1
Different blues in the same language: idiomatic variations and the perception of the color blue in Uruguay and Spain. Gonzalez Perillli, Fernando; Rebollo, Ignacio; Morales Geribón, Nicolasa, Arévalo, Analía y Maiche Marini, Alejandro. 1. Laboratorio de Percepción y Psicofísica, Grupo PLIT Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona, 2. CIBPsi, Universidad de la República (Uruguay); 3. Center for Aphasia and Related Disorders EBIRE (USA), 4.CAIAC. INTRODUCTION Referencias : Winawer, Witthoft , Frank, Wu, Wade, and Boroditsky,L, Russian blues reveal effects of language on color discrimination, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 104 (2007), pp. 7780–7785. Whorf, B. (1956). Language, thought, and reality: selected writings of… . (Edited by John B. Carroll.). Oxford England: Technology Press of MIT. J., N. M.C., L., A.R. Figure 1 Colors chips employed in the experimental study Figure 4, example of stimuli empoyed in verbal interference blocks CONCLUSION 63948327 63948827 RESULTS Centro de Investigación Básica en Psicología Camiseta de la selección uruguaya de fútbol Camiseta de la selección argentina de fútbol Figure 3, example of stimuli empoyed in spatial interference blocks Figure 2, example of stimuli empoyed in verbal colour discrimantion trials. METHOD For each group, there was a highly significant main effect of distance: in Spaniards [1005 vs. 804 msec, near color vs. far color; F (1, 17) = 40.946; P = 0.000] and Uruguayans [1200 vs. 943 msec; F (1, 15) = 73.344; P = 0.000].Adittionally Category reflected a significant effect in both groups, Spain, [941 vs 868 msec., within category vs. cross category F (1, 17) = 8.962; P = 0.008], Uruguay [1129 vs. 1014, F (1, 15) = 18.011; P = 0.001] VA Northern California Health Care System Several studies about color discrimination comparing speakers of different languages have shown a facilitation effect in groups that employ more than one term to refer to a certain color. This effect has been traditionally explained by the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis that suggests a link between language and perception. In this study, we carried out a discrimination color task with spanish and uruguayan speakers using the same experimental design developed by Winawer et. al. (2007) which compared the performances between English and Russian speakers. In our case, two populations of speakers with the same language (Spanish) from different countries (Uruguay and Spain) were compared taking into account the linguistic difference referring to the shades of the blue color. While uruguayans have two different terms to refer to the dark and light blue (celeste and azul) spaniards employ just one (azul). Participants had to discriminate stimuli that could be either in the same color category (i.e Both dark blue or both light blue) or in a different one (one light blue and the other dark blue) Results showed a higher accuracy for the Uruguayan group in the discrimination task when the comparison were made across different color categories. However, contrary to what we expected, there were no differences in the Reaction Time. This study, which is pioneer comparing two groups with the same language, contributes to the discussion of whether language or other cultural variables affect the perceptual processes of color discrimination tasks. Participants: Barcelona: 20, Montevideo: 20 Procedure: Materials and Design Participants completed three blocks of 136 color discrimination trials each. One regular block, another block in which the participant also performed a secondary verbal interference task, and a third block in which the participant performed a spatial interference task (control). Color Stimuli. 20 computer-simulated color chips (2.5 cm side) were created for this study, ranging from light blue ('azul celeste' in Spain and 'celeste' in Uruguay) to dark blue ('azul oscuro' in Spain and 'azul' in Uruguay). (Fig. 1). The Commission Internationale de l'Eclairage (CIE) Yxy coordinates ranged from 84, 0.214, 0.255 (stimulus 1) to 5.3, 0.154, 0.09 (stimulus 20). The stimuli differed primarily in the luminance axis (Y) and the y chromaticity axis. The color squares were 2.5 cm per side, and subjects viewed the screen from 60 cm. In subsequent trials, participants carried out the same task, once with an additional digit span (memory) task (see fig 4) and once with a spatial interference task (see fig 3). : Participants were also asked to categorize the 20 stimuli into either dark or light blue, in order to detect the color boundary between categories in both groups Participants were presented with a color discrimination task (see Fig. 2) and had to decide which of the two lower squares matched the one above. Interference Conditions: Spatial interference: Participants viewed a 4 x 4 square grid of which four random squares were shaded black (Fig. 3). Subjects were instructed to remember the grid pattern by maintaining a picture of it in their mind until tested. A two-choice test was given after eight color discrimination trials. Verbal interference: Participants had to rehearse eight-digit number series (Fig. 4) during the color task. This series was presented for 3 sec. Subjects rehearsed the number series while completing eight color discrimination trials; their recall was then Basic Task: tested by having them choose between the original series and a foil which differed by one digit. Border detection task Participants completed a fourth block in order to test each subject color boundary between dark and light blue. Participants were shown the 20 stimuli (ten times each) in random order and asked to classify each color with a key press, either celeste or azul (for Uruguayans) or azul claro vs.azul oscuro (for Spanish Spanish speakers).Subjects were instructed to make all judgments as quickly and accurately as possible. Bars show means Results revealed that Uruguayan participants were significantly more accurate at matching blue color squares when the distracter square was from a different linguistic category (cross-category). Interestingly, Spanish participants did not display such an advantage (with the exception of the verbal interference condition task). These findings suggest that the linguistic distinction found in Uruguayan Spanish gives these participants an advantage when conducting a task that uses linguistic terms but is not, strictly speaking, a linguistic task. These findings are in line with those found by Winawer et al. (2007); in this study, the Uruguayan profile was closest to that of the Russians, while the Spanish participants performed similarly to the American group. Because the Spanish participants have an 'intermediate' way of naming light blues which includes both color terms (azul celeste), we predicted that Spanish participants might differ from Uruguayans but also from the American group in Winawer et al. (2007). Future work will include testing more participants and conducting further analyses of the conditions in order to see whether this prediction holds true. 2 2 2 3 1y 2, 4 f[email protected] Corresponding author: URUGUAY SPAIN * Within category Cross category Accuracy Within category Cross category Color discrimination 90 85 80 75 Separate 2 x 3 x 2 repeated-measures ANOVAs was calculated for each group (Uruguay and Spain), with the factors of distance (near color vs. far color), interference (none vs. spatial vs. verbal), and category (between vs. within). Within as well as collapsed across conditions (basic, verbal, spatial), Uruguayans were significantly more accurate in the cross-category (vs. within-category) trials [F (1, 15) = 5.533; P = 0.033]. This effect was not found for the Spanish group [.88 vs. .88;F (1, 17) = 0.169; P = 0.686] The effect of distance was present in Spain, F (1, 17) = 43.308; P = 0.000 (.828 vs .939, near vs. far); and Uruguay, F (1, 15) = 83.388; P = 0.000 (.751 vs. .941) URUGUAY SPAIN * Within category Cross category RT Within category Cross category 1200 1100 1000 900 800 URUGUAY SPAIN * Within category Cross category Accuracy Within category Cross category 90 85 80 75 70 Bars show means Accuracy Reaction Times 700 * DISTANCE CATEGORY URUGUAY SPAIN * Within category Cross category RT Within category Cross category 1200 1100 1000 900 800 Bars show means 700 * DISTANCE * Centre d'Accessibilitat i Intel·ligència Ambiental de Catalunya
