Table 1.
Nobile [15]’s results of sound symbolic associations between consonant features and visual shapes.
Table 2.
Congruent and incongruent associations of visual and phonetic stimuli according to previous studies.
Table 3.
Number of words and pseudowords for each category of consonants in the experimental material.
Fig 1.
Original frame used in Westbury [9]’s experiment (left) and corresponding edited frame in our experiment (right).
Fig 2.
The 16 frames used in the experiment.
The top eight frames are considered spiky, the lower eight rounded.
Fig 3.
The Agency FB and Gabriola fonts used in the experiment.
The Agency FB font (bottom) is the angular font, and the Gabriola font (top) the curvy font.
Fig 4.
Examples of trials with two pseudowords.
On the left, the pseudoword is presented in a round frame with the angular font, on the right in a spiky frame with the curvy font (Gabriola).
Table 4.
Distribution of experimental stimuli with respect to type of frame, font and category of consonants.
Table 5.
Likelihood ratio tests for the fixed predictors of response times for pseudowords in a Generalized Gamma gamlss model.
Fig 5.
Interaction between Type of Frame and Font for pseudowords.
Marginal locations are displayed numerically (white figures) and graphically for the four conditions Spiky Frames & Angular Font, Spiky Frames & Curvy Font, Round Frames & Angular Font and Round Frames & Curvy Font. Vertical bars report the confidence intervals for the four means. Significance levels of pairwise comparisons of these conditions are reported above. P-values have been corrected for multiple comparisons with Holm’s method.
Table 6.
Likelihood ratio tests for the fixed predictors of response times for words in a Generalized Gamma gamlss model.
Fig 6.
Interaction between Type of Frame and Font for words.
Marginal locations are displayed numerically (white figures) and graphically for the four conditions Spiky Frames & Angular Font, Spiky Frames & Curvy Font, Round Frames & Angular Font and Round Frames & Curvy Font. Vertical bars report the confidence intervals for the four locations. Significance levels of pairwise comparisons of these conditions are reported above. P-values have been corrected for multiple comparisons with Holm’s method.
Fig 7.
Interaction between Type of Frame and Category of Consonant for words.
Marginal locations are displayed numerically (white figures) and graphically for height different conditions. Vertical bars report the confidence intervals for the four locations.