Research shows that high- and low-pitch sounds can be associated with various meanings. For example, high-pitch sounds are associated with small concepts, whereas low-pitch sounds are associated with large concepts. This study presents three experiments revealing that high-pitch sounds are also associated with open concepts and opening hand actions, while low-pitch sounds are associated with closed concepts and closing hand actions. In Experiment 1, this sound-meaning correspondence effect was shown using the two-alternative forced-choice task, while Experiments 2 and 3 used (...) reaction time tasks to show this interaction. In Experiment 2, high-pitch vocalizations were found to facilitate opening hand gestures, and low-pitch vocalizations were found to facilitate closing hand gestures, when performed simultaneously. In Experiment 3, high-pitched vocalizations were produced particularly rapidly when the visual target stimulus presented an open object, and low-pitched vocalizations were produced particularly rapidly when the target presented a closed object. These findings are discussed concerning the meaning of intonational cues. They are suggested to be based on cross-modally representing conceptual spatial knowledge in sensory, motor, and affective systems. Additionally, this pitch-opening effect might share cognitive processes with other pitch-meaning effects. (shrink)

Previous research shows that simultaneously executed grasp and vocalization responses are faster when the precision grip is performed with the vowel [i] and the power grip is performed with the vowel [ɑ]. Research also shows that observing an object that is graspable with a precision or power grip can activate the grip congruent with the object. Given the connection between vowel articulation and grasping, this study explores whether grasp‐related size of observed objects can influence not only grasp responses but also (...) vowel pronunciation. The participants had to categorize small and large objects into natural and manufactured categories by pronouncing the vowel [i] or [ɑ]. As predicted, [i] was produced faster when the object's grasp‐related size was congruent with the precision grip while [ɑ] was produced faster when the size was congruent with the power grip (Experiment 1). The effect was not, however, observed when the participants were presented with large objects that are not typically grasped by the power grip (Experiment 2). This study demonstrates that vowel production is systematically influenced by grasp‐related size of a viewed object, supporting the account that sensory‐motor processes related to grasp planning and representing grasp‐related properties of viewed objects interact with articulation processes. The paper discusses these findings in the context of size–sound symbolism, suggesting that mechanisms that transform size‐grasp affordances into corresponding grasp‐ and articulation‐related motor programs might provide a neural basis for size‐sound phenomena that links small objects with closed‐front vowels and large objects with open‐back vowels. (shrink)