MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2172178590 · doi:10.1162/jocn.2007.19.6.981

When “3” is a Jerk and “E” is a King: Personifying Inanimate Objects in Synesthesia

2007· article· en· W2172178590 on OpenAlexaff
Daniel Smilek, Kelly A. Malcolmson, Jonathan S. A. Carriere, Meghan Eller, Donna Kwan, Michael Reynolds

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cognitive Neuroscience · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMultisensory perception and integration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSynesthesiaObject (grammar)PsychologyCognitive psychologyPersonalitySocial psychologyPerceptionArtificial intelligenceNeuroscienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We report a case study of an individual (TE) for whom inanimate objects, such as letters, numbers, simple shapes, and even furniture, are experienced as having rich and detailed personalities. TE reports that her object-personality pairings are stable over time, occur independent of her intentions, and have been there for as long as she can remember. In these respects, her experiences are indicative of synesthesia. Here we show that TE's object-personality pairings are very consistent across test-retest, even for novel objects. A qualitative analysis of TE's personality descriptions revealed that her personifications are extremely detailed and multi-dimensional, and that her personifications of familiar and novel objects differ in specific ways. We also found that TE's eye movements can be biased by the emotional associations she has with letters and numbers. These findings demonstrate that synesthesia can involve complex semantic personifications, which can influence visual attention. Finally, we propose a neural model of normal personification and the unusual personifications that accompany object-personality synesthesia.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.080
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.305 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations52
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cognitive NeuroscienceSame topicMultisensory perception and integrationFrench-language works237,207