↓ Skip to main content

Modality exclusivity norms for 400 nouns: The relationship between perceptual experience and surface word form

Overview of attention for article published in Behavior Research Methods, October 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
118 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
120 Mendeley
Title
Modality exclusivity norms for 400 nouns: The relationship between perceptual experience and surface word form
Published in
Behavior Research Methods, October 2012
DOI 10.3758/s13428-012-0267-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dermot Lynott, Louise Connell

Abstract

We present modality exclusivity norms for 400 randomly selected noun concepts, for which participants provided perceptual strength ratings across five sensory modalities (i.e., hearing, taste, touch, smell, and vision). A comparison with previous norms showed that noun concepts are more multimodal than adjective concepts, as nouns tend to subsume multiple adjectival property concepts (e.g., perceptual experience of the concept baby involves auditory, haptic, olfactory, and visual properties, and hence leads to multimodal perceptual strength). To show the value of these norms, we then used them to test a prediction of the sound symbolism hypothesis: Analysis revealed a systematic relationship between strength of perceptual experience in the referent concept and surface word form, such that distinctive perceptual experience tends to attract distinctive lexical labels. In other words, modality-specific norms of perceptual strength are useful for exploring not just the nature of grounded concepts, but also the nature of form-meaning relationships. These norms will be of benefit to those interested in the representational nature of concepts, the roles of perceptual information in word processing and in grounded cognition more generally, and the relationship between form and meaning in language development and evolution.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 120 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Italy 2 2%
France 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 116 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 18%
Researcher 22 18%
Student > Master 15 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 9%
Student > Bachelor 7 6%
Other 23 19%
Unknown 20 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 43 36%
Linguistics 25 21%
Neuroscience 6 5%
Computer Science 4 3%
Arts and Humanities 3 3%
Other 13 11%
Unknown 26 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 October 2012.
All research outputs
#20,657,128
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Behavior Research Methods
#1,980
of 2,525 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#149,372
of 191,770 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Behavior Research Methods
#18
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,525 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.2. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 191,770 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.