The Hue of Concepts

Abstract

The study shows a systematic naturally biased association between percepts and concepts. Specifically, it shows that a series of terms pertaining to an abstract semantic field (related to the frame of ethics in social behaviour) has a nonrandom, highly significant, association with colours (hues). This is the first time that consistent associations between abstract terms and colours have been reported in the general population. The main hypothesis, ie that there appear to be 'hues of concepts', was borne out by the results: the abstract terms considered were coloured with blue/green (ie cool) colours as well as their synonyms, while their antonyms were coloured with red/yellow (ie warm) colours. The association provides information about the nature of abstract concepts and their relationship with perception. It also sheds light on the interrelations among words in semantic domains that, to date, have been studied from only a computational viewpoint.

The Semantics of Biological Forms

“…We tested the biological forms analysed in a previous study (Dadam et al, 2012) by making use of the Osgood semantic differential, which is the most appropriate for this type of analysis because it provides a rating scale designed to measure the connotative meaning of forms, and because it is based on adjectives. If shown to be consistent, the regularity of the associations between certain characteristics of biological appearances and specific adjectives would support the idea of a correspondence, not only between different dimensions of the visual modality, as already suggested in previous studies, but also between perceptual and connotative processes in language (Albertazzi, Canal, Micciolo, & Malfatti, 2013;Ramachandran & Hubbard, 2001). This would lead to the conclusion that the relation between natural language categories and perceptual characteristics of forms, also those with expressive value, are not ad hoc or the result of symbolic, conventional associations in natural languages but can probably be assumed to be universally rooted in perception itself (Gibbs, 2005;Hampe & Grady, 2005;Shibuya, Nozawa, & Kanamaru, 2007).…”

Cross-Modal Perceptual Organization in Works of Art

“…The questionnaire reported this information. The participants were also asked about possible conscious synesthesia ( Albertazzi et al., 2013 ; Albertazzi, Canal, & Micciolo, 2015 ; Palmer & Schloss, 2010 ; Palmer et al., 2013 ) and only one declared to be a synesthete. We did not include synesthesia among the exclusion criteria, as the aim was to evaluate the existence of naturally biased associations in the general population.…”

“…Over the years, a series of stimuli of increasing complexity have been tested providing evidence of the presence of cross-modal Gestalten organizing multisensory grouping. For example, cross-modal correspondences have been verified between abstract concepts and color mapping ( Albertazzi et al., 2013 ), between conceptual literary meanings and classical music ( Albertazzi, Canal, et al., 2016 ), between contents of contemporary expressionist painting and Spanish flamenco music ( Albertazzi, Canal, & Micciolo, 2015 ), and between contents of abstract paintings and tactile perceptions ( Albertazzi, Bacci, et al., 2016 ). The last four studies do not make use of methodologies such as reaction times or implicit association tests.…”

Experimental phenomenology for consciousness.

“…I have written extensively on the historical origins and the conceptual framework of experimental phenomenology (Albertazzi, 2013b, 2015b), its systematic claims (Albertazzi, 2013a, 2015b), the originality of the experimental proposal and its methodology (Albertazzi, 2018b, 2019), the issue of how to construct a mathematical model for a closed, creative system like psychology (Albertazzi & Louie, 2016), the kind of naturalization that phenomenology can or cannot allow (Albertazzi, 2018b), and the different concept of nature resulting from this conception (Albertazzi, 2020). I have also shown the fruitfulness of the approach by some recent experiments (e.g., Albertazzi, Bacci, Canal, & Micciolo, 2016; Albertazzi, Canal, Dadam, & Micciolo, 2014; Albertazzi, Canal, Malfatti, & Micciolo, 2013; Albertazzi, Canal, & Micciolo, 2015; Albertazzi, Canal, Dadam, & Micciolo, 2014; Albertazzi & da Pos, 2017; Albertazzi, Canal, da Pos, et al, 2013; Albertazzi, Malfatti, Canal, & Micciolo, 2014). For the single topics, I must necessarily refer to these studies.…”