Painting With all the Colors of the Wind Part One

PART ONE: WHAT IS SYNESTHESIA?

Read this sentence.

Now stop. Go back, and read it again, but this time, listen to that sentence as well. No, it’s alright, there is no need to read it aloud, and you don’t need to enunciate carefully with your internal voice either. That’s not quite what I mean. I want you to hear the sentence, listen to each letter’s tone as it comes, observe the unique melody evoked by that specific combination of written symbols and shapes. Hear the sentence.

If that task seems impossible, that’s okay.

We can try another if you like.

“I’ll Follow You into the Dark” by Sigourney Young
For the Etsy artist Sigourney Young, this task would be perfectly intuitive. Young has color-music synesthesia, and creates beautiful watercolor pieces based on what she sees during a song. My best friend commissioned this painting, inspired by the song “I”ll Follow You into the Dark by Death Cab for Cutie, for me in 2017, and I’ve overlaid the sheet music of the piece on an image of the painting to illustrate how the two are inextricably intertwined.

Think of a song, perhaps your favorite song. Pick a song that is rich and full, with a vibrant soundscape to immerse yourself in. Now, I want you to go and listen to that song. Yes, right now is fine. Go ahead and close this article- I’ll wait for you right here. Take your time and enjoy the music.

Back already? Good. Now, I want you to paint that song for me. I need you to paint that song for me and show me what you saw as you listened. Show each note as it appeared, every melody, countermelody, chord and harmony, laid out in vivid pigments. Recreate what you saw as you heard, each color and shape singing out clearly.

That didn’t make sense to you either?  What about tasting the texture of the nearest object? Or perhaps smelling that first sentence?

What if I told you that these weren’t just the strange, hypothetical conjuring of an online article, but a genuine way of experiencing the world?

For the roughly 4% of the world’s population that have synesthesia, an integration of seemingly separate sensations is simply a part of their reality. Synesthesia is a broad categorization of neurological phenomena in which the stimulation of one sensory system, such as the visual or auditory systems, triggers a correlated response in another. This blending or “bleeding” together of sensations is involuntary and unconscious, simply elicited by whatever stimulus was present. The word “synesthesia”, a combination of two Greek words, syn, meaning together or conjoined, and aesthesis, meaning perception, forms a remarkable accurate description of the condition (Phillips, Gross).

This figure, adapted from Grossenbacher and Lovelace (2001) illustrates 2 examples of inducer-concurrent pairing in color-grapheme synesthesia.

There are many different types of synesthesia, but they all have some traits in common. There are at least three fundamental requirements commonly used to define the condition in general. First, as I mentioned earlier, it is an involuntary reaction, one that is unconsciously elicited by the stimulus (Phillips). This means that the synesthete, as people with synesthesia are called, doesn’t have control over what is perceived, or when. It is just like any other sensory experience- you can’t “unhear” or “unsee” something, nor change the color of an object you are looking at (Gross). Additionally, the associations must be consistent. For example, someone with color-auditory synesthesia will always perceive the same color in response to the same sound, and if the number 4 is red to a color-grapheme synesthete, it must always be red. Finally, the experience is  the “adding” of sensory input, not replacing or substituting it. That means that the synesthete is still able to perceive the stimuli in the original sense as well, so if a person has auditory-gustatory, or sound-taste, synesthesia, they will be still be able to taste the food as well as hear it (Ward).

