ArticlePsychological research2025
Assessing the limits on size-pitch mapping reveals the interplay between top-down and bottom-up influences on relative crossmodal correspondences.
Article in Psychological research, 2025. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Certain sensory dimensions, such as visual size and auditory pitch, are consistently associated, resulting in performance facilitation or inhibition. The mechanisms underlying these crossmodal correspondences are still the subject of debate: The relative or absolute nature of crossmodal mappings is connected to this debate, as an absolute mapping points to a bottom-up process, whereas a relative one is evidence of stronger top-down influences. Three experiments were conducted (including overall N = 207 participants), based on two different tasks, designed to explore a wide range of size-pitch crossmodal mappings. In Experiment 1, the participants were instructed to freely manipulate stimuli varing along a given dimension to 'match' the other. The results revealed evidence for a quasi-absolute mapping, but the correspondences shifted depending on the participants' auditory or visual attentional focus. In Experiment 2, the participants performed a visual speeded categorization task, involving a wide range of auditory task-irrelevant pitches, including the "preferred" ones, estimated on the basis of the results of Experiment 1. The results revealed a rather relative mapping, corroborating a top-down influence on the correspondence effect. Experiment 3 was designed to determine whether the relative mapping involved has boundary. The results confirmed that the larger the interval between pitches (i.e., more perceptually salient), the stronger the congruence effect, thus highlighting bottom-up facilitation. Taken together, these findings reveal that the size-pitch correspondences are sensitive to task-related top-down factors, as well as to stimulus-related bottom-up influences, ultimately revealing the adaptive nature of this kind of multisensory integration.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39960509What 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.