[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
I think it's important to segregate the contribution of exciter (or non
sounding object) and resonator (or sounding object).
I run an experiment where people estimated the size of balls (i.e., a
non sounding object) that were dropped upon a plate (i.e., a sounding
object). In the experiment I varied either balls' mass (i.e., the size)
or plates' diameter.
Size estimates had a very high correlation with the sound's power,
therefore with the sound's loundness (r^2 between sound's power and size
estimate were between .97 and .99). The correlation between spectral
centroid (an good candidate for an "estimate of pitch" if you like) and
size were lower (.92. to .97).
Therefore, there is, for a peculiar class of objects (i.e., non sounding
objects), a link between size and loudness.
Grassi, M. (2005). Do we hear size or sound: balls dropped on plates.
Perception & Psychophysics, 67(2), 274-284.
Does anyone know of experimental psychological data reported which
refutes (or not) the hypothesis: the perception of object O as “has
/much/ of quality X” predisposes to the perception also of “has /much/
of quality Y”? E.g., is there empirical evidence for cross-modal bonds
like "large objects (much of size) are loud objects (much of sound)" ?
Although I see brain research approaching the subject (e.g.
http://www.dhushara.com/pdf/synesthesia.pdf) I have not (yet) found so
much empirical psychology about such metaphors. I may not have studied
carefully enough the synaestesia literature, but appreciate any more
specific ‘forwardings’ then.
Pieter Jan Stallen / Chair Community Noise Annoyance / University of
Leiden / Netherlands
Massimo Grassi - PhD
Dipartimento di Psicologia Generale
Via Venezia 8 - 35131 Padova - Italy