Aubrey L Gilbert’s research while affiliated with University of California, Berkeley and other places

What is this page?


This page lists works of an author who doesn't have a ResearchGate profile or hasn't added the works to their profile yet. It is automatically generated from public (personal) data to further our legitimate goal of comprehensive and accurate scientific recordkeeping. If you are this author and want this page removed, please let us know.

Publications (6)


Figure 1. Lexical categories influence perception in the RVF. (a) Print-rendered versions of the four colors used. (b) Sample display for the visual search task. Participants were required to press one of two response keys, indicating the side containing the target color. (c) In the no-interference condition, RTs were faster for the between- category pair and slower for the within-category pairs when targets appeared in the RVF compared with when they appeared in the LVF. (d) Effects were reversed with verbal interference. *, P ≤ 0.05, two-tailed t test, df 10; ns, non-significant. Values are mean ± SEM. Source: (Gilbert, Regier, Kay & Ivry 2006). 
Figure 2. Modulation of color-category effects in the RVF is specific to linguistic demands of the interference task. (a) Trial events. Within a block of trials, the visual search task was interleaved with blank displays, displays containing a color word, or displays containing a spatial grid. (b and c) No-interference and verbal-interference results replicate those obtained in the first experiment. (d) For the nonverbal-interference condition, performance followed a pattern similar to that observed in the no-interference condition. *, P ≤ 0.05, two-tailed t test, df 10; ns, non-significant. Values are mean  ±  SEM. Source: (Gilbert, Regier, Kay & Ivry 2006). 
Figure 3. The category effect is larger in the RVF than in the LVF in a reanalysis of the data from a color identification task used by Daoutis et al. (16). (a) Stimuli in CIE coordinates. The within-category set contains three hues of green: G1, G2, G3; the across-category set contains a blue (B), a purple (Pu), and a pink (Pi). Perceptual distance is the same for all adjacent pairs across both sets (G1-G2, G2-G3, B-Pu, and Pu-Pi). When a peripheral stimulus (e.g., G1) is the target, it is linearly separable from the distractors (G2 G3). (b) Illustration of a target-present trial with 15 distractors. The target is indicated here by the arrow, which, however, was not present in the display itself. (c and d) Target detection times for within- and across-category targets by LVF and RVF: collapsed across linear separability (c) and linearly separable targets alone (d). Error bars show 95% confidence limits. Source: (Drivonikou, Kay, Regier, Ivry, Gilbert, Franklin & Davies 2007). 
Figure 4. A larger category effect is observed in the RVF on a color detection task. (a) Munsell codes of the stimuli; stimuli varied in hue at constant value and chroma. Hue separations were either five steps (far set) or 2.5 steps (near set). The target was either in the same color category as the background (e.g., 10BG on 5B, both blue) or in the adjacent category (e.g., 10BG on 5BG, blue on green). (b) Illustration of a test frame: white circles show possible target locations around the fixation cross, and the black circle representing the target. (c and d) Blue-green set: The difference in RT between within- and across-category is larger in the RVF (c). Target-background perceptual separation only affects the RVF (d). (e) Blue-purple set: Again, the difference in RT between within- and across-category is larger in the RVF. Error bars are 95% confidence limits. Source: (Drivonikou, Kay, Regier, Ivry, Gilbert, Franklin & Davies 2007). 
Figure 5. Cat and dog stimuli used in experimentation. Source: (Gilbert, Regier, Kay, & Ivry 2007). 

