ArticleBehavior research methods2024
Affordance norms for 2825 concrete nouns.
Article in Behavior research methods, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objects are commonly described based on their relations to other objects (e.g., associations, semantic similarity, etc.) or their physical features (e.g., birds have wings, feathers, etc.). However, objects can also be described in terms of their actionable properties (i.e., affordances), which reflect interactive relations between actors and objects. While several normed datasets have been developed to categorize various aspects of meaning (e.g., semantic features, cue-target associations, etc.), to date, norms for affordances have not been generated. We address this limitation by developing a set of affordance norms for 2825 concrete nouns. Using an open-response format, we computed affordance strength (AFS; i.e., the probability of an item eliciting a particular action response), affordance proportion (AFP; i.e., the proportion of participants who provided a specific action response), and affordance set size (AFSS; i.e., the total number of unique action responses) for each item. Because our stimuli overlapped with Pexman et al.'s, Behavior Research Methods, 51, 453-466, (2019) body-object interaction norms (BOI), we tested whether AFS, AFP, and AFSS were related to BOI, as objects with more perceived action properties may be viewed as being more interactive. Additionally, we tested the relationship between AFS and AFP and two separate measures of relatedness: cosine similarity (Buchanan et al., Behavior Research Methods, 51, 1849-1863, 2019a, Behavior Research Methods, 51, 1878-1888, 2019b) and forward associative strength (Nelson et al., Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36(3), 402-407, 2004). All analyses, however, revealed weak relationships between affordance measures and existing semantic norms, suggesting that affordance properties reflect a separate construct.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39168920What 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.