Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40229351›Full record

ArticleCommunications psychology2025

Learning about color from language.

Qiawen Liu, Jeroen van Paridon, Gary Lupyan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Communications psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–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. Article
  2. Article
  3. Do Language Models Know Who Did What to Whom?Open mind : discoveries in cognitive science · 2026
    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

3 authors.

Qiawen Liu *Department of Psychology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, 53706, USA. ql3814@princeton.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0003-5702-2032
Jeroen van Paridon *Department of Psychology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, 53706, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5384-8772
Gary LupyanDepartment of Psychology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, 53706, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8441-7433

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Certain colors are strongly associated with certain adjectives (e.g. red is hot, blue is cold). Some of these associations are grounded in visual experiences such as seeing glowing red embers. Surprisingly, despite having no visual experience, many congenitally blind people show very similar color associations which are likely learned through language. We show that these associations are indeed embedded in the statistical structure of language. We apply a projection method to word embeddings trained on corpora of spoken and written language to identify color-adjective associations as they are represented in English. These projections were predictive of color-adjective associations reported by blind and sighted English speakers. The most predictive projections were generated by embeddings derived from a corpus of fiction, which outperformed even the state-of-the-art large language model, GPT-4. By augmenting the training corpora in various ways we discover the types of sentences most responsible for conveying the color-adjective associations to the models. We find that word embedding models learn these associations from indirect (second-order) co-occurrences, and that when prompted, people are able to identify some of the words that are most informative for associating colors with specific adjectives. Learning through linguistic co-occurrences is one way word meanings can be continually aligned across language users despite large variations in perceptual experience.

Identifiers

PMID40229351
PMCPMC11997174

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.