Contains all data from this psycholinguistic study, including original surveys, compiled data, and analysis R code.

This study is a cross-linguistic, conceptual replication of Lynott and Connell’s (2009, 2013) modality exclusivity norms. Their English properties and concepts were translated into Dutch, then independently tested as follows. Forty-two respondents rated the auditory, haptic, and visual strength of those words. Mean scores were then computed, with a high interrater reliability and interitem consistency. Based on the three modalities, each word also features a specific modality exclusivity, and a dominant modality. The norms also include external measures of word frequency, length, distinctiveness, age of acquisition, and known percentage. Starting with the results, unimodal, bimodal, and tri-modal words appear. Visual and haptic experience are quite related, leaving a more independent auditory experience. These different relations are important because they may correlate with different levels of detail in word comprehension (Louwerse & Connell, 2011). Auditory and visual words tend towards unimodality, whereas haptic words tend towards multimodality. Likewise, properties are more unimodal than concepts. Last, the 'sound symbolism' hypothesis was tested by means of a regression: Auditory strength predicts lexical properties of the words (frequency, distinctiveness...) better than the other modalities do, or else with a different polarity.

See a longer summary at: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/modality-exclusivity-norms-336-properties-411-dutch-english-bernabeu

The norms were used, and validated, in an experiment that implemented the conceptual modality switch. Data for that experiment may be found as a linked component of the present Project.