@article{RofesZakariasCederetal.2018,
  author    = {Rofes, Adria and Zakarias, Lilla and Ceder, Klaudia and Lind, Marianne and Johansson, Monica Blom and de Aguiar, Vania and Bjekic, Jovana and Fyndanis, Valantis and Gavarro, Anna and Simonsen, Hanne Gram and Hernandez Sacristan, Carlos and Kambanaros, Maria and Kraljevic, Jelena Kuva and Martinez-Ferreiro, Silvia and Mavis, Ilknur and Mendez Orellana, Carolina and Sor, Ingrid and Lukacs, Agnes and Tuncer, Muge and Vuksanovic, Jasmina and Munarriz Ibarrola, Amaia and Pourquie, Marie and Varlokosta, Spyridoula and Howard, David},
  title     = {Imageability ratings across languages},
  series = {Behavior research methods : a journal of the Psychonomic Society},
  volume    = {50},
  journal   = {Behavior research methods : a journal of the Psychonomic Society},
  number    = {3},
  publisher = {Springer},
  address   = {New York},
  issn      = {1554-351X},
  doi       = {10.3758/s13428-017-0936-0},
  pages     = {1187 -- 1197},
  year      = {2018},
  abstract  = {Imageability is a psycholinguistic variable that indicates how well a word gives rise to a mental image or sensory experience. Imageability ratings are used extensively in psycholinguistic, neuropsychological, and aphasiological studies. However, little formal knowledge exists about whether and how these ratings are associated between and within languages. Fifteen imageability databases were cross-correlated using nonparametric statistics. Some of these corresponded to unpublished data collected within a European research network-the Collaboration of Aphasia Trialists (COST IS1208). All but four of the correlations were significant. The average strength of the correlations (rho = .68) and the variance explained (R (2) = 46\%) were moderate. This implies that factors other than imageability may explain 54\% of the results. Imageability ratings often correlate across languages. Different possibly interacting factors may explain the moderate strength and variance explained in the correlations: (1) linguistic and cultural factors; (2) intrinsic differences between the databases; (3) range effects; (4) small numbers of words in each database, equivalent words, and participants; and (5) mean age of the participants. The results suggest that imageability ratings may be used cross-linguistically. However, further understanding of the factors explaining the variance in the correlations will be needed before research and practical recommendations can be made.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{Miklashevsky2017,
  author    = {Miklashevsky, Alex A.},
  title     = {Perceptual experience norms for 506 Russian nouns},
  series = {Journal of Psycholinguistic Research},
  volume    = {47},
  journal   = {Journal of Psycholinguistic Research},
  number    = {3},
  publisher = {Springer},
  address   = {New York},
  issn      = {0090-6905},
  doi       = {10.1007/s10936-017-9548-1},
  pages     = {641 -- 661},
  year      = {2017},
  abstract  = {A number of new psycholinguistic variables has been proposed during the last years within embodied cognition framework: modality experience rating (i.e., relationship between words and images of a particular perceptive modality-visual, auditory, haptic etc.), manipulability (the necessity for an object to interact with human hands in order to perform its function), vertical spatial localization. However, it is not clear how these new variables are related to each other and to such traditional variables as imageability, AoA and word frequency. In this article, normative data on the modality (visual, auditory, haptic, olfactory, and gustatory) ratings, vertical spatial localization of the object, manipulability, imageability, age of acquisition, and subjective frequency for 506 Russian nouns are presented. Strongest correlations were observed between olfactory and gustatory modalities (.81), visual modality and imageability (.78), haptic modality and manipulability (.7). Other modalities also significantly correlate with imageability: olfactory (.35), gustatory (.24), and haptic (.67). Factor analysis divided variables into four groups where visual and haptic modality ratings were combined with imageability, manipulability and AoA (the first factor); word length, frequency and AoA formed the second factor; olfactory modality was united with gustatory (the third factor); spatial localization only is included in the fourth factor. Present norms of imageability and AoA are consistent with previous as correlation analysis has revealed. The complete database can be downloaded from supplementary material.},
  language  = {en}
}