A cross-culturally standardized set of pictures for younger and older adults: American and Chinese norms for name agreement, concept agreement, and familiarity

The present study presents normative measures for 260 line drawings of everyday objects, found in Snodgrass and Vanderwart (1980), viewed by individuals in China and the United States. Within each cultural group, name agreement, concept agreement, and familiarity measures were obtained separately for younger adults and older adults. For a subset of 57 pictures (22%), there was equivalence in both name agreement and concept agreement, and for an additional subset of 29 pictures (11%), there was nonequivalent name agreement but equivalent concept agreement, across all culture-by-age groups. The data indicate substantial differences across culture-by-age groups in name agreement percentages and number of distinct name responses provided. We discovered significant differences between older and younger American adults in both name agreement percentages (67 pictures, or 26%) and concept agreement percentages (44 pictures, or 17%). Written naming responses collected for the entire set of Snodgrass and Vanderwart pictures showed shifts in both naming and concept agreement percentages over the intervening decades: Although correlations in name agreement were strong (r= .71,p < .001) between our younger American samples and those of Snodgrass and Vanderwart, name agreement percentages have changed for a substantial proportion (33%) of the 260 pictures; moreover, 63% of the stimuli for which Snodgrass and Vanderwart reported concept agreement now appear to differ. We provide comprehensive comparison statistics and tests for both the present study and prior ones, finding differences across numerous item-level measures. The corpus of data suggests that substantial differences in all measures can be found across age as well as culture, so that unequivocal conclusions with respect to cross-cultural or age-related differences in cognition can be made only when appropriate stimuli are selected for studies. Data for all 260 pictures, for each of the four groups, and all supporting materials and tests are freely archived athttp://agingmind.cns.uiuc.edu/Pict Norms. The full set of these norms may be downloaded fromwwwpsychonomic.org/archive/.

[1]  H L Roediger,et al.  Effects of imagery on perceptual implicit memory tests. , 1994, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[2]  Alan J. Parkin,et al.  Implicit and explicit memory in young children and adults , 1988 .

[3]  S Rajaram,et al.  Perceptual effects on remembering: recollective processes in picture recognition memory. , 1996, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[4]  Kara D. Federmeier,et al.  Timed picture naming in seven languages , 2003, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[5]  Maria Nikolajeva Word and Picture , 2006 .

[6]  D Milech,et al.  Word and picture identification: Is representational parsimony possible? , 1986, Memory & cognition.

[7]  J. G. Snodgrass,et al.  Concepts and Their Surface Representations , 1984 .

[8]  Joan Gay Snodgrass,et al.  Naming times for the Snodgrass and Vanderwart pictures , 1996 .

[9]  David Friedman,et al.  Developmental picture norms: Relationships between name agreement, familiarity, and visual complexity for child and adult ratings of two sets of line drawings , 1989 .

[10]  J G Snodgrass,et al.  Picture naming by young children: norms for name agreement, familiarity, and visual complexity. , 1997, Journal of experimental child psychology.

[11]  Kara D. Federmeier,et al.  Timed picture naming: Extended norms and validation against previous studies , 2003, Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers : a journal of the Psychonomic Society, Inc.

[12]  R. Morrell,et al.  Effects of contextual integration on recall of pictures by older adults. , 1990, Journal of gerontology.

[13]  R. Nisbett,et al.  Aging, culture, and cognition. , 1999, The journals of gerontology. Series B, Psychological sciences and social sciences.

[14]  Shu Hua,et al.  NAME AGREEMENT, FAMILIARITY, IMAGE AGREEMENT AND VISUAL COMPLEXITY FOR 235 PICTURES , 1989 .

[15]  Marcia K. Johnson,et al.  Aging and reflective processes of working memory: binding and test load deficits. , 2000, Psychology and aging.

[16]  A Wingfield,et al.  Response Latencies in Naming Objects , 1965, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[17]  R. Proctor,et al.  Index of norms and ratings published in the Psychonomic Society journals , 1999, Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers : a journal of the Psychonomic Society, Inc.

[18]  Alan S. Brown,et al.  Persistent repetition priming in picture naming and its dissociation from recognition memory. , 1988, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[19]  L. Squire,et al.  Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) Activity in the Hippocampal Region during Recognition Memory , 2000, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[20]  J. G. Snodgrass,et al.  A standardized set of 260 pictures: norms for name agreement, image agreement, familiarity, and visual complexity. , 1980, Journal of experimental psychology. Human learning and memory.

[21]  Sang Joon Kim,et al.  A Mathematical Theory of Communication , 2006 .

[22]  S. Rajaram PERCEPTUAL EFFECTS ON REMEMBERING : RECOLLECTIVE PROCESSES IN PICTURE RECOGNITION MEMORY , 1996 .

[23]  E. Tulving,et al.  PET studies of encoding and retrieval: The HERA model , 1996, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[24]  C. E. SHANNON,et al.  A mathematical theory of communication , 1948, MOCO.