Emojis en Tareas de Categorización: una Nueva Forma de Evaluar el Conocimiento Conceptual

Macarena Martínez-Cuitiño; Dolores Jazmín Zamora; Nicolás Nahuel Romero; Juan Pablo Barreyro

doi:10.46553/RPSI.19.38.2023.p25-40

Authors

Macarena Martínez-Cuitiño Institute of Cognitive and Translational Neuroscience (INCyT). Neuropsychology and Language Research Laboratory; National Council for Scientific and Technical Research (CONICET) Buenos Aires' University. Faculty of Psychology https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4912-1626
Dolores Jazmín Zamora Institute of Cognitive and Translational Neuroscience (INCyT). Neuropsychology and Language Research Laboratory; National Council for Scientific and Technical Research (CONICET) Favaloro University. Faculty of Human and Behavioral Sciences https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2073-416X
Nicolás Nahuel Romero Institute of Cognitive and Translational Neuroscience (INCyT). Neuropsychology and Language Research Laboratory; National Council for Scientific and Technical Research (CONICET) Favaloro University. Faculty of Human and Behavioral Sciences https://orcid.org/0009-0001-7938-6668
Juan Pablo Barreyro National Council for Scientific and Technical Research (CONICET). Interdisciplinary Research Center in Mathematical and Experimental Psychology (CIIPME) Buenos Aires' University. Faculty of Psychology https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1606-1049

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.46553/RPSI.19.38.2023.p25-40

Keywords:

emoji, color diagnosticity, concepts, categorization task

Abstract

Emoji represent a new pictorial format with which we interact daily. They incorporate certain characteristics that have been postulated as fundamental semantic attributes to disambiguate the access to conceptual meaning from a visual input: the diagnostic color and the prototypical shape in its representation. The aim of this study is to assess the impact of this material on accessing conceptual meaning. A computerized categorization task was administered. Concepts from living things and object domains, both with high color diagnosticity and low prototypicality form were assessed. The results identified an advantage for those with high color diagnosticity, being more pronounced for natural elements. Furthermore, an advantage was identified in the living things domain.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Adlington, R. L., Laws, K. R., & Gale, T. M. (2009). The Hatfield Image Test (HIT): A new picture test and norms for experimental and clinical use. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 31(6), 731–753. https://doi.org/10.1080/13803390802488103

Alario, F. X. & Ferrand, L. (1999). A set of 400 pictures standardized for French: Norms for name agreement, image agreement, familiarity, visual complexity, image variability, and age of acquisition. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 31(3), 531-552.https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03200732

Bramão, I., Faísca, L., Forkstam, C., Reis, A., & Petersson, K. M. (2010). Cortical Brain Regions Associated with Color Processing: An FMRi Study. The Open Neuroimaging Journal, 4(0), 164–173. https://doi.org/10.2174/1874440001004010164

Brodeur, M. B., Dionne-Dostie, E., Montreuil, T., & Lepage, M. (2010). The bank of standardized stimuli (BOSS), a new set of 480 normative photos of objects to be used as visual stimuli in cognitive research. PLoS ONE, 5(5). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0010773

Capitani, E., Laiacona, M., Mahon, B. Z., & Caramazza, A. (2003). What are the facts of semantic category-specific deficits? A critical review of the clinical evidence. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 20, 213–261. https://doi.org/10.1080/02643290244000266

Caramazza, A. (1998). The interpretation of semantic category-specific deficits: What do they reveal about the organization of conceptual knowledge in the brain? Neurocase, 4, 265–272. https://doi.org/10.1080/13554799808410627

Carroll, J. B. & White, M. N. (1973). Word frequency and age of acquisition as determiners of picture-naming latency. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 25(1), 85-95. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14640747308400325

Coppens, P. & Frisinger, D. (2005). Category-specific naming effect in non-brain-damaged individuals. Brain and Language, 94(1), 61–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2004.11.008

Danesi, M. (2017). The semiotics of emoji: The rise of visual language in the age of the internet. Bloomsbury Publishing.

