Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36462095›Full record

ArticleJournal of psycholinguistic research2023

Is Purple Lost in Translation? The Affective Meaning of Purple, Violet, and Lilac Cognates in 16 Languages and 30 Populations.

Mari Uusküla, Christine Mohr, Déborah Epicoco, Domicele Jonauskaite

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of psycholinguistic research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

4 authors.

Mari UuskülaSchool of Humanities, Tallinn University, Tallinn, Estonia.
Christine MohrInstitute of Psychology, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Déborah EpicocoInstitute of Psychology, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Domicele JonauskaiteInstitute of Psychology, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland. domicele.jonauskaite@univie.ac.at.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7513-9766

Funding

Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung 100014_182138Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung P0LAP1_175055Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung P500PS_202956
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Colour-emotion association data show a universal consistency in colour-emotion associations, apart from emotion associations with PURPLE. Possibly, its heterogeneity was due to different cognates used as basic colour terms between languages. We analysed emotion associations with PURPLE across 30 populations, 28 countries, and 16 languages (4,008 participants in total). Crucially, these languages used the cognates of purple, lilac, or violet to denote the basic PURPLE category. We found small but systematic affective differences between these cognates. They were ordered as purple > lilac > violet on valence, arousal, and power biases. Statistically, the cognate purple was the most strongly biased towards associations with positive emotions, and lilac was biased more strongly than violet. Purple was more biased towards high power emotions than violet, but cognates did not differ on arousal biases. Additionally, affective biases differed by population, suggesting high variability within each cognate. Thus, cognates partly account for inconsistencies in the meaning of PURPLE, without explaining their origins.

Indexed as

EmotionsLanguageArousalHumansColourCross-culturalCross-modal associationsEmotionSemantics

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.