When Sandpaper Is ‘Kiki’ and Satin Is ‘Bouba’: an Exploration of the Associations Between Words, Emotional States, and the Tactile Attributes of Everyday Materials

in Multisensory Research
Restricted Access
Get Access to Full Text
Rent on DeepDyve

Have an Access Token?

Enter your access token to activate and access content online.

Please login and go to your personal user account to enter your access token.


Have Institutional Access?

Access content through your institution. Any other coaching guidance?


Over the last decade, scientists working on the topic of multisensory integration, as well as designers and marketers involved in trying to understand consumer behavior, have become increasingly interested in the non-arbitrary associations (e.g., sound symbolism) between different sensorial attributes of the stimuli they work with. Nevertheless, to date, little research in this area has investigated the presence of these crossmodal correspondences in the tactile evaluation of everyday materials. Here, we explore the presence and nature of the associations between tactile sensations, the sound of non-words, and people’s emotional states. Samples of cotton, satin, tinfoil, sandpaper, and abrasive sponge, were stroked along the participants’ forearm at the speed of 5 cm/s. Participants evaluated the materials along several dimensions, comprising scales anchored by pairs of non-words (e.g., Kiki/Bouba) and adjectives (e.g., ugly/beautiful). The results revealed that smoother textures were associated with non-words made up of round-shaped sounds (e.g., Maluma), whereas rougher textures were more strongly associated with sharp-transient sounds (e.g., Takete). The results also revealed the presence of a number of correspondences between tactile surfaces and adjectives related to visual and auditory attributes. For example, smooth textures were associated with features evoked by words such as ‘bright’ and ‘quiet’; by contrast, the rougher textures were associated with adjectives such as ‘dim’ and ‘loud’. The textures were also found to be associated with a number of emotional labels. Taken together, these results further our understanding of crossmodal correspondences involving the tactile modality and provide interesting insights in the applied field of design and marketing.

When Sandpaper Is ‘Kiki’ and Satin Is ‘Bouba’: an Exploration of the Associations Between Words, Emotional States, and the Tactile Attributes of Everyday Materials

in Multisensory Research



BarM.NetaM. (2006). Humans prefer curved visual objectsPsychol. Sci. 17645648.

Baron-CohenS.WykeM. A.BinnieC. (1987). Hearing words and seeing colours: an experimental investigation of a case of synaesthesiaPerception 16761767.

BremnerA. J.CaparosS.DavidoffJ.de FockertJ.LinnellK. J.SpenceC. (2013). ‘Bouba’ and ‘Kiki’ in Namibia? A remote culture make similar shape–sound matches, but different shape–taste matches to WesternersCognition 126165172.

CarbonC. C. (2010). The cycle of preference: long-term dynamics of aesthetic appreciationActa Psychol. 134233244.

CrisinelA.-S.SpenceC. (2010). As bitter as a trombone: synesthetic correspondences in nonsynesthetes between tastes/flavors and musical notesAtten. Percept. Psychophys. 7219942002.

CrisinelA.-S.SpenceC. (2012). A fruity note: crossmodal associations between odors and musical notesChem. Senses 37151158.

CrisinelA.-S.JonesS.SpenceC. (2012a). ‘The sweet taste of maluma’: crossmodal associations between tastes and wordsChemosens. Percept. 5266273.

CrisinelA.-S.CosserS.KingS.JonesR.PetrieJ.SpenceC. (2012b). A bittersweet symphony: systematically modulating the taste of food by changing the sonic properties of the soundtrack playing in the backgroundFood Qual. Prefer. 24201204.

DarwinC. (1872). The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals. J. MurrayLondon, UK.

DavisR. (1961). The fitness of names to drawings: a cross-cultural study in TanganyikaBr. J. Psychol. 52259268.

DeroyO.CrisinelA. S.SpenceC. (2013). Crossmodal correspondences between odors and contingent features: odors, musical notes, and geometrical shapesPsychon. Bull. Rev. 20878896.

