Springer Nature is making Coronavirus research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

A cross-cultural investigation of the graphic differential

  • 48 Accesses

  • 4 Citations

Abstract

A new Graphic Differential (GD) suggested by French (1977) may be used as a language-free alternative to the Semantic Differential (Osgood, Suci, & Tannenbaum, 1957). The new GD (which is based on prior attempts by other writers) consists of 5 pictographic scales for each semantic dimension: Evaluation, Potency, and Activity. Since the GD employs pictograms instead of adjectives, it would be a suseful tool for cross-cultural research, given that the pictograms, although developed in the United States, are understood universally. In the present study, 46 American and 46 German subjects sorted the 15 graphic scales according to semantic similarity. Responses were summarized in similarity matrices, which were analyzed further by the methods of maximum spanning tree and hierarchical cluster analysis. American results show that the intended meaning of the scales could be understood. This strengthens the intracultural validity of the GD. In general, the German findings were similar. The German subjects, however, could not categorize all the scales as clearly as the Americans. The “problematic” scales could weaken the cross-cultural validity of the GD.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Bujas, Z. (1967). Graphic form of Osgood's semantic differential.Acta Instituti Psychologici, No. 49-63, 5–12.

  2. Ertel, S. (1969).Psychophonetik. Untersuchungen ueber Lautsymbolik und Motivation. Goettingen, Germany: Hogrefe.

  3. Espe, H. (1982). Ein Sortierversuch zur Ueberpruefung der semantischen Struktur des Semantischen Differentials. Research report. Hochschule der Kuenste Berlin. (unpublished).

  4. French, P. L. (1977). Nonverbal measurement of affect: The graphic differential.Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 6, 337–347.

  5. French, P. L. (1978). The development of affective meaning 1: Verbal versus nonverbal measurement. InThe development of meaning: The pedolinguistic series (Vol. 3, pp. 232–240). Tokyo: Bunka Hyron.

  6. French, P. L. (1981). Comparability of verbal and nonverbal measures of affective meaning in bilinguals' two languages.Perceptual and Motor Skills, 52 251–254.

  7. Jakobovits, L. A. (1969). The affect of symbols: Towards the development of a cross-cultural graphic differential.International Journal of Symbology, 1, 28–52.

  8. Johnson, S. C. (1967). Hierarchical clustering schemes.Psychometrika, 32, 241–254.

  9. Miller, G. A. (1969). A psychological method to investigate verbal concepts.Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 6, 169–191.

  10. Morgan, B. J. T., Simpson, M. J. A., Hanby, J. P., & Hall-Craggs, J. (1976). Visualizing interaction and sequential data in animal behavior: Theory and application of cluster-analysis methods.Behavior, 56, 1–43.

  11. Osgood, C. E. (1960). The cross-cultural generality of visual-verbal synesthetic tendencies.Behavioral Sciences, 5, 149–169.

  12. Osgood, C. E. (1980a). Things and words. In M. R. Key (Ed.),The relationship of verbal and nonverbal communication (pp. 229–258). The Hague, Paris, New York: Mouton.

  13. Osgood, C. E. (1980b). The cognitive dynamics of synesthesia and metaphor. In R. P. Honek & R. R. Hoffman (Eds.),Cognition and figurative language (pp. 203–238). Hillsdale, New Jersey: Erlbaum.

  14. Osgood, C. E., May, W. H., & Miron, M. S. (1975).Cross-cultural universals of affective meaning. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.

  15. Osgood, C. E., Suci, G. J., & Tannenbaum, P. H. (1957).The measurement of meaning. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.

  16. Prim, R. G. (1957). Shortest connection networks and some generalizations.Bell System Technical Journal, 36, 1389–1401.

  17. Steinberg, D. D. (1967). The word sort: An instrument for semantic analysis.Psychonomic Science, 8, 541–542.

Download references

Author information

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Espe, H. A cross-cultural investigation of the graphic differential. J Psycholinguist Res 14, 97–111 (1985). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01067477

Download citation

Keywords

  • Cluster Analysis
  • Cognitive Psychology
  • Hierarchical Cluster
  • Span Tree
  • Hierarchical Cluster Analysis