Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31898071›Full record

ArticleAttention, perception & psychophysics2020

Heaviness-brightness correspondence and stimulus-response compatibility.

Peter Walker, Gabrielle Scallon, Brian J Francis

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Attention, perception & psychophysics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Peter WalkerDepartment of Psychology, Lancaster University, Lancaster, LA1 4YF, UK. p.walker@lancaster.ac.uk.
Gabrielle ScallonDepartment of Psychology, Lancaster University, Lancaster, LA1 4YF, UK.
Brian J FrancisDepartment of Mathematics and Statistics, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cross-sensory correspondences can reflect crosstalk between aligned conceptual feature dimensions, though uncertainty remains regarding the identities of all the dimensions involved. It is unclear, for example, if heaviness contributes to correspondences separately from size. Taking steps to dissociate variations in heaviness from variations in size, the question was asked if a heaviness-brightness correspondence will induce a congruity effect during the speeded brightness classification of simple visual stimuli. Participants classified the stimuli according to whether they were brighter or darker than the mid-gray background against which they appeared. They registered their speeded decisions by manipulating (e.g., tapping) the object they were holding in either their left or right hand (e.g., left for bright, right for dark). With these two otherwise identical objects contrasting in their weight, stimuli were classified more quickly when the relative heaviness of the object needing to be manipulated corresponded with the brightness of the stimulus being classified (e.g., the heavier object for a darker stimulus). This novel congruity effect, in the guise of a stimulus-response (S-R) compatibility effect, was induced when heaviness was isolated as an enduring feature of the object needing to be manipulated. It was also undiminished when participants completed a concurrent verbal memory load task, countering claims that the heaviness-brightness correspondence is verbally mediated. Heaviness, alongside size, appears to contribute to cross-sensory correspondences in its own right and in a manner confirming the far-reaching influence of correspondences, extending here to the fluency with which people communicate simple ideas by manipulating a hand-held object.

Indexed as

Visual PerceptionHumansBrightnessCross-sensory correspondencesHeavinessStimulus-response compatibility

Identifiers

PMID31898071
PMCPMC7297857

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.