EitanZ.RothschildI. (2010). How music touches: musical parameters and listeners’ audio-tactile metaphorical mappingsPsychol. Music 39449467.

EssickG.JamesA.McGloneF. P. (1999). Psychophysical assessment of the affective components of non-painful touchNeuroReport 1020832087.

EssickG. K.McGloneF.DancerC.FabricantD.RaginY.PhillipsN. (2010). Quantitative assessment of pleasant touchNeurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 34192203.

EtziR.SpenceC.GallaceA. (2014). Textures that we like to touch: an experimental study of aesthetic preferences for tactile stimuliConsc. Cogn. 29178188.

EvansK. K.TreismanA. (2010). Natural cross-modal mappings between visual and auditory featuresJ. Vis. 106. DOI:10.1167/10.1.6.

FryerL.FreemanJ.PringL. (2014). Touching words is not enough: how visual experience influences haptic–auditory associations in the ‘Bouba–Kiki’ effectCognition 132164173.

GallaceA.SpenceC. (2006). Multisensory synesthetic interactions in the speeded classification of visual sizePercept. Psychophys. 6811911203.

GallaceA.SpenceC. (2011). Tactile aesthetics: towards a definition of its characteristics and neural correlatesSoc. Semiotics 21569589.

GallaceA.SpenceC. (2014). In Touch with the Future: the Sense of Touch from Cognitive Neuroscience to Virtual Reality. Oxford University PressOxford, UK.

GallaceA.BoschinE.SpenceC. (2011). On the taste of ‘Bouba’ and ‘Kiki’: an exploration of word–food associations in neurologically normal participantsCogn. Neurosci. 23446.

GuestS.DessirierJ. M.MehrabyanA.McGloneF.EssickG.GescheiderG. (2011). The development and validation of sensory and emotional scales of touch perceptionAtten. Percept. Psychophys. 73531550.

HabelU.KleinM.KellermannT.ShahN. J.SchneiderF. (2005). Same or different? Neural correlates of happy and sad mood in healthy malesNeuroImage 26206214.

Hanson-VauxG.CrisinelA.-S.SpenceC. (2012). Smelling shapes: crossmodal correspondences between odors and shapesChem. Senses 38161166.

HubbardT. L. (1996). Synesthesia-like mappings of lightness, pitch, and melodic intervalAm. J. Psychol. 109219238.

KaiserH. F. (1958). The varimax criterion for analytic rotation in factor analysisPsychometrika 23187200.

KaiserH. F. (1960). The application of electronic computers to factor analysisEduc. Psychol. Meas. 20141151.

KaiserH. F. (1970). A second generation little jiffyPsychometrika 35401415.

KaiserH. F. (1974). An index of factorial simplicityPsychometrika 393136.

KandelE. R.SchwartzJ. H.JessellT. M. (2000). Principles of Neural Science. McGraw-HillNew York, NY, USA.

KarwoskiT. F.OdbertH. S.OsgoodC. E. (1942). Studies in synesthetic thinking: II. The role of form in visual responses to musicJ. Gen. Psychol. 26199222.

KlinkR. R. (2000). Creating brand names with meaning: the use of sound symbolismMark. Lett. 11520.

KlinkR. R. (2001). Creating meaningful new brand names: a study of semantics and sound symbolismJ. Marketing Theory Pract. 92734.

KlinkR. R. (2003). Creating meaningful brands: the relationship between brand name and brand markMark. Lett. 14143157.

KöhlerW. (1929). Gestalt Psychology. LiverightNew York, NY, USA.

KöhlerW. (1947). Gestalt Psychology2nd edn. LiverightNew York, NY, USA.

KovicV.PlunkettK.WestermannG. (2010). The shape of words in the brainCognition 1141928.

LederH.CarbonC. (2005). Dimensions in appreciation of car interior designAppl. Cogn. Psychol. 19603618.

LökenL. S.WessbergJ.McGloneF.OlaussonH. (2009). Coding of pleasant touch by unmyelinated afferents in humansNat. Neurosci. 12547548.

