Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39351021›Full record

ArticleOpen mind : discoveries in cognitive science2024

Evolution of the Moral Lexicon.

Aida Ramezani, Jennifer E Stellar, Matthew Feinberg, Yang Xu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Open mind : discoveries in cognitive science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Aida RamezaniDepartment of Computer Science, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
Jennifer E StellarDepartment of Psychology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
Matthew FeinbergRotman School of Management, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
Yang XuDepartment of Computer Science, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Morality is central to social well-being and cognition, and moral lexicon is a key device for human communication of moral concepts and experiences. How was the moral lexicon formed? We explore this open question and hypothesize that words evolved to take on abstract moral meanings from concrete and grounded experiences. We test this hypothesis by analyzing semantic change and formation of over 800 words from the English Moral Foundations Dictionary and the Historical Thesaurus of English over the past hundreds of years. Across historical text corpora and dictionaries, we discover concrete-to-abstract shifts as words acquire moral meaning, in contrast with the broad observation that words become more concrete over time. Furthermore, we find that compound moral words tend to be derived from a concrete-to-abstract shift from their constituents, and this derivational property is more prominent in moral words compared to alternative compound words when word frequency is controlled for. We suggest that evolution of the moral lexicon depends on systematic metaphorical mappings from concrete domains to the moral domain. Our results provide large-scale evidence for the role of metaphor in shaping the historical development of the English moral lexicon.

Indexed as

language and moralitylexical evolutionmetaphormoral foundationsmoral lexicon

Identifiers

PMID39351021
PMCPMC11441783

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.