ArticleBehavior research methods2025
A lexical database of British Sign Language (BSL) and German Sign Language (DGS): Iconicity ratings, iconic strategies, and concreteness norms.
Article in Behavior research methods, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Iconicity and transparency in Dutch Sign Language.Behavior research methods · 2026Article
- Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Iconicity, understood as a resemblance relationship between meaning and form, is an important variable that has important psycholinguistic effects in lexical processing and language learning across modalities of language. With the growing interest in iconicity, clear operationalizations in terms of the different ways in which iconicity is construed and measured are critical for establishing its broader psycholinguistic profile. This study reports a normed database of iconicity ratings for the same concepts in British Sign Language (BSL) and German Sign Language (DGS). As a related dimension, we also report the type of iconic mapping strategy, i.e., a nominal variable that reflects the different ways in which signs make form-meaning associations for each sign. Finally, we include concreteness ratings for the same concepts. Data from deaf and hearing signers show that iconicity ratings are strongly correlated across both languages, with different distributions across the different strategies, and skewed towards the iconic end of the scale for all groups except German hearing non-signers. Concreteness ratings in BSL and DGS are correlated, though more weakly, and skewed towards the concrete end of the scale. Interestingly, this differs from findings for spoken languages, where concreteness ratings exhibit substantially stronger correlations and abstract concepts are more predominantly represented. We also find that iconicity and concreteness ratings have a moderate positive and strong positive correlation in BSL and DGS, respectively. These results will be useful in psycholinguistic research and highlight differences that can be attributed to the manual-visual modality of signs.
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.