LudwigV. U.SimnerJ. (2013). What colour does that feel? Tactile–visual mapping and the development of cross-modalityCortex 4910891099.

MarksL. E. (1978). The Unity of the Senses: Interrelations Among the Modalities. Academic PressNew York, NY, USA.

MarksL. E. (1987). On cross-modal similarity: auditory–visual interactions in speeded discriminationJ. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 13384394.

MarksL. E. (2004). Cross-modal interactions in speeded classification in: Handbook of Multisensory ProcessesCalvertG. A.SpenceC.SteinB. E. (Eds) pp.  85105. MIT PressCambridge, MA, USA.

MartinoG.MarksL. E. (1999). Perceptual and linguistic interactions in speeded classification: tests of the semantic coding hypothesisPerception 28903924.

MartinoG.MarksL. E. (2000). Cross-modal interactions between vision and touch: the role of synesthetic correspondencePerception 29745754.

MaurerD.PathmanT.MondlochC. J. (2006). The shape of boubas: sound–shape correspondences in toddlers and adultsDev. Sci. 9316322.

McGloneF.ReillyD. (2010). The cutaneous sensory systemNeurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 34148159.

McGloneF.VallboA. B.OlaussonH.LökenL.WessbergJ. (2007). Discriminative touch and emotional touchCan. J. Exp. Psychol. 61173183.

McGloneF.WessbergJ.OlaussonH. (2014). Discriminative and affective touch: sensing and feelingNeuron 82737755.

MondlochC. J.MaurerD. (2004). Do small white balls squeak? Pitch-object correspondences in young childrenCogn. Affect. Behav. Neurosci. 4133136.

MorganG. A.GoodsonF. E.JonesT. (1975). Age differences in the associations between felt temperatures and color choicesAm. J. Psychol. 88125130.

NgoM. K.MisraR.SpenceC. (2011). Assessing the shapes and speech sounds that people associate with chocolate samples varying in cocoa contentFood Qual. Prefer. 22567572.

NielsenA.RendallD. (2011). The sound of round: evaluating the sound-symbolic role of consonants in the classic Takete–Maluma phenomenonCan. J. Exp. Psychol. 65115124.

NielsenA. K.RendallD. (2013). Parsing the role of consonants versus vowels in the classic Takete–Maluma phenomenonCan. J. Exp. Psychol. 67153163.

OsgoodC. E. (1952). The nature and measurement of meaningPsychol. Bull. 49197237.

OsgoodC. E.SuciG. J. (1955). Factor analysis of meaningJ. Exp. Psychol. 50325338.

OsgoodC. E.SuciG. J.TannenbaumP. H. (1957). The Measurement of Meaning. University of Illinois PressUrbana, IL, USA.

PalmerS. E.SchlossK. B.XuZ.Prado-LeónL. R. (2013). Music–color associations are mediated by emotionProc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 11088368841.

PariseC. V.SpenceC. (2008). Synesthetic congruency modulates the temporal ventriloquism effectNeurosci. Lett. 442257261.

PariseC. V.SpenceC. (2012). Audiovisual crossmodal correspondences and sound symbolism: an IAT studyExp. Brain Res. 220319333.

PariseC. V.KnorreK.ErnstM. O. (2014). Natural auditory scene statistics shapes human spatial hearingProc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 11161046108.

RafaeliE.RevelleW. (2006). A premature consensus: are happiness and sadness truly opposite affects? Motiv. Emot. 30112.

RamachandranV. S.HubbardE. M. (2001). Synaesthesia — a window into perception, though and languageJ. Consc. Stud. 8334.

RogersS. K.RossA. S. (1975). A crosscultural test of the maluma takete phenomenonPerception 4105106.

SapirE. (1929). A study in phonetic symbolismJ. Exp. Psychol. 12225239.

SeoH. S.ArshamianA.SchemmerK.ScheerI.SanderT.RitterG.HummelT. (2010). Cross-modal integration between odors and abstract symbolsNeurosci. Lett. 478175178.

