Search for: All records

Large-scale language datasets and advances in natural language processing offer opportunities for studying people’s cognitions and behaviors. We show how representations derived from language can be combined with laboratory-based word norms to predict implicit attitudes for diverse concepts. Our approach achieves substantially higher correlations than existing methods. We also show that our approach is more predictive of implicit attitudes than are explicit attitudes, and that it captures variance in implicit attitudes that is largely unexplained by explicit attitudes. Overall, our results shed light on how implicit attitudes can be measured by combining standard psychological data with large-scale language data. In doing so, we pave the way for highly accurate computational modeling of what people think and feel about the world around them. 

People make subjective judgments about the healthiness of different foods every day, and these judgments in turn influence their food choices and health outcomes. Despite the importance of such judgments, there are few quantitative theories about their psychological underpinnings. This article introduces a novel computational approach that can approximate people’s knowledge representations for thousands of common foods. We used these representations to predict how both lay decision-makers (the general population) and experts judge the healthiness of individual foods. We also applied our method to predict the impact of behavioral interventions, such as the provision of front-of-pack nutrient and calorie information. Across multiple studies with data from 846 adults, our models achieved very high accuracy rates ( r 2 = .65–.77) and significantly outperformed competing models based on factual nutritional content. These results illustrate how new computational methods applied to established psychological theory can be used to better predict, understand, and influence health behavior. 

Considerable amount of laboratory and survey‐based research finds that people show disproportional compassionate and affective response to the scope of human mortality risk. According to research on “psychic numbing,” it is often the case that the more who die, the less we care. In the present article, we examine the extent of this phenomenon in verbal behavior, using large corpora of natural language to quantify the affective reactions to loss of life. We analyze valence, arousal, and specific emotional content of over 100,000 mentions of death in news articles and social media posts, and find that language shows an increase in valence (i.e., decreased negative affect) and a decrease in arousal when describing mortality of larger numbers of people. These patterns are most clearly reflected in specific emotions of joy and (in a reverse fashion) of fear and anger. Our results showcase a novel methodology for studying affective decision making, and highlight the robustness and real‐world relevance of psychic numbing. They also offer new insights regarding the psychological underpinnings of psychic numbing, as well as possible interventions for reducing psychic numbing and overcoming social and psychological barriers to action in the face of the world's most serious threats.