ArticleAttention, perception & psychophysics2025
Influence of simple crossmodal correspondence on interpretation of spoken intent.
Article in Attention, perception & psychophysics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The lightness/pitch crossmodal correspondence modulates reported dominance in binocular rivalry.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Crossmodal correspondences (CMCs) are consistent associations between sensory features from different modalities. Previous research has demonstrated that these pairings can be recruited in the resolution of the Rubin face-vase illusion. This research builds upon and expands these findings into the resolution of language ambiguity. The study uses the feature pairings of elevation/pitch, lightness/pitch, and size/pitch to influence the perceived intonation of a spoken utterance. Participants listened to a range of auditory stimuli, varying in their intent, and attempted to classify them as questions or statements. We found that change in the irrelevant visual features of elevation or lightness could bias their judgements in a manner consistent with an actual change in the pitch of the auditory stimulus. Size/pitch does not appear to affect language judgements, and we confirm this in a series of follow-up experiments. This suggests that simple crossmodal correspondences can influence high-level ambiguity resolution, at least in some cases. These findings have important implications for the use of visual cues in audiovisual language studies such as the visual world paradigm.
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.