Search results
14 mar 2020 · At present, research on psychological distance has identified four major dimensions: spatial distance, temporal distance, social distance, and hypotheticality (Trope and Liberman 2010). The dimensions of psychological distance interact with one another; i.e., a change in one of the distance dimensions affects the perception of other distance ...
On the basis of theories of categorization ( Rosch, 1975 ), concept formation ( Medin & Smith, 1984 ), and action identification ( Vallacher & Wegner, 1987 ), we view high-level construals as relatively abstract, coherent, and superordinate mental representations, compared with low-level construals.
1 gru 2021 · The psychological distance of objects (e.g., things, places, other people) affects how we think about them. Research suggests that psychological proximity and distance might be also related to positive and negative evaluations, respectively.
19 lis 2020 · Introduction. The theory of the Construal Level explains that there is a relation among the psychological distance and response of people to a specific event ( Liberman and Trope, 1998, 2003 ). The psychological distance is composed of four dimensions: spatial, social, temporal, and hypothetical ( Liberman et al., 2007; Liberman and Trope, 2008 ).
This study used Citespace, Bibexcel, and Netdraw to construct scientific maps and performed co-word analysis, social network analysis, and cluster analysis of data from 1371 published studies on psychological distance that were retrieved from the Web of Science database.
Psychological distance is defined within the Construal-Level Theory (CLT), which was developed by Trope and Liberman . Their first approach referred only to the temporal distance and assumed that we judge a more distant event in time by few abstract characteristics (high-level construal).
13 gru 2011 · The extant literature defines psychological distance as “the different ways in which an object might be removed from” the self along dimensions such as “time, space, social distance, and hypotheticality” (Trope and Liberman 2010, 440).
