Loading…

Colour meaning and context

This study compares semantic ratings of colour samples (chips) with those of the same colours applied to a variety of objects. In total, 25 participants took part in the colour‐meaning experiment, and assessed 54 images using five semantic scales. In Experiment 1, simplified images (coloured silhoue...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Color research and application 2017-08, Vol.42 (4), p.450-459
Main Authors: Won, Seahwa, Westland, Stephen
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:This study compares semantic ratings of colour samples (chips) with those of the same colours applied to a variety of objects. In total, 25 participants took part in the colour‐meaning experiment, and assessed 54 images using five semantic scales. In Experiment 1, simplified images (coloured silhouettes) were used whereas in Experiment 2 real images were used. In this article, the terms “chip meaning” and “context meaning” are used for convenience. Chip meaning refers to the associated meanings when only isolated colour chips were evaluated while context meaning refers to colour meanings evaluated when colours were applied to a variety of product categories. Analyses were performed on the data for the two experiments individually. The results of Experiment 1 show relatively few significant differences (28%) between chip meaning and context meaning. However, differences were found for a number of colours, objects, and semantic scales i.e., red and black; hand wash and medicine; and masculine‐feminine and elegant‐vulgar. The results of Experiment 2 show more significant differences (43%) between chip meaning and context meaning. In summary, the context sometimes affects the colour meaning; however, the degree to which colour meanings are invariant to context is perhaps slightly surprising. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Col Res Appl, 42, 450–459, 2017
ISSN:0361-2317
1520-6378
DOI:10.1002/col.22095