ArticleFrontiers in psychology2014
Photographs of manipulable objects are named more quickly than the same objects depicted as line-drawings: Evidence that photographs engage embodiment more than line-drawings.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- Timed picture naming norms for 800 photographs of 200 objects in English.Behavior research methods · 2024Article
- Cumulative semantic cost without successful naming.Memory & cognition · 2021Article
- You won't believe what this guy is doing with the potato: The ObjAct stimulus-set depicting human actions on congruent and incongruent objects.Behavior research methods · 2021Article
- PicPsy: A new bank of 106 photographs and line drawings with written naming norms for Spanish-speaking children and adults.PloS one · 2020Article
- Article
- Article
- Picture perfect: A stimulus set of 225 pairs of matched clipart and photographic images normed by Mechanical Turk and laboratory participants.Behavior research methods · 2018Article
- The real deal: Willingness-to-pay and satiety expectations are greater for real foods versus their images.Cortex; a journal devoted to the study of the nervous system and behavior · 2018Article
- Graspable Objects Grab Attention More Than Images Do.Psychological science · 2018Article
- ERPs Differentially Reflect Automatic and Deliberate Processing of the Functional Manipulability of Objects.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Previous research has shown that photographs of manipulable objects (i.e., those that can be grasped for use with one hand) are named more quickly than non-manipulable objects when they have been matched for object familiarity and age of acquisition. The current study tested the hypothesis that the amount of visual detail present in object depictions moderates these "manipulability" effects on object naming. The same objects were presented as photographs and line-drawings during a speeded naming task. Forty-six participants named 222 objects depicted in both formats. A significant object depiction (photographs versus line drawing) by manipulability interaction confirmed our hypothesis that manipulable objects are identified more quickly when shown as photographs; whereas, non-manipulable objects are identified equally quickly when shown as photographs versus line-drawings. These results indicate that factors such as surface detail and texture moderate the role of "action" and/or "manipulability" effects during object identification tasks, and suggest that photographs of manipulable objects are associated with more embodied representations of those objects than when they are depicted as line-drawings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.