+9

Lateralized Whorf: Language influences perceptual decision in the right visual field
  • Article
  • Full-text available

April 2012

·

557 Reads

·

23 Citations

·

Terry Regier

·

Aubrey L. Gilbert

·

Since the middle of the last century, studies of color naming and color perception have

Download


Figure 2: Creating a randomized dataset. (Reprinted from Kay & Regier, 2003)
Figure 3: Best examples of WCS color terms, compared with those of English. (Reprinted from Regier et al., 2005)
Figure 8: No-interference condition: an effect of language in the RVF, but not the LVF. 8 (Reprinted from Gilbert et al., 2006)
Figure 9: Verbal interference disrupts the pattern of lateralization. (Reprinted from Gilbert et al., 2006)
Figure 10: Non-verbal interference largely preserves the pattern of lateralization. (Reprinted from Gilbert et al., 2006)
Language and Thought: Which Side Are You on, Anyway?

February 2010

·

2,246 Reads

·

38 Citations

This chapter focuses on color naming, and color cognition and perception. It first reviews the debate over color naming and cognition, highlighting the apparent conflation of the following questions - Are semantic distinctions in languages determined by largely arbitrary linguistic convention? Do semantic differences cause corresponding cognitive or perceptual differences in speakers of different languages? - in that debate. It suggests how some recent findings help to distinguish these questions and lead to the conclusion of universal tendencies in naming, coupled with Whorfian effects of language on thought. Itshows that Whorfian effects of language on perception may be dominant in the right visual field. The "Whorf on the right" suggestion is a general one, and is expected to hold for other semantic domains as well. The chapter concludes with a discussion of what these findings mean for the language and thought debate generally, and what useful role, if any, the traditional framing of the debate may play in the future. © 2010 by Barbara C. Malt and Phillip Wolff. All rights reserved.


Fig. 6. Visual search task results from callosotomy patient testing. Error bars show 95% confidence limits. 
Figure 2 of 2
Support for lateralization of the Whorf effect beyond the realm of color discrimination

June 2008

·

323 Reads

·

131 Citations

Brain and Language

Recent work has shown that Whorf effects of language on color discrimination are stronger in the right visual field than in the left. Here we show that this phenomenon is not limited to color: The perception of animal figures (cats and dogs) was more strongly affected by linguistic categories for stimuli presented to the right visual field than those presented to the left. Moreover, the magnitude of the visual field asymmetry was reduced when demands on verbal working memory were increased by a secondary task. This reduction did not occur when the secondary task imposed demands on spatial working memory. Taken together, these results demonstrate that the lateralized Whorf effect may be quite general, reflecting an interaction of linguistic and perceptual codes primarily in the left hemisphere.


Fig. 1. The category effect is larger in the RVF than in the LVF in a reanalysis of the data from a color identification task used by Daoutis et al. (16). ( a ) Stimuli in CIE coordinates. The within-category set contains three hues of green: G1, G2, G3; the across-category set contains a blue (B), a purple (Pu), and a pink (Pi). Perceptual distance is the same for all adjacent pairs across both sets (G1-G2, G2-G3, B-Pu, and Pu-Pi). When a peripheral stimulus (e.g., G1) is the target, it is linearly separable from the distractors (G2 G3). ( b ) Illustration of a target-present trial with 15 distractors. The target is indicated here by the arrow that, however, was not present in the display itself. ( c and d ) Target detection times for within- and across-category targets by LVF and RVF: collapsed across linear separability ( c ) and linearly separable targets alone ( d ). Error bars show 95% confidence limits. 
Fig. 2. A larger category effect is observed in the RVF on a color detection task. ( a ) Munsell codes of the stimuli; stimuli varied in hue at constant value and chroma. Hue separations were either five steps (far set) or 2.5 steps (near set). The target was either in the same color category as the background (e.g., 10BG on 5B, both blue) or in the adjacent category (e.g., 10BG on 5BG, blue on green). ( b ) Illustration of a test frame: white circles show possible target locations around the fixation cross, and the black circle representing the target. ( c and d ) Blue-green set: The difference in RT between within- and across-category is larger in the RVF ( c ). Target-background perceptual separation only affects the RVF ( d ). ( e ) Blue-purple set: Again, the difference in RT between within- and across-category is larger in the RVF. Error bars are 95% confidence limits. 
Further evidence that Whorfian effects are stronger in the right visual field than the left

