Abstract
Stimulus sets are valuable tools that can facilitate the work of researchers designing experiments. Images of faces, and line drawings of objects have been developed and validated, however, pictures of animals, that do not contain backgrounds, have not been made available. Here we present image agreement and quality ratings for a set of 640 color images of animals on a transparent background, across 60 different basic categories (e.g. cat, dog, frog, bird), some with few, and others with many exemplars. These images were normed on 302 participants. Image agreement was measured both with respect to the proportion of participants that provided the same name as well as the H-statistic for each image. Image quality was measured both overall, and with respect to the accuracy of participants’ naming of the basic category. Word frequency of each basic and superordinate category based on the English Lexicon Project (Balota, et al., 2007) and the HAL database (Kucera & Francis, 1976) are provided as are Age of Acquisition (Kuperman, Stadthagen-Gonzalez, & Brysbaert, 2012) data.
Highlights
The development of sets of stimulus images for experimental research has often been a lab by lab endeavor
We provide the size of each image, as a measure of objective, visual complexity [29], as this has been shown to be correlated with subjective measures of complexity as well as impact picture naming accuracy, while being uncorrelated with RT, word frequency and age of acquisition
There are some limitations of the stimulus set and the norming procedure
Summary
The development of sets of stimulus images for experimental research has often been a lab by lab endeavor. Validating a stimulus set of animal pictures databases, photoshopped onto white backgrounds and can be manipulated for size, making them flexible for use in multiple experimental settings To validate these stimuli, we used approaches similar to [1,18] and tested a sample of approximately 300 undergraduate participants. We provide the size of each image, as a measure of objective, visual complexity [29], as this has been shown to be correlated with subjective measures of complexity as well as impact picture naming accuracy, while being uncorrelated with RT, word frequency and age of acquisition
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have