ArticleScientific reports2024
Crossmodal correspondences between visual and speech angularity and tactile jaggedness of response key.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Several studies reported various crossmodal correspondences related to tactile features. These previous studies have investigated tactile-related correspondences through explicit matching or subjective evaluation tasks, which required participants to recognize relationships between tactile and other sensory features or rate tactile materials on scales with adjective labels related to visual or auditory features. However, these tasks are prone to occur the experimenter-expectancy effects and arbitrary categorization of tactile materials by the labels, making it difficult to assess implicit and non-arbitrary aspects of crossmodal correspondences. To address this, we used a speeded classification task to examine whether the angularity/roundedness of visual and auditory stimuli correspond to tactile jaggedness/fluffiness. Participants distinguished between angularity or roundedness (Experiment 1: visual shapes; Experiment 2: speech sounds) by pressing right- or left-positioned response keys with task-irrelevant jaggedness or fluffiness without prior instruction on which key represented jaggedness/fluffiness. Results showed faster keypresses for jagged/fluffy responses to angular/rounded stimuli, suggesting an implicit correspondence between these sensory features except for the experimenter-expectancy effects and the influence of the labels. Unlike previous studies that examined the correspondence with simple tactile features (e.g., weight, size), our findings suggest that even complex tactile-quality features, such as jaggedness/fluffiness, implicitly correspond to visual and auditory angularity/roundedness.
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.