English
 
Help Privacy Policy Disclaimer
  Advanced SearchBrowse

Item

ITEM ACTIONSEXPORT
  In search of the kiki-bouba effect

Lockwood, G., Drijvers, L., Hagoort, P., & Dingemanse, M. (2016). In search of the kiki-bouba effect. Poster presented at the Eighth Annual Meeting of the Society for the Neurobiology of Language (SNL 2016), London, UK.

Item is

Files

show Files

Locators

show

Creators

show
hide
 Creators:
Lockwood, Gwilym1, 2, Author           
Drijvers, Linda2, 3, Author           
Hagoort, Peter1, 4, Author           
Dingemanse, Mark5, Author           
Affiliations:
1Neurobiology of Language Department, MPI for Psycholinguistics, Max Planck Society, ou_792551              
2International Max Planck Research School for Language Sciences, MPI for Psycholinguistics, Max Planck Society, Nijmegen, NL, ou_1119545              
3Center for Language Studies , External Organizations, ou_55238              
4Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, ou_55236              
5Language and Cognition Department, MPI for Psycholinguistics, Max Planck Society, ou_792548              

Content

show
hide
Free keywords: Perception; Speech Perception and Audiovisual Integration
 Abstract: The kiki-bouba effect, where people map round shapes onto round sounds (such as [b] and [o]) and spiky shapes onto “spiky” sounds (such as [i] and [k]), is the most famous example of sound symbolism. Many behavioural variations have been reported since Köhler’s (1929) original experiments. These studies examine orthography (Cuskley, Simner, & Kirby, 2015), literacy (Bremner et al., 2013), and developmental disorders (Drijvers, Zaadnoordijk, & Dingemanse, 2015; Occelli, Esposito, Venuti, Arduino, & Zampini, 2013). Some studies have suggested that the cross-modal associations between linguistic sound and physical form in the kiki-bouba effect are quasi-synaesthetic (Maurer, Pathman, & Mondloch, 2006; Ramachandran & Hubbard, 2001). However, there is a surprising lack of neuroimaging data in the literature that explain how these cross-modal associations occur (with the exceptions of Kovic et al. (2010)and Asano et al. (2015)). We presented 24 participants with randomly generated spiky or round figures and 16 synthesised, reduplicated CVCV (vowels: [i] and [o], consonants: [f], [v], [t], [d], [s], [z], [k], and [g]) nonwords based on Cuskley et al. (2015). This resulted in 16 nonwords across four conditions: full match, vowel match, consonant match, and full mismatch. Participants were asked to rate on a scale of 1 to 7 how well the nonword fit the shape it was presented with. EEG was recorded throughout, with epochs timelocked to the auditory onset of the nonword. There were significant behavioural effects of condition (p<0.0001). Bonferroni t-tests show participants rated full match more highly than full mismatch nonwords. However, there was no reflection of this behavioural effect in the ERP waveforms. One possible reason for the absence of an ERP effect is that this effect may jitter over a broad latency range. Currently oscillatory effects are being analysed, since these are less dependent on precise time-locking to the triggering events.

Details

show
hide
Language(s): eng - English
 Dates: 2016
 Publication Status: Not specified
 Pages: -
 Publishing info: -
 Table of Contents: -
 Rev. Type: Peer
 Identifiers: -
 Degree: -

Event

show
hide
Title: the Eighth Annual Meeting of the Society for the Neurobiology of Language (SNL 2016)
Place of Event: London, UK
Start-/End Date: 2016-08-17 - 2016-08-20

Legal Case

show

Project information

show

Source

show