Users
Forty-nine indigenous Language-talking people of Universitat Rovira i Virgili (Tarragona, Spain) took part in the latest auditory research. They had the typical age decades (SD = 6.thirty-two, variety = 19–58), 33 was indeed female (% of one’s take to), and you will 16 was boys (% of take to). No professionals were excluded from the analyses. People obtained informative credit because of their contribution.
Method of getting new norms
The latest database would be downloaded due to the fact a stick out file from this link: The new document is sold with next articles: word (Foreign-language phrase), ico-m (average iconicity of your own term), ico-sd (standard deviation of the iconicity of one’s term), ico-letter (quantity of participants who ranked the latest iconicity of the word), ico-dn (amount of members which indicated that it don’t understand phrase otherwise their meaning), audio-m (average iconicity of the word on the auditory modality), audio-sd (practical deviation of one’s iconicity of your word on the auditory modality), audio-letter (number of participants just who ranked the latest iconicity of your own keyword inside the the fresh auditory modality), audio-dn (level of participants which indicated that it don’t know the word or its definition in the auditory modality), and you can gcat (grammatical sounding the expression).
We calculated the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC; Koo Li, 2016) for each iconicity questionnaire to obtain the interrater reliability of the measure. To do this, we used the two-way random effects based on the absolute agreement of multiple raters (2,k). The ICCs were all statistically significant (all ps < .001), M = .99, SD = .00, range = .97–99, which strongly supports the reliability of the data.
Additionally, we compared our iconicity ratings with those of Perry et al. (2015). Although there were 238 Spanish words in common with that study, we selected only 197. We did this because some words in the Perry et al. study had a negative iconicity value because the authors used a scale ranging from ?5 to 5. In that scale, negative values indicated that the sound of the word suggested the opposite of its meaning, 0 https://datingranking.net/nl/nostringsattached-overzicht/ indicated that there was no relationship between the sound of a word and its meaning, and positive values indicated a congruent relationship between the sound of a word and its meaning. Hence, we excluded from the analyses the words that received a negative iconicity rating in Perry et al. (of note, a similar procedure was adopted by Sidhu Pexman, 2018). The correlation between the ratings of the two databases was significant albeit low, r = .29, p < .001. It has been suggested that subjective iconicity arises from participants' own experience with the world and/or language (Occhino, Anible, Wilkinson, Morfors, 2017). Individual susceptibility to the symbolic connotations of the words (Taylor Taylor, 1965) and increased consistency of the mapping between word forms and meanings with age (Taylor Taylor, 1962) also seem to play a role in how iconicity is subjectively perceived. Although the age of the participants was not reported in the Perry et al. study, age and/or individual differences might account for the low correlations between scores from their study and the current one. Methodological differences should be also considered, particularly regarding task instructions. In this sense, it is worth noting that Perry et al. asked participants to rate the stimuli on a scale varying from words that sound the opposite of what they mean to words that sound the same as what they mean. In contrast, in the current study we asked participants to score on a scale from a lack of resemblance to a close relationship between words' sound and meaning. In sum, although significant, the low correlation between the two normative studies points to the need for additional research using similar methodological settings to test the contribution of individual differences in language-related factors to the perceived relationship between word forms and meanings.