ArticleHumanities & social sciences communications2022
Gender Differences in Emotional Connotative Meaning of Words Measured by Osgood's Semantic Differential Techniques in Young Adults.
Article in Humanities & social sciences communications, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Young males in crisis: pathways, usage and acceptability of an online messenger based psychosocial counselling service.Frontiers in digital health · 2025Article
- Communication between parents diagnosed with cancer and their children: study with data triangulation.Revista da Escola de Enfermagem da U S P · 2024Article
- Pupil Dilation Reflects Emotional Arousal Via Poetic Language.Perceptual and motor skills · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Semantic differential techniques are a useful, well-validated tool to assess affective processing of stimuli and determine how that processing is impacted by various demographic factors, such as gender. In this paper, we explore differences in connotative word processing between men and women as measured by Osgood's semantic differential and what those differences imply about affective processing in the two genders. We recruited 94 young participants (47 men, 47 women, ages 18-39) using an online survey and collected their affective ratings of 120 words on three rating tasks: Evaluation (E), Potency (P), and Activity (A). With these data, we explored the theoretical and mathematical overlap between Osgood's affective meaning factor structure and other models of emotional processing commonly used in gender analyses. We then used Osgood's three-dimensional structure to assess gender-related differences in three affective classes of words (words with connotation that is Positive, Neutral, or Negative for each task) and found that there was no significant difference between the genders when rating Positive words and Neutral words on each of the three rating tasks. However, young women consistently rated Negative words more negatively than young men did on all three of the independent dimensions. This confirms the importance of taking gender effects into account when measuring emotional processing. Our results further indicate there may be differences between Osgood's structure and other models of affective processing that should be further explored.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.