Sentence examples for rated size from inspiring English sources

A positive correlation indicates that the more a specific characteristic is present in the nonwords, the larger the rated size, whereas a negative correlation would suggest that as the presence of a specific feature increases, rated size decreases.

None of the remaining consonantal features (i.e., voicing, number of nasals, affricates, or approximants) predicted rated size (all p > 0.40).

To examine whether specific phonemic characteristics (e.g., plosivity, voicing) predicted rated size, we conducted some correlational analyses using the phonemic characteristics listed in Table 1.

When nonwords included more plosive consonants the size increased (r = 0.41, p < 0.001), and when nonwords included more fricatives the rated size decreased (r = –0.37, p < 0.001).

Only vowel properties predicted size: back vowels were positively associated with rated size (b = 6.98, t 95) = 2.97, p = 0.004) and front vowels were negatively associated with size (b = –8.10, t 95) = –3.0, p = 0.003).

In our study, both restricted and unrestricted men rated sizes C and D the most attractive and the smallest sizes the least attractive, regardless of the viewing angle.

Vertices[1]: contributors – Vertices[2]: artifacts ∙ Edges: contribution relationship ∙ Rating: size of vertices[1] is related to their out-degree.

Vertices [1]: 12 software developers – Vertices [2]: 9,062 artifacts (mostly source code) ∙ Edges: contribution relationship ∙ Rating: size of vertices [1] is related to their out-degree.

Stimuli of different size were presented repetitively and the participant rated their size on a discrete scale.

Schmidt telescopes are rated in size according to the diameter of the corrector glass.

The participants rated the size of visual objects on a 5-point scale.