GOOD AND BAD IN THE HANDS OF POLITICIANS:

SPONTANEOUS GESTURES
DURING POSITIVE AND
NEGATIVE SPEECH
Daniel Casasanto & Kyle Jasmin HEIRBAUT Selma
N° 52113213
2010
INTRODUCTION

 Innate link between action and emotion

Þ Link between hand gestures and communicating good/bad?
 Linguistic and non-linguistic conventions:
right = good
left = bad
 Diversity of the human conceptual repertoire
  Casasanto, 2009; Willems et al., 2009; Willems et al., 2010
 Body-specificity hypothesis: the content of our minds
depends on the structure of our bodies

PREVIOUS
 Beilock et al., 2007; Reber et al., 1998
RESEARCH  Dominant side of the body -> interaction more fluently
-> positive evaluations
Þ For right-handers: right = good
Þ For left-handers: left = good
  Casasanto, 2009
 Do right- and left-handers have contrasting associations?
-> YES
 BUT: constrained to binary choices
 This study:
 Similar question: Do speakers tend to gesture more with
HYPOTHESIS their dominant hands when talking about good things
and with their non-dominant hands when talking about
bad things?
 BUT: spontaneous behaviour of the final presidential
candidates
 Hypothesis: YES
 Obama Kerry

METHODS
 Speech: rating clauses as expressing
ideas with positive, negative or
indeterminate emotional valence

 Hand gestures: associating emotional

valence with use of the dominant and
non-dominant hand

McCain Bush
  Hypothesis = results = body-specificity hypothesis
Þ Speakers don't just gesticulate with their
dominant hand
RESULTS  ! McCain (Republican) is left-handed
  Nobody is aware of the way they gesticulate during
speech
RESULTS  BUT: non-dominant hand gestures can be dramatic
enough to inform the audience on the emotions of the
speaker
Is the hand-valence association not just an artifact of:

 Temporal/numerical order? -> NO DISCUSSION

 The speakers’ position? -> NO
 Coaching?: -> No
CONCLUSION AND COMMENTS

 Hand-valence association =/ conventions

 BUT = innate differences causing asymmetries in fluency

 Can we protect ourselves against lies?

  Beilock SL. et Holt LE. (2007). « Embodied preference judgments:
can likeability be driven by the motor system? », Psychol Sci, vol. 18,
p.51–57.
 Casasanto D. (2009). « Embodiment of abstract concepts: good and
bad in rightand left-handers », Journal of Experimental Psychology:
General, vol.138, no°3, p. 351–367.
 Casasanto D. et Jasmin K. (2010) . « Good and Bad in the Hands of
Politicians: Spontaneous Gestures during Positive and Negative
Speech »,. PLoS ONE, vol.5, no°7.

REFERENCES  Reber R., Winkielman P. et Schwarz N. (1998). « Effects of perceptual

fluency on affective judgments », Psychol Sci, vol. 9, no°1, p. 45–48.
 Willems RM., Toni I., Hagoort P. et Casasanto D. (2009). « Body-
specific motor imagery of hand actions: neural evidence from right-
and left-handers », Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, vol. 3, no°39.
http://www.frontiersin.
org/neuroscience/humanneuroscience/paper/10.3389/neuro.09/039.
2009/ html/ (21 avril 2010)
 Willems RM., Hagoort P. et Casasanto D. (2010). « Body-specific
representations of action verbs: neural evidence from right- and left-
handers », Psychol Sci, vol. 21, no°1, p. 67–74.