Decuyper, C., Brysbaert, M., Brodeur, M. B., & Meyer, A. S. (2021). Bank of standardized stimuli (BOSS): Dutch names for 1400 photographs. Journal of Cognition, 4(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.5334/JOC.180

Forster, K. & Forster, J. (2003). DMDX: A Windows display program with millisecond accuracy. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 35(1), 116–124. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03195503

Funnell, E. & Sheridan, J. (1992). Categories of knowledge? Unfamiliar aspects of living and non-living things. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 9, 135–153. https://doi.org/10.1080/02643299208252056

Gaffan, D. & Heywood, C. (1993). A spurious category-specific visual agnosia for living things in normal human and nonhuman primates. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 5, 118–128. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn.1993.5.1.118

Gale, T. M., Laws, K. R., & Foley, K. (2006). Crowded and sparse domains in object recognition: Consequences for categorization and naming. Brain and Cognition, 60(2), 139–145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandc.2005.10.003

Gerlach, C. (2009). Category-specificity in visual object recognition. Cognition, 111(3), 281–301. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2009.02.005

Gerlach, C. (2016). Normal and abnormal category-effects in visual object recognition: A legacy of Glyn W. Humphreys. Visual Cognition, 25(1–3), 60–78. https://doi.org/10.1080/13506285.2016.1258022

Halverson, C. M. E., Donnelly, C. E., Weiner, M., & Lee, J. L. (2023). Content Analysis of Emoji and Emoticon Use in Clinical Texting Systems. JAMA Network Open, 6(6), e2318140. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.18140

Karst, A. T. & Clapham, E. S. (2019). An examination of differential repetition priming effects for natural and man-made objects. Journal of General Psychology, 146(4), 339–364. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221309.2019.1585322

Krautz, A. E. & Keuleers, E. (2021). LinguaPix database: A megastudy of picture-naming norms. Behavior Research Methods, June. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-021-01651-0

Laws, K. R. (2000). Category-specificity naming errors in normal subjects: The influence of evolution and experience. Brain and Language, 75, 123-133. https://doi.org/10.1006/brln.2000.2348

Laws, K. R. & Neve, C. (1999). A `normal` category-specific advantage for naming living things. Neuropsychologia, 37, 1263-1269. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0028-3932(99)00018-4

Lloyd-Jones, T. J. & Humphreys, G. W. (1997). Perceptual differentiation as a source of category effects in object processing: evidence from naming and object decision. Memory and Cognition, 25, 18–35. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03197282

Manoiloff, L., Artstein, M., Canavoso, M., Fernández, L., & Seguí, J. (2010). Expanded norms for 400 experimental pictures in an Argentinean Spanish-speaking population. Behavior Research Methods, 42(2), 452-460. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/BRM.42.2.452

Martínez-Cuitiño, M., Barreyro, J. P., Wilson, M., & Jaichenco, V. (2015). Nuevas normas semánticas y de tiempos de latencia para un set de 400 dibujos en español. Interdisciplinaria, 32(2), 289–305. http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=18043528006

Martínez-Cuitiño, M. & Jaichenco, V. (2015). Seres vivos y artefactos: ¿Efectos categoriales producto de la ausencia de color en tareas de denominación de dibujos? Escritos en Psicología, 8, 57-68.

Martínez-Cuitiño, M., Peccin, A., Soriano, F. G., & Barreyro, J. P. (2019). Denominación y categorización de dibujos con y sin color. Cuadernos de Neuropsicología, 13(2), 37–45.

Martínez, N. & Matute, H. (2019). Examining the influence of picture format on children’s naming responses. PeerJ, 2019(10). https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.7692

Martínez, N., Matute, H., & Goikoetxea, E. (2020). Picpsy: A new bank of 106 photographs and line drawings with written naming norms for spanish-speaking children and adults. PLoS ONE, 15(9), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0238976

Moisset, X., Attal, N., & Ciampi de Andrade, D. (2022). An Emoji-Based Visual Analog Scale Compared With a Numeric Rating Scale for Pain Assessment. JAMA, 328(19), 1980. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2022.16940

Moreno-Martínez, F. J. & Moratilla-Pérez, I. (2016). Naming and categorization in healthy participants: Crowded domains and blurred effects of gender. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 19, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1017/sjp.2016.59

Moreno-Martínez, F. J. & Montoro, P. R. (2012). An ecological alternative to Snodgrass & Vanderwart: 360 high quality colour images with norms for seven psycholinguistic variables. PLoS ONE, 7(5), 34–42. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0037527

Nagai, J. & Yokosawa, K. (2003). What regulates the surface color effect in object recognition: Color diagnosticity or category. Technical Report on Attention and Cognition, 28(28), 1–4. http://staff.aist.go.jp/jun.kawahara/AandC/3/nagai.pdf

Ni, L., Liu, Y., Yu, W., & Fu, X. (2019). The China Image Set (CIS): A New Set of 551 Colored Photos With Chinese Norms for 12 Psycholinguistic Variables. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02631

Nisi, M., Longoni, A. M., & Snodgrass, J. G. (2000). Misure italiane per l'accordo sul nome, familiarità ed età di acquisizione, per le 260 figure di Snodgrass e Vanderwart (1980). Giornale Italiano di Psicologia, 27(1), 205-220. http://dx.doi.org/10.1421/288

