English passages can be in either the active or passive voice. Relative to the active voice, the passive voice provides a sense of objectivity regarding the events being described. This leads to our hypothesis that passages in the passive voice can increase readers’ psychological distance from the content of the passage, triggering an abstract construal. In five studies with American, Australian, British, and Canadian participants, we find evidence for our propositions, with both paragraphs and sentences in the passive voice increasing readers’ felt temporal, hypothetical, and spatial distance from activities described in the text, which increases their abstraction in a manner that generalizes to unrelated tasks. As such, prose colors how people process information, with the active and passive voice influencing the reader in ways beyond what is stated in the written word.
AlterA. L.OppenheimerD. (2008). Effects of fluency on psychological distance and mental construal (or why New York is a large city, but New York is a civilized jungle). Psychological Science, 19, 161-167.
2.
AnisfeldM.KlenbortI. (1973). On the functions of structural paraphrase: The view from the passive voice. Psychological Bulletin, 79, 117-126.
3.
AuT. K. F. (1983). Chinese and English counterfactuals: The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis revisited. Cognition, 15, 155-187.
4.
AydukO.KrossE. (2010). From a distance: Implications of spontaneous self-distancing for adaptive self-reflection. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98, 809-829.
5.
Bar-AnanY.LibermanN.TropeY.AlgomD. (2007). Automatic processing of psychological distance: Evidence from a Stroop task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 136, 610-622.
6.
BarattaA. M. (2009). Revealing stance through passive voice. Journal of Pragmatics, 41, 1406-1421.
7.
BolingerD. (1980). Language: The loaded weapon. London, England: Longman.
8.
ChanE. Y.MaglioS. J. (2019). Coffee cues elevate arousal and reduce level of construal. Consciousness and Cognition, 70, 57-69.
9.
ChomskyN. (1971). On the functions of structural paraphrase: The view from the passive voice. In SteinbergD. D.JakobovitsL. A. (Eds.), Semantics: An interdisciplinary reader in philosophy, linguistics and psychology (pp. 117-126). London, England: Cambridge University Press.
10.
ClarkK. (1992). The linguistics of blame: Representations of women in The Sun’s reporting of crimes of sexual violence. In ToolanM. (Ed.), Language, text and context: Essays in stylistics (pp. 208-224). London, England: Routledge.
11.
FiedlerK.HarrisC.SchottM. (2018). Unwarranted inferences from statistical mediation tests—An analysis of articles published in 2015. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 75, 95-102.
12.
FujitaK.TropeY.LibermanN.Levin-SagiM. (2006). Construal levels and self-control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 351-367.
13.
GriceP. (1975). Logic and conversation. In ColeP.MorganJ. (Eds.), Syntax and semantics 3: Speech acts (pp. 41-58). New York, NY: Academic Press.
14.
HansenJ.WänkeM. (2010). Truth from language and truth from fit: The impact of linguistic concreteness and level of construal on subjective truth. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36, 1576-1588.
15.
HenleyN. M.MillerM.BeazleyJ. A. (1995). Syntax, semantics, and sexual violence: Agency and the passive voice. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 14, 60-84.
16.
HylandK. (1998). Persuasion and context: The pragmatics of academic metadiscourse. Journal of Pragmatics, 30, 437-455.
17.
Im ShinH.KimJ. (2017). Foreign language effect and psychological distance. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 46, 1339-1352.
18.
IvanicR. (1994). I is for interpersonal: Discoursal construction of writer identities and the teaching of writing. Linguistics and Education, 6, 3-15.
19.
Johnson-LairdP. N. (1968). Shorter articles and notes the interpretation of the passive voice. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 20, 69-73.
20.
KajuA.MaglioS. J. (2018). Urgently yours: Temporal communication norms and psychological distance. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 28, 665-672.
21.
KimchiR.PalmerS. E. (1982). Form and texture in hierarchically constructed patterns. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 8, 521-535.
22.
LabrooA. A.PatrickV. M. (2009). Psychological distancing: Why happiness helps you see the big picture. Journal of Consumer Research, 35, 800-809.
23.
LambS. (1991). Acts without agents: An analysis of linguistic avoidance in journal articles on men who batter women. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 61, 250-257.
24.
LeeH.FujitaK.DengX.UnnavaH. R. (2017). The role of temporal distance on the color of future-directed imagery: A construal-level perspective. Journal of Consumer Research, 43, 707-725.
25.
LeongP. A. (2014). The passive voice in scientific writing: The current norm in science journals. Journal of Science Communication, 13(1), 1-16.
26.
LibbyL. K.ShaefferE. M.EibachR. P. (2009). Seeing meaning in action: A bidirectional link between visual perspective and action identification level. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 138, 503-516.
27.
LibermanN.FörsterJ. (2009). The effect of psychological distance on perceptual level of construal. Cognitive Science, 33, 1330-1341.
28.
LundbergU.BratfischO.EkmanG. (1972). Emotional involvement and subjective distance: A summary of investigations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 169-177.
29.
Macmillan Publishers. (2017). Macquarie dictionary (7th ed.). Sydney, New South Wales, Australia: Author.
30.
MaglioS. J.FederM. A. (2017). The making of social experience from the sounds in names. Social Cognition, 35, 663-674.
31.
MaglioS. J.RabagliaC. D.FederM. A.KrehmM.TropeY. (2014). Vowel sounds in words affect mental construal and shift preferences for targets. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 143, 1082-1096.
32.
MaglioS. J.TropeY.LibermanN. (2013a). The common currency of psychological distance. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 22, 278-282.
33.
MaglioS. J.TropeY.LibermanN. (2013b). Distance from a distance: Psychological distance reduces sensitivity to any further psychological distance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 142, 644-657.
34.
NavonD. (1977). Forest before trees: The precedence of global features in visual perception. Cognitive Psychology, 9, 353-383.
35.
OlsonD. R.FilbyN. (1972). On the comprehension of active and passive sentences. Cognitive Psychology, 3, 361-381.
36.
PenelopeJ. (1990). Speaking freely. New York, NY: Pergamon Press.
37.
PlatowM. J.BrodieM. (1999). The effects of linguistic voice on evaluations and attributions of ingroup and outgroup members. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 2, 187-200.
38.
PreacherK. J.HayesA. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 879-891.
39.
PruittJ. D. (1968). Passive voice should be avoided by research writers. The Journal of Higher Education, 39, 460-464.
40.
RabagliaC. D.MaglioS. J.KrehmM.SeokJ. H.TropeY. (2016). The sound of distance. Cognition, 152, 141-149.
41.
ReillyJ.ZamoraA.McGivernR. F. (2005). Acquiring perspective in English: The development of stance. Journal of Pragmatics, 37, 185-208.
42.
SmithC. S. (1971). Sentences in discourse: An analysis of a discourse by Bertrand Russell. Journal of Linguistics, 7, 213-235.
43.
SmithP. K.TropeY. (2006). You focus on the forest when you’re in charge of the trees: Power priming and abstract information processing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 578-596.
44.
SpassovaG.LeeA. Y. (2013). Looking into the future: A match between self-view and temporal distance. Journal of Consumer Research, 40, 159-171.
45.
StephanE.LibermanN.TropeY. (2010). Politeness and psychological distance: A construal level perspective. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98, 268-280.
46.
StrackF.SchwarzN.GschneidingerE. (1985). Happiness and reminiscing: The role of time perspective, affect, and mode of thinking. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 1460-1469.
47.
ThompsonG.YeY. (1991). Evaluation in the reporting verbs used in academic papers. Applied Linguistics, 12, 365-382.
48.
TropeY.LibermanN. (2000). Temporal construal and time-dependent changes in preference. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 876-889.
49.
TropeY.LibermanN. (2010). Construal-level theory of psychological distance. Psychological Review, 117, 440-463.
50.
VallacherR. R.WegnerD. M. (1987). What do people think they’re doing? Action identification and human behavior. Psychological Review, 94, 3-15.
51.
Van BovenL.KaneJ.McGrawA. P.DaleJ. (2010). Feeling close: Emotional intensity reduces perceived psychological distance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98, 872-885.
52.
WakslakC. J.TropeY.LibermanN.AlonyR. (2006). Seeing the forest when entry is unlikely: Probability and the mental representation of events. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 135, 641-653.
53.
WilliamsL. E.BarghJ. A. (2008). Keeping one’s distance: The influence of spatial distance cues on affect and evaluation. Psychological Science, 19, 302-308.
54.
XuA. J.WyerR. S. (2008). The effect of mindsets on consumer decision strategies. Journal of Consumer Research, 34, 556-566.
55.
ZhongC. B.LiljenquistK. (2006). Washing away your sins: Threatened morality and physical cleansing. Science, 313, 1451-1452.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