Aside from those three requirements, the synesthetic experience is extremely varied and idiosyncratic. Typically, the secondary sensation, referred to as the “concurrent” to the stimulus’s “inducer”,  is best described as a “projected” experience. This just means that it isn’t felt as something imagined, but as the perception of something outside the body. For example, if you had lexical-gustatory synesthesia, you would actually have the sensation of tasting something specific when you heard or read certain letters, rather than just associating a taste with it mentally. However, it isn’t always that clear-cut, particularly with color-graphemic synesthesia, the association of numbers or letters with particular colors. Although all will perceive the color as something inherent to the grapheme, the color may not appear to physically overlay with the normal visual field.  Dixon et al. 2004 splits people with this type of synesthesia  into two groups, projectors and associators. Projectors will see the color physically overlaid on a space in their visual field, while associators will see the color in their mind’s eye, as if on an internal screen (Ward). Contrary to the initial definition, synesthesia is also not always the combination of two separate sensory systems, but simply different aspects of them. Using color-graphemic synesthesia again as the example, both the visually-presented character and the color are different facets of the same visual sense (Ward). It has also been shown that for some synesthetes, the concept of the stimulus is enough to trigger the secondary sensory experience. Dixon et al. 2000 found, for instance, that for individuals with color-number synesthesia, giving them sums equal to 7, like 5+2, can often be enough to make them see the color associated with 7 (Ward). It has also been observed that if the inducing word is “inaccessible, as in a tip-of-the-tongue state”, people with lexical-gustatory synesthesia may be able to taste it.

This table compiles the relative frequency of some inducer-concurrent types pairings, as adapted from data collected by Day (2007), and I think it is a neat way to see a few of the many possibilities for modality pairing in synesthesia.

There are, theoretically, as many different forms of synesthesia as there are possible combinations of sensory experiences, and it is estimated that there are upwards of 35 different variants documented so far (Gross). In addition to the ones mentioned, this includes auditory-touch synesthesia, where a physical touch or other tactile sensation also produces a sound, mirror or touch-visual synesthesia, where seeing another person receive a tactile stimulus (e.g. get touched or touch something) makes the synesthete feel that touch as well, and variations that include spatial and/or temporal experiences. The most prevalent forms are color-graphemic and color-auditory, and even within these, there is a ton of individuality. Synesthetes will have their own colors for each stimulus, and for some people, each individual character will have a color, while others may have one sensation for an entire word.

An interesting point to make here, is that thus far (and for the remainder of these articles), we are discussing synesthesia that an individual has always experienced, sometimes called “developmental synesthesia”. While it a topic of debate whether they should be considered synesthesia and/or arise from the same biological mechanisms, there are other related conditions known collectively as “acquired synesthesia” (Gross). These include synesthesia/synesthetic-like experiences that occur later in life, usually due to some form of physical injury or change  that results in the loss of sensory input from one area or sense. The fairly well-known Phantom Limb Syndrome, during which the individual perceives pain and other somatosensations from the area where an amputated limb used to be, is actually linked to some very intriguing cases of acquired synesthesia! People in these cases report perceiving touch from visual input, like seeing something touch either the location of the phantom limb or touch on the corresponding location of another person. This seems to parallel the experiences of mirror synesthesia (Ramachandran). There has also been research on acquired auditory-visual and tactile-visual synesthesia following the onset of blindness, as well as touch-auditory synesthesia after the loss of hearing, and following damage to the thalamus (Ramachandran, Ward). In these cases, the general hypothesis seems to be that the sensory cortex implicated for the lost/damaged sense is still active and able to function, but no longer getting the sensory input from receptor sites as before. It therefore may begin to respond to another sensory system, through some change in neural communication, which can create the dual sensory experiences of synesthesia (Ward).

If you, like me, are a nonsynesthete, this all may seem incredibly overwhelming and perhaps even a bit difficult to believe. But while the neurological basis of synesthesia isn’t completely understood, there is a substantial body of experimental research and data on the subject. A study by Baron-Cohen et al. in 1987 provided the first experimental evidence that the synesthetic associations of specific stimuli are consistent over time. Working with a control group of people without synesthesia as well as a participant with color-lexical synesthesia, they recorded the color each person reported being triggered by each word on a 100-word list. The control group was asked to repeat the test 2 weeks later, and only retained consistency with the word-color pairing 20 percent of the time. By contrast, when the synesthete was asked, 1 year later and without any prior warning, to repeat the test, she  showed a consistency over 90% (Ward). Further investigations by this research team also found that brain imaging technology can measure a difference in brain activity during synesthetic perception. Using PET and fMRI imaging to measure brain activity in different regions, they were able to observe that people with color-auditory synesthesia have increased activation in area V4, which is correlated to color, than nonsynesthetes do when listening to sounds.

