Edited by Pamela Perniss, Olga Fischer and Christina Ljungberg
[Iconicity in Language and Literature 17] 2020
► pp. 213–230
Show me how you feel
Iconicity and systematicity in visual morphology
Visual representations are an ideal place to look at the balance of iconicity and systematicity, given that visual images often look like what they represent but also can be characterized along a scale from highly photorealistic to highly schematic or cartoony. Here we examine the contrast between different styles by presenting participants with “visual morphology” of upfixes – representations like hearts or lightbulbs that float above faces – where the face and/or upfix are either cartoony or photorealistic. Overall, we find that cartoony images, relative to photorealistic images, are easier to process, and therefore demand less attention and facilitate responding. We argue that these results support the view that drawings, and visual morphology, draw on schematic knowledge stored in long-term memory.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Methods
- 2.1Stimuli
- 2.2Participants
- 2.3Procedure
- 2.4Data analysis
- 3.Results
- 3.1Accuracy
- 3.2Response times
- 3.3Eye-tracking: Dwell times
- 3.4Eye-tracking: Number of fixations
- 3.5Eye-tracking: Entry time
- 4.Discussion
- 5.Conclusion
-
References
https://doi.org/10.1075/ill.17.13ken
References
Cited by
Cited by 1 other publications
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 06 january 2023. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.