James Carney

Dr. James Carney


Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

20Years (2007-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 June 2020 in Behavior Research Methods
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
DLDermot Lynott
Dermot Lynott
LCLouise Connell
Louise Connell
MBMarc Brysbaert
Marc Brysbaert
JBJames Brand
James Brand
JCJames Carney
James Carney
Sensorimotor information plays a fundamental role in cognition. However, the existing materials that measure the sensorimotor basis of word meanings and concepts have been restricted in terms of their sample size and breadth of sensorimotor experience. Here we present norms of sensorimotor strength for 39,707 concepts across six perceptual modalities (touch, hearing, smell, taste, vision, and interoception) and five action effectors (mouth/throat, hand/arm, foot/leg, head excluding mouth/throat, and torso), gathered from a total of 3,500 individual participants using Amazon’s Mechanical Turk platform. The Lancaster Sensorimotor Norms are unique and innovative in a number of respects: They represent the largest-ever set of semantic norms for English, at 40,000 words × 11 dimensions (plus several informative cross-dimensional variables), they extend perceptual strength norming to the new modality of interoception, and they include the first norming of action strength across separate bodily effectors. In the first study, we describe the data collection procedures, provide summary descriptives of the dataset, and interpret the relations observed between sensorimotor dimensions. We then report two further studies, in which we (1) extracted an optimal single-variable composite of the 11-dimension sensorimotor profile (Minkowski 3 strength) and (2) demonstrated the utility of both perceptual and action strength in facilitating lexical decision times and accuracy in two separate datasets. These norms provide a valuable resource to researchers in diverse areas, including psycholinguistics, grounded cognition, cognitive semantics, knowledge representation, machine learning, and big-data approaches to the analysis of language and conceptual representations. The data are accessible via the Open Science Framework (http://osf.io/7emr6/) and an interactive web application (https://www.lancaster.ac.uk/psychology/lsnorms/).

16 March 2015 in PLOS ONE
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
TDTamas David-Barrett
Tamas David-Barrett
ARAnna Rotkirch
Anna Rotkirch
JCJames Carney
James Carney
IIIsabel Behncke Izquierdo
Isabel Behncke Izquierdo
JKJaimie Krems
Jaimie Krems
RDRobin I M Dunbar
Robin I M Dunbar
The ability to create lasting, trust-based friendships makes it possible for humans to form large and coherent groups. The recent literature on the evolution of sociality and on the network dynamics of human societies suggests that large human groups have a layered structure generated by emotionally supported social relationships. There are also gender differences in adult social style which may involve different trade-offs between the quantity and quality of friendships. Although many have suggested that females tend to focus on intimate relations with a few other females, while males build larger, more hierarchical coalitions, the existence of such gender differences is disputed and data from adults is scarce. Here, we present cross-cultural evidence for gender differences in the preference for close friendships. We use a sample of ∼112,000 profile pictures from nine world regions posted on a popular social networking site to show that, in self-selected displays of social relationships, women favour dyadic relations, whereas men favour larger, all-male cliques. These apparently different solutions to quality-quantity trade-offs suggest a universal and fundamental difference in the function of close friendships for the two sexes.

1 December 2020 in Evolutionary Studies in Imaginative Culture
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
JCJames Carney
James Carney
The “4E” approach to cognition argues that cognition does not occur solely in the head, but is also embodied, embedded, enacted, or extended by way of extra-cranial processes and structures. Though very much in vogue, 4E cognition has received relatively few critical evaluations. By reflecting on two recent collections, this article reviews the 4E paradigm with a view to assessing its strengths and weaknesses.

3 December 2014 in PLOS ONE
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
JCJames Carney
James Carney
RWRafael Wlodarski
Rafael Wlodarski
RDRobin Dunbar
Robin Dunbar
Do narratives shape how humans process other minds or do they presuppose an existing theory of mind? This study experimentally investigated this problem by assessing subject responses to systematic alterations in the genre, levels of intentionality, and linguistic complexity of narratives. It showed that the interaction of genre and intentionality level are crucial in determining how narratives are cognitively processed. Specifically, genres that deployed evolutionarily familiar scenarios (relationship stories) were rated as being higher in quality when levels of intentionality were increased; conversely, stories that lacked evolutionary familiarity (espionage stories) were rated as being lower in quality with increases in intentionality level. Overall, the study showed that narrative is not solely either the origin or the product of our intuitions about other minds; instead, different genres will have different—even opposite—effects on how we understand the mind states of others.

8 April 2022 in PLOS ONE
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
JCJames Carney
James Carney
CRCole Robertson
Cole Robertson
Does reading fiction improve mental health and well-being? We present the results of five studies that evaluated the impact of five forms of exposure to fiction. These included the effects of recalling reading fiction, of being prescribed fiction, of discussing fiction relative to non-fiction, and of discussing literary fiction relative to best-seller fiction. The first three studies directly recruited participants; the final two relied on scraped social media data from Reddit and Twitter. Results show that fiction can have a positive impact on measures of mood and emotion, but that a process of mnemonic or cognitive consolidation is required first: exposure to fiction does not, on its own, have an immediate impact on well-being.

1 November 2015 in Personality and Individual Differences
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
JLJacques Launay
Jacques Launay
EPEiluned Pearce
Eiluned Pearce
RWRafael Wlodarski
Rafael Wlodarski
MDMax van Duijn
Max van Duijn
JCJames Carney
James Carney
RDRobin I.M. Dunbar
Robin I.M. Dunbar