February 2007

·

302 Reads

·

179 Citations

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

The Whorf hypothesis holds that differences between languages induce differences in perception and/or cognition in their speakers. Much of the experimental work pursuing this idea has focused on the domain of color and has centered on the issue of whether linguistically coded color categories influence color discrimination. A new perspective has been cast on the debate by recent results that suggest that language influences color discrimination strongly in the right visual field but not in the left visual field (LVF). This asymmetry is likely related to the contralateral projection of visual fields to cerebral hemispheres and the specialization of the left hemisphere for language. The current study presents three independent experiments that replicate and extend these earlier results by using different tasks and testing across different color category boundaries. Our results differ in one respect: although we find that Whorfian effects on color are stronger for stimuli in the right visual field than in the LVF, we find that there are significant category effects in the LVF as well. The origin of the significant category effect in the LVF is considered, and two factors that might account for the pattern of results are proposed.


Fig. 1. Lexical categories influence perception in the RVF. ( a ) Print-rendered versions of the four colors used. ( b ) Sample display for the visual search task. Participants were required to press one of two response keys, indicating the side containing the target color. ( c ) In the no-interference condition, RTs were faster for the between-category pair and slower for the within-category pairs when targets appeared in the RVF compared with when they appeared in the LVF. ( d ) Effects were reversed with verbal interference. * , P Ͻ 0.05, two-tailed t test, df ϭ 10; ns, nonsignificant. Values are mean Ϯ SEM. 
Fig. 2. Modulation of color-category effects in the RVF is specific to linguistic demands of the interference task. ( a ) Trial events. Within a block of trials, the visual search task was interleaved with blank displays, displays containing a color word, or displays containing a spatial grid. ( b and c ) No-interference and verbal-interference results replicate those obtained in the first experiment. ( d ) For the nonverbal-interference condition, performance followed a pattern similar to that observed in the no-interference condition. * , P Ͻ 0.05, two-tailed t test, df ϭ 10; ns, nonsignificant. 
Fig. 3. Lexical categories influence perception in the RVF of a callosotomy patient. * , P 0.05, two-tailed t test, df 1; ns, nonsignificant.
Whorf hypothesis is supported in the right visual field but not the left

February 2006

·

1,446 Reads

·

426 Citations

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

The question of whether language affects perception has been debated largely on the basis of cross-language data, without considering the functional organization of the brain. The nature of this neural organization predicts that, if language affects perception, it should do so more in the right visual field than in the left visual field, an idea unexamined in the debate. Here, we find support for this proposal in lateralized color discrimination tasks. Reaction times to targets in the right visual field were faster when the target and distractor colors had different names; in contrast, reaction times to targets in the left visual field were not affected by the names of the target and distractor colors. Moreover, this pattern was disrupted when participants performed a secondary task that engaged verbal working memory but not a task making comparable demands on spatial working memory. It appears that people view the right (but not the left) half of their visual world through the lens of their native language, providing an unexpected resolution to the language-and-thought debate. • categorical perception • color • hemispheric laterality • linguistic relativity

Citations (6)


... Semantic typology examines how the different languages of the world organize, structure and express the information in our conceptual domains (Evans, 2010;Moore et al., 2015). Some wellknown examples are the studies of kinship (Nerlove and Romney, 1967), color (Berlin and Kay, 1969;Kay et al., 2009), body parts (Brown, 1976;Enfield et al., 2006), or sense perception (Viberg, 1983;Enfield et al., 2006;Majid et al., 2018). But undoubtedly, the domain that has attracted the most attention is that of space (Pederson et al., 1998;Talmy, 2000a;Levinson, 2003;Levinson and Meira, 2003;Majid et al., 2004;Bohnemeyer et al., 2007). ...

