Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-5g6vh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T15:08:46.868Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Color naming and categorization in inherited color vision deficiencies

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 September 2006

VALÉRIE BONNARDEL
VALÉRIE BONNARDEL
Affiliation:
Division of Psychology, University of Sunderland, Sunderland, United Kingdom
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Dichromatic subjects can name colors accurately, even though they cannot discriminate among red-green hues (Jameson & Hurvich, 1978). This result is attributed to a normative language system that dichromatic observers developed by learning subtle visual cues to compensate for their impoverished color system. The present study used multidimensional scaling techniques to compare color categorization spaces of color-vision deficient (CVD) subjects to those of normal trichromat (NT) subjects, and consensus analysis estimated the normative effect of language on categorization. Subjects sorted 140 Munsell color samples in three different ways: a free sorting task (unlimited number of categories), a constrained sorting task (number of categories limited to eight), and a constrained naming task (limited to eight basic color terms). CVD color categories were comparable to those of NT subjects. For both CVD and NT subjects, a common color categorization space derived from the three tasks was well described by a three-dimensional model, with the first two dimensions corresponding to reddish-greenish and yellowish-bluish axes. However, the third axis, which was associated with an achromatic dimension in NTs, was not identified in the CVD model. Individual differences multidimensional scaling failed to reveal group differences in the sorting tasks. In contrast, the personal color naming spaces of CVD subjects exhibited a relative compression of the yellowish-bluish dimension that is inconsistent with the typical deutan-type color spaces derived from more direct measures of perceptual color judgments. As expected, the highest consensus among CVDs (77%) and NTs (82%) occurred in the naming task. The categorization behaviors studied in this experiment seemed to rely more on learning factors, and may reveal little about CVD perceptual representation of colors.

Keywords

Color namingColor categorizationColor vision deficienciesMultidimensional scalingConsensus analysis.
Type
CONGENITAL DEFICIENCIES
Information
Visual Neuroscience , Volume 23 , Issue 3-4 , May 2006 , pp. 637 - 643
Copyright
© 2006 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Berlin, B. & Kay, P. (1969). Basic Color Terms: Their University and Evolution. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Bimler, D.L. & Kirkland, K. (2004). Multidimensional scaling of D15 caps: Color-vision defects among tobacco smokers? Visual Neurosciences 21, 445–448.Google Scholar
Bimler, D.L., Kirkland, K., & Jameson, K.A. (2004). Quantifying variations in personal color spaces: Are there sex differences in color vision? Color Research and Application 29, 128–134.Google Scholar
Chang, J.J. & Carroll, J.D. (1980). Three are not enough: An INDSCAL analysis suggesting that color space has seven (±1) dimensions. Color Research & Application 5, 193–206.Google Scholar
Davidoff, J., Davies, I., & Roberson, D. (1999). Color categories in a stone-age tribe. Nature 398, 203–204.Google Scholar
Helm, C.E. (1964). Multidimensional ratio scaling of perceived color relations. Journal of Optical Society of America 54, 256–262.Google Scholar
Jameson, D. & Hurvich, L.M. (1978). Dichromatic color language: “Reds” and “Greens” don't look alike but their colors do. Sensory Processes 2, 146–155.Google Scholar
Montag, E.D. & Boynton, R.M. (1987). Rod influence in dichromatic surface color perception. Vision Research 27, 2153–2162.Google Scholar
Moore, C.C., Romney, A.K., & Hsia, T. (2000). Shared cognitive representations of perceptual and semantic structures of basic colors in Chinese and English. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 97, 5007–5010.Google Scholar
Müller, M., Cavonius, C.R., & Mollon, J.D. (1991). Constructing the color space of the deuteranomalous observer. In Color Vision deficiencies X, eds. Drum, B., Moreland, J.D. & Serra, A., pp. 377–387. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Nolan, J.B., Crognale, M.A., & Webster, M.A. (2003). Color naming, color categories, and central color-coding in a case of X-linked incomplete achromatopsia. In Normal and Defective Color Vision, eds. Mollon, J.D., Pokorny, J. & Knoblauch, K., pp. 370–377. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Paramei, G.V. (1996). Color space of normally sighted and color-deficient observers reconstructed from color naming. Psychological Science 7, 311–317.Google Scholar
Paramei, G.V., Bimler, D.L., & Cavonius, C.R. (2000). Color-vision variations represented in an individual-difference vector chart. Color Research and Application 26, S230–S234.Google Scholar
Romney, A.K., Moore, C.C., Batchelder, W.H., & Hsia, T.L. (2000). Statistical methods for characterizing similarities and differences between semantic structures. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 97, 518–523.Google Scholar
Schreibner, H.M.O. & Boynton, R.M. (1968). Residual red-green discrimination in dichromats. Journal of the Optical Society of America 58, 1151–1158.Google Scholar
Shepard, N.R. & Cooper, L.A. (1992). Representation in the blind, color-blind, and normally sighted. Psychological Science 3, 97–103.Google Scholar