ABSTRACT Researchers studying color naming and categorization often face challenges in integrating their results across different studies that employ different stimulus color samples. While the Munsell Book of Color (MBC) is predominant, many studies use the more accessible Color‐aid Corporation (CAC) samples—either the “Standard Set” of the Color‐aid system (CAC‐220), used in 1948–1989, or the “Full Set” (CAC‐314), introduced in 1989. To facilitate cross‐study comparisons, we measured 65 color samples from CAC‐220 and 67 color samples from CAC‐314 sets that were used in earlier studies. We performed measurements in two independent laboratories, using different calibration devices, but under nominally identical D65 illumination. We determined colorimetric properties of those color samples in CIE xyY , Lab , and LCh color systems and established correspondences with the World Color Survey (WCS) palette, derived from MBC. Results demonstrate acceptable correspondence between most CAC‐220 and CAC‐314 samples (average CIE 76 a*b* ΔE = 3.62), with only six samples showing larger differences. We successfully matched 55 of 67 CAC‐314 samples to the WCS palette by visual inspection, providing a bridge between studies using different color sets. Inter‐laboratory measurements showed good agreement (ΔEs = 2.70–4.26). However, our calibrations differed substantially from previously published CAC measurements (ΔEs = 11.67–12.70). Sample copy variation, illuminant differences, manufacturing changes, or sample aging might explain some of the differences. Overall, our conversion tables should enable researchers to translate between color systems, compare results from studies using different color sample sets, and establish reproducible methodologies, enhancing past and future comparability in color cognition research.
Jonauskaitė et al. (Mon,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: