@conference {bib_73,
	title = {Is it fair? Textual effects on the salience of moral foundations},
	booktitle = {Proceedings of the 39th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society},
	year = {2017},
	pages = {3028-3032},
	abstract = {Many of the important decisions we make have moral implications. Moral Foundations Theory (Haidt \& Joseph, 2004) identifies 5 distinct styles of moral reasoning that may be applied to such decisions. This paper explores how reading text that emphasizes one of these styles might affect our reasoning. After participants read a series of tweets that emphasized the Fairness/Cheating foundation they exhibited an increased reliance on this style compared to when they read tweets emphasizing the Care/Harm foundation. This affected participants{\textquoteright} answers to a questionnaire designed to measure the perceived importance of the different foundations, as well as in their rating of the foundations evident in other tweets. Interestingly, this effect was short lived and was not observed for the Care/Harm foundation. These results suggest that exposure to the moral reasoning of others might temporarily influence what moral arguments we are likely to accept and employ.},
	author = {Eyal Sagi},
	editor = {Gunzelmann, G. and Howes, A. and Tenbrink, T. and Davelaar, E. J.}
}
@conference {bib_67,
	title = {The Moral Rhetoric of Climate Change},
	booktitle = {Proceedings of the 37th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society},
	year = {2015},
	pages = {2063-2068},
	abstract = {Communication in the media about climate change in the United States is complicated by the intensely ideologically polarized state of the debate surrounding the issue; moral rhetoric is an important dimension of how ideology is communicated. In this study we examined how moral rhetoric regarding this issue differs on the basis of a publication{\textquoteright}s perceived ideological lean. To address the question, we built a corpus from a diverse group of online news media that were rated for their perceived ideological lean. Using Latent Semantic Analysis we calculated the average loading for the five moral domains identified in Haidt{\textquoteright}s Moral Foundations Theory (Haidt \& Joseph, 2004) on the terms "climate change" and "global warming." We found that there were higher moral loadings overall for "climate change" with a greater difference seen among the more progressive media.},
	author = {Eyal Sagi and Timothy M. Gann and Teenie Matlock},
	editor = {D. C. Noelle and Rick Dale and A. S. Warlaumont and J. Yoshimi and Teenie Matlock and C. D. Jennings and P. P. Maglio}
}
@article {55,
	title = {Identity, Causality, and Pronoun Ambiguity},
	journal = {Topics in Cognitive Science},
	volume = {6},
	year = {2014},
	pages = {663-680},
	abstract = {This article looks at the way people determine the antecedent of a pronoun in sentence pairs, such as: Albert invited Ron to dinner. He spent hours cleaning the house. The experiment reported here is motivated by the idea that such judgments depend on reasoning about identity (e.g., the identity of the he who cleaned the house). Because the identity of an individual over time depends on the causal-historical path connecting the stages of the individual, the correct antecedent will also depend on causal connections. The experiment varied how likely it is that the event of the first sentence (e.g., the invitation) would cause the event of the second (the house cleaning) for each of the two individuals (the likelihood that if Albert invited Ron to dinner, this would cause Albert to clean the house, vs. cause Ron to clean the house). Decisions about the antecedent followed causal likelihood. A mathematical model of causal identity accounted for most of the key aspects of the data from the individual sentence pairs.},
	doi = {10.1111/tops.12105},
	author = {Eyal Sagi and Lance J Rips}
}
@conference {jamrozik2013relational,
	title = {Relational words have high metaphoric potential},
	booktitle = {Proceedings of the First Workshop on Metaphor in NLP},
	year = {2013},
	pages = {21-26},
	abstract = {What influences the likelihood that a word will be used metaphorically? We tested whether the likelihood of metaphorical use is related to the relationality of a word{\textquoteright}s meaning. Relational words name relations between entities. We predicted that relational words, such as verbs (e.g., speak) and relational nouns (e.g., marriage) would be more likely to be used metaphorically than words that name entities (e.g., item). In two experiments, we collected expert ratings of metaphoricity for uses of verbs, relational nouns, and entity nouns collected from a corpus search. As predicted, uses of relational words were rated as more metaphorical than uses of entity words. We discuss how these findings could inform NLP models of metaphor.},
	url = {http://www.aclweb.org/anthology/W/W13/W13-09.pdf$\#$page=31},
	author = {Jamrozik, Anja and Eyal Sagi and Goldwater, Micah and Dedre Gentner},
	editor = {E. Shutova and Beata Beigman-Klebanov and J. Testreault and Z. Kozareva}
}