O’Sullivan, M., Lepage, M., Bouras, M., Montreuil, T., & Brodeur, M. B. (2012). North-American Norms for Name Disagreement: Pictorial Stimuli Naming Discrepancies. PLoS ONE, 7(10). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0047802

Pind, J., Jónsdóttir, H., Tryggvadóttir, H. B., & Jónsson, F. (2000). Icelandic norms for the Snodgrass and Vanderwart (1980) pictures: name and image agreement, familiarity, and age of acquisition. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 41, 41-48. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-9450.00169

Piñeiro, A., Manzano, M., & Reigosa, V. (1997). Estudio de las características de un conjunto de 260 figuras en sujetos adultos de habla hispana. Cognitiva, 9, 29-64.

Rossion, B. & Pourtois, G. (2004). Revisiting Snodgrass and Vanderwart’s object pictorial set: The role of surface detail in basic-level object recognition. Perception, 33, 217–236. https://doi.org/10.1068/p5117

Russo, N., Hagmann, C. E., Andrews, R., Black, C., Silberman, M., & Shea, N. (2018). Validation of the C.A.R.E. stimulus set of 640 animal pictures: Name agreement and quality ratings. PLoS ONE, 13(2), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0192906

Sabsevitz, D. S., Medler, D. A., Seidenberg, M., & Binder, J. R. (2005). Modulation of the semantic system by word imageability. NeuroImage, 27(1), 188–200. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2005.04.012

Salmon, J. P., Matheson, H. E., & McMullen, P. A. (2014). Photographs of manipulable objects are named more quickly than the same objects depicted as line-drawings: Evidence that photographs engage embodiment more than line-drawings. Frontiers in Psychology, 5(OCT), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01187

Sanfeliu, M. C. & Fernández, A. (1996). A set of 254 Snodgrass-Vanderwart pictures standardized for Spanish: Norms for name agreement, image agreement, familiarity, and visual complexity. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 28, 537-555. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03200541

Saryazdi, R., Bannon, J., Rodrigues, A., Klammer, C., & Chambers, C. G. (2018). Picture perfect: A stimulus set of 225 pairs of matched clipart and photographic images normed by Mechanical Turk and laboratory participants. Behavior Research Methods, 50(6), 2498–2510. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-018-1028-5

Schouteten, J. J., Llobell, F., Chheang, S. L., Jin, D., & Jaeger, S. R. (2023). Emoji meanings (pleasure–arousal–dominance dimensions) in consumer research: Between-country and interpersonal differences. Journal of Food Science, 88, 106–121. https://doi.org/10.1111/1750-3841.16374

Snodgrass, J. G. & Yuditsky, T. (1996). Naming times for the Snodgrass and Vanderwart pictures. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers, 28(4), 516–536. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/BF03200540

Snodgrass, J. S. & Vanderwart, M. (1980). A Standardized Set of 260 Pictures: Norms for Name Agreement, Image Agreement, Familiarity, and Visual Complexity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 6(2), 174–215. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.6.2.174

Souza, C., Garrido, M. V., & Carmo, J. C. (2020). A systematic review of normative studies using images of common objects. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 573314. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.573314

Tanaka, J. & Presnell, L. M. (1999). Color diagnosticity in object recognition. Perception & Psychophysics, 61, 1140–1153. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03207619

Tanaka, J., Weiskopf, D., & Williams, P. (2001). The role of color in high-level vision. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 5, 211–215. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-6613(00)01626-0

Tsaparina, D., Bonin, P., & Méot, A. (2011). Russian norms for name agreement, image agreement for the colorized version of the Snodgrass and Vanderwart pictures and age of acquisition, conceptual familiarity, and imageability scores for modal object names. Behavior Research Methods, 43, 1085-1099. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-011-0121-9

Vivas, J., Vivas, L., Comesaña, A., Coni, A. G., & Vorano, A. (2016). Spanish semantic feature production norms for 400 concrete concepts. Behavior Research Methods, 49(3), 1095–1106. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-016-0777-2

Warrington, E. K. & McCarthy, R. A. (1983). Category-specific access dysphasia. Brain, 106, 859–879. https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/106.4.859

Warrington, E. K. & Shallice, T. (1984). Category specific semantic impairments. Brain, 107, 829–854. https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/107.3.829

Witzel, C., Olkkonen, M., & Gegenfurtner, K. R. (2016). Memory colours affect colour appearance. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 39, 51–52. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X15002587