.Our findings will help us to develop theories to explain emotional processes relating to using irony. These theoretical advances could inform the use of irony to communicate in professional settings, and aid understanding of conditions in which irony comprehension is impaired (e.g., autism and schizophrenia).

人们在日常对话中经常使用讽刺语。例如，如果某人做了一件愚蠢的事情，他的朋友可能会说“That was clever!”，从表面上看，这与他们的意思正好相反。理解讽刺性的评论可能比理解一个人直接说的话要困难得多，比如，“那太蠢了！”因此，考虑到误解的风险，如果人们选择使用讽刺语言，似乎很可能是他们想要它达到一些其他的功能，这些功能是直接说话无法达到的，比如引起接受者的特定情绪反应。在这个项目中，我们的目标是调查言语反讽对情绪的影响，使用一些技术，这些技术可以告诉我们一个人在阅读或听反讽评论时的即时情绪反应。一些理论家提出，讽刺的功能是使评论的情感力量减弱，例如，使批评看起来不那么严厉，而另一些人则认为，讽刺可能会增加接受者的谴责感。因此，目前尚不清楚反讽是增强还是抑制了话语的情感力量。至于哪些因素会影响这一过程，以及具体涉及哪些情绪，我们也知之甚少。为了解决这些问题，在实验1中，我们将检验人们对被批评或表扬的情绪反应是通过讽刺而不是直接的评论来增强还是减弱。我们还将研究情绪反应是否受到讽刺评论是针对参与者自己还是针对另一个人的影响。我们将通过测量人们在听讽刺语时的皮肤电导反应来做到这一点，这是情绪唤醒的直接指标。在实验2中，我们将使用相同的技术来检查人们对书面讽刺的情绪反应。我们还将评估这些反应如何受到常用设备（如表情符号）的影响。在实验3和4中，我们希望更详细地研究使用反讽能引起哪些情绪。在实验3中，我们将观察人们是否期望故事中的人物发现讽刺的评论比直接的评论更有趣。我们将再次研究书面反讽和口头反讽。在实验3a中，我们将记录人们在阅读人物之间的对话时的眼球运动，以检查他们是否希望收到讽刺评论的人被逗乐，而不希望同样的信息被逐字传达。我们希望在阅读过程中观察到更多的眼球运动中断，如果角色对评论的情感反应与读者的期望不匹配。我们还将研究，这种对娱乐的期望是否会因参与者是站在发表评论的人的角度，还是站在接受评论的人的角度而有所不同。在实验3b中，我们将检测人们在听反语时的脑电活动。这将告诉我们对特定情绪反应的期望是否在书面和口头讽刺中有所不同，其中涉及不同的线索（例如，语气）。在实验4中，与娱乐相比，我们将检验人们是否期望角色对讽刺评论比直接评论更沮丧。同样，我们将研究书面反讽（实验4a）和口头反讽（实验4b），并将检查结果是否会因参与者是站在说话者的角度还是站在讽刺评论的接受者的角度而有所不同。我们的发现将帮助我们发展理论来解释与使用反语有关的情绪过程。这些理论的进步可以为在专业环境中使用反语进行交流提供信息，并有助于理解反语理解受损的情况（例如自闭症和精神分裂症）。