Reference:

Temporal Expressions in English and Spanish: Influence of Typology and Metaphorical Construal
Lateralized Whorf: Language influences perceptual decision in the right visual field

... The traditional debate on how language and thought interact is centred around two opposing views: universalism and relativism. The universalism view holds that variation between languages is limited, because languages are a product of human cognition, and the extent to which languages can vary is tied to the structure and boundaries of cognition (Regier et al., 2010). In this view, cognitive reality constrains linguistic variation. ...

Language and Thought: Which Side Are You on, Anyway?

... Aphasic patients were selectively impaired on low-dimensional categorization and their selective impairment was correlated with the severity of their naming impairment, indicating, in agreement with the positions of Cohen et al. [55][56][57][58] that language impairment impacts categorization specifically when that it requires focusing attention and isolating individual features of concepts. Consistent with the same hypothesis were also results of a study in which Pauly et al. [64] tested left or right hemisphere stroke patients on a speeded color discrimination task in which two factors were manipulated: (1) the categorical relationship between the target and the distracters and (2) the visual field in which the target was presented. Similar to controls, the RH patients were faster in detecting targets in the right visual field when the target and distracters had different color names compared to when their names were the same. ...

Aphasic Patients Exhibit a Reversal of Hemispheric Asymmetries in Categorical Color Discrimination
  • Citing Article
  • March 2011

Brain and Language

... If so, this would suggest the involvement of higher order cognitive processes in determining search performance in the oddball task. In fact, this possibility is supported by prior findings showing color category information facilitates oddball detection when target and distractor colors belong to different categories, compared to where they belong to the same SEARCH EFFICIENCY AND PERCEPTUAL SIMILARITY 17 category (while keeping target-distractor separation identical across conditions, see Gilbert et al., 2006, Regier & Kay, 2009, though see Brown et al., 2011 for contradicting evidence). ...

Whorf hypothesis is supported in the right visual field but not the left

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

... These ndings provide evidence of the in uence of language on the visual cortex, a classic topic that remains highly controversial in the eld of cognitive neuroscience (see Lupyan, 2016;Thierry, 2016). Supporting cognitive evidence comes from prominent behavioural cross-linguistic studies and verbal learning experiments, which have demonstrated that verbal labels can in uence visual colour categorization (e.g., Gilbert et al., 2006;Drivonikou et al., 2007;Winawer et al., 2007). However, the robustness of these cognitive ndings has been challenged (e.g., Martinovic et al., 2020; see SI of Fedorenko et al., 2024), and even when such effects are actually observed, researchers are unable to determine whether they arise from the perceptual stages or other cognitive processes (Maier & Abdel Rahman, 2019). ...

Further evidence that Whorfian effects are stronger in the right visual field than the left

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

... Irrespective of the conscious experience of inner speech, linguistic representations have been claimed to subserve various noncommunicative cognitive functions, ranging from low-level perception to higher-level abstract thinking and metacognition (for reviews, see, e.g.: Borghi & Fernyhough, 2023;Gleitman & Papafragou, 2005;Lupyan, 2016;Lupyan et al., 2020;Perszyk & Waxman, 2018). Typically, the effect of language on these aspects of cognition has been assessed either by experimentally manipulating the amount of verbal information available to participants (e.g., Baldo et al., 2005;Dils & Boroditsky, 2010;Gilbert et al., 2008;Lupyan, 2009;Maier & Abdel Rahman, 2019;Tullett & Inzlicht, 2010;Winawer et al., 2007) or by comparing the performance of language-impaired participants to that of language-unimpaired controls (e.g., Baldo et al., 2010Baldo et al., , 2015Cohen-Dallal et al., 2022;Koemeda-Lutz et al., 1987;Langland-Hassan et al., 2017Lupyan & Mirman, 2013). Much less attention has been devoted to the effects on these functions of naturally occurring individual differences in the use of inner speech. ...

Support for lateralization of the Whorf effect beyond the realm of color discrimination

Brain and Language