Many of us “see red,” “feel blue,” or “turn green with envy.” Are such color-emotion associations fundamental to our shared cognitive architecture, or are they cultural creations learned through our languages and traditions? To answer these questions, we tested emotional associations of colors in 4,598 participants from 30 nations speaking 22 native languages. Participants associated 20 emotion concepts with 12 color terms. Pattern-similarity analyses revealed universal color-emotion associations (average similarity coefficient r = .88). However, local differences were also apparent. A machine-learning algorithm revealed that nation predicted color-emotion associations above and beyond those observed universally. Similarity was greater when nations were linguistically or geographically close. This study highlights robust universal color-emotion associations, further modulated by linguistic and geographic factors. These results pose further theoretical and empirical questions about the affective properties of color and may inform practice in applied domains, such as well-being and design.

In physical environments and cultural landscapes, we most often deal not with separate colors, but with color combinations. When choosing a color, we usually try to “fit” it into a preexisting color context, making the new color combination harmonious. Yet are the “laws” of color harmony fundamental to our shared cognitive architecture, or are they cultural products that vary from country to country? To answer these questions we conducted an experiment with 599 participants aged 18 to 76 from eight different countries, including Algeria (MA = 26.2 years; SD = 8.8; 49 men, 26 women), Belarus (MA = 19.8 years; SD = 9.1; 19 men, 63 women), Italy (MA = 29.0 years; SD = 12.8; 23 men, 67 women), Mexico (MA = 20.0 years; SD = 7.0; 34 men, 23 women), Nigeria (MA = 34.7 years; SD = 10.5; 29 men, 32 women), Russia (MA = 24.6 years; SD = 6.3; 17 men, 72 women), Saudi Arabia (MA = 24.5 years; SD = 8.6; 28 men, 38 women), and Chile (MA = 34.3 years; SD = 15.1; 35 men, 43 women). To create experimental stimuli, we used 10 color combinations composed by the Russian avant-garde artist Mikhail Matyushin and his disciples for the Reference Book of Color (1932) based on shades that were typical in architectural design—yellow ochre, light umber, light ochre, and burnt umber. We removed the “intermediary” linking color from each of the selected color triads and asked participants to adjust the color of this band according to their liking. Mapping 2995 color choices into CIELAB and CIELCh color space to identify their chromatic characteristics (hue, lightness, and chroma), we demonstrate graphically that color triads in different cultures have a different “geometry” in CIELAB color space and on the color circle. We conclude that the revealed patterns of these relationships reflect cross-cultural “shifts” in human perception of color harmony. The analysis presented in this paper will facilitate opportunities for architects, designers, and other color professionals to create culturally specific harmonic color combinations in urban environments.

In a high-context culture like Chinese, the linguistic code encompasses only part of the message and is incomplete without context. One of the implicit codes embedded in high-context communication is color tropes. Highly recognizable in the Sinophone world, color tropes often manifest themselves in the forms of metaphor, metonymy, allusions, and similes and are often related to the conveyance of emotional content. This paper provides a selection and discussion of such color tropes, demonstrates that color in a language inspires associations and connotations that are often very subtle and determined by deep cultural memory, and, giving several Chinese examples, shows how the primary semasiology of a color term often influences its subsequent semantic extension.

The designations of the orange fruit in Indo-European languages very often literally meant “apple from China”. Citrus species were known in the Chinese cultural area in the fifth century BCE and glossed in c.100 CE, but there is no basic colour term for orange in Modern Standard Mandarin. This colour category is psychologically salient, but it is still inseparable from a concrete object in the mind of a native speaker, and can therefore be defined as starting to become basic. This article also suggests modification of Berlin and Kay’s (1969: 6) first criterion for basicness in colour terms: applied to Chinese, a term should be monomorphemic and, moreover, monosyllabic – rather than just monolexemic – since almost every syllable is a morpheme in Chinese.