SilviaP. J.BaronaC. M. (2009). Do people prefer curved objects? Angularity, expertise, and aesthetic preferenceEmpir. Stud. Arts 272542.

SpectorF.MaurerD. (2009). Synesthesia: a new approach to understanding the development of perceptionDev. Psychol. 45175189.

SpenceC. (2011). Crossmodal correspondences: a tutorial reviewAtten. Percept. Psychophys. 73971995.

SpenceC. (2012). Managing sensory expectations concerning products and brands: capitalizing on the potential of sound and shape symbolismJ. Consum. Psychol. 223754.

SpenceC. (2014). Assessing the influence of shape and sound symbolism on the consumer’s response to chocolateNew Food 175962.

SpenceC.DeroyO. (2012). Crossmodal correspondences: innate or learned? i-Perception 3316318.

SpenceC.DeroyO. (2013). Crossmodal mental imagery in: Multisensor Imagery: Theory and ApplicationsLaceyS.LawsonR. (Eds) pp.  157183. SpringerNew York, USA.

SpenceC.GallaceA. (2011a). Tasting shapes and wordsFood Qual. Prefer. 22290295.

SpenceC.GallaceA. (2011b). Multisensory design: reaching out to touch the consumerPsychol. Mark. 28267308.

SpenceC.Piqueras-FiszmanB. (2014). The Perfect Meal: the Multisensory Science of Food and Dining. Wiley-BlackwellOxford, UK.

SpenceC.HobkinsonC.GallaceA.FiszmanB. P. (2013). A touch of gastronomyFlavour 214. DOI:10.1186/2044-7248-2-14.

UkponmwanJ. O. (1993). The thermal-insulation properties of fabricsTextile Progr. 24154.

VallboA. B.OlaussonH.WessbergJ. (1999). Unmyelinated afferents constitute a second system coding tactile stimuli of the human hairy skinJ. Neurophysiol. 8127532763.

WalkerP.SmithS. (1985). Stroop interference based on the multimodal correlates of haptic size and auditory pitchPerception 14729736.

WalkerP.FrancisB. J.WalkerL. (2010). The brightness–weight illusion: darker objects look heavier but feel lighterExp. Psychol. 57462469.

WalkerL.WalkerP.FrancisB. (2012). A common scheme for cross-sensory correspondences across stimulus domainsPerception 4111861192.

WardJ.HuckstepB.TsakanikosE. (2006). Sound–colour synaesthesia: to what extent does it use cross-modal mechanisms common to us all? Cortex 42264280.

WastielsL.SchiffersteinH. N.HeylighenA.WoutersI. (2012). Red or rough, what makes materials warmer? Mater. Des. 42441449.

WestburyC. (2005). Implicit sound symbolism in lexical access: evidence from an interference taskBrain Lang. 931019.


  • View in gallery

    Participants’ mean ratings of the textures on the scales anchored to pairs of non-words. The lower limit of the y-axis (−5) refers to the non-words placed at the bottom of the graph (e.g., kiki), the upper limit (+5) to the non-words placed at the top (e.g., bouba). Error bars represent the standard errors of the means.

  • View in gallery

    Participants’ mean ratings of the textures on the basis of the adjective scales. The lower limit of the y-axis (−5) refers to the words placed at the bottom of the graph (e.g., smooth), the upper limit (+5) to the words placed at the top (e.g., rough). Error bars represent the standard errors of the means.

  • View in gallery

    Mean ratings of the textures on the basis of the scales with emotional labels. The lower limit of the y-axis (−5) refers to the label ‘not at all’, while the upper limit (+5) to the label ‘very much’. Error bars represent the standard errors of the means.

  • View in gallery

    Two-dimensional projections of the loadings of the ratings on the rotated components extracted through PCA. First and second component (A), first and third component (B), first and fourth component (C), second and third component (D), second and fourth component (E), third and fourth component (F).

Index Card

Content Metrics

Content Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 40 40 35
Full Text Views 9 9 9
PDF Downloads 2 2 2
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0