Dutch modality exclusivity norms for 336 properties and 411 concepts

This study is a cross-linguistic, conceptual replication of Lynott and Connell’s (2009, 2013) modality exclusivity norms. Their English properties and concepts were translated into Dutch, then independently tested as follows. Forty-two respondents rated the auditory, haptic, and visual strength of those words. Mean scores were then computed, with a high interrater reliability and interitem consistency. Based on the three modalities, each word also features a specific modality exclusivity, and a dominant modality. The norms also include external measures of word frequency, length, distinctiveness, age of acquisition, and known percentage. Starting with the results, unimodal, bimodal, and tri-modal words appear. Visual and haptic experience are quite related, leaving a more independent auditory experience. These different relations are important because they may correlate with different levels of detail in word comprehension (Louwerse & Connell, 2011). Auditory and visual words tend toward unimodality, whereas haptic words tend toward multimodality. Likewise, properties are more unimodal than concepts. Last, the 'sound symbolism' hypothesis was tested by means of a regression: Auditory strength predicts lexical properties of the words (e.g., frequency, distinctiveness) better than the other modalities do, or else with a different polarity. All the data and analysis code are available at https://osf.io/brkjw/.