Another experimental technique used to test for synesthesia is a modified version of the Stroop test. The original Stroop test is something you’ve probably done at some point, and involves reading the color name or identifying the ink color of color names that are either printed in a congruent color, like the word red written in RED, or in an incongruent color, such as like this word RED printed in green ink. Normally, you are able to respond much faster and more accurately when the word and the color are congruent- this is known as the Stroop Effect  and is extremely well-established amongst the scientific community. In the experiments involving synesthesia, the same principle is applied to the inducing stimulus and the concurrent perceptual effect: for people with color-grapheme synesthesia who perceive the number 4 as blue, the congruent task would have a blue 4, while the incongruent would have 4 printed in a different color, like purple. This has been done with color-grapheme, gustatory-auditory, color-auditory, and even spatial synesthesia, and the Stroop Effect has been markedly present for all (Ward).

Neat, you’ve made it this far! That was my initial look into the phenomena that is synesthesia and what really defines it. While researching, I kept finding out more and more, so if you want to learn about research into the biological basis of synesthesia,  or any of the other interesting facts I found out, check out Part Two here:

https://chargedmagazine.org/2019/10/painting-with-al…he-wind-part-two/

References 

Day, S. (2007). Types of Synesthesia. Retrieved from http://www.daysyn.com/Types-of-Syn.html

Gross, V. (n.d.). Synesthesia Project: FAQ. Retrieved from https://www.bu.edu/synesthesia/faq/

Grossenbacher, P. G., & Lovelace, C. T. (2001). Mechanisms of synesthesia: Cognitive and physiological constraints. Trends in Cognitive Sciences,5(1), 36-41. doi:10.1016/s1364-6613(00)01571-0

Phillips, E. L. (n.d.). What is synesthesia? Retrieved from https://faculty.washington.edu/chudler/syne.html

Ramachandran, V.S., Hubbard, E.M. and Butcher, P.A. (2004). Synesthesia, CrossActivation, and the Foundations of Neuroepistemology. In G. Calvert, C. Spence and B. E. Stein (eds), The Handbook of Multisensory Processes (pp. 867-83). Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press.

Ward, J. (2013). Synesthesia. Annual Review of Psychology,64(1), 49-75. doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143840

Your journey starts here! Let’s talk!

ThemeRex © 2026. All rights reserved.
  Timothy Durham was convicted of rape when a test showed his DNA genotype matched the DNA recovered from the crime scene. Eye witnesses testified that Durham was in a different state at the time of the incident, but he wasn’t exonerated from his 3000 year sentence until follow up DNA analysis showed that the preliminary forensic analysis used in the trial was misinterpreted (Thomas et al.). DNA testing serves an invaluable part in our criminal justice system, but it comes with complications and bias that can lead to wrongful convictions and misinformed juries.  

Background:

Forensic genetics aims to identify the origin of a biological sample. It can be traced back to Karl Landsteiner who discovered human ABO blood groups. With blood groups, suspects could be eliminated based on their blood type. For example, if a suspect had type A blood and there was type B blood left at the scene by the perpetrator, the investigators could rule out the suspect. Unfortunately, the reverse didn’t work. If the suspect and perpetrator both had the same blood type, it can’t be concluded that the suspect was guilty. Blood identifiers evolved into 8 distinct categories which improved the ability to eliminate suspects, but could only conclude that (if the system matched) it might be the perpetrator or this person might be related to the perpetrator (Jobling and Gill). The field evolved in the 1980s with the discovery of Minisatellites, lines of repetitive DNA that don’t encode proteins. Minisatellite patterns in DNA create what we know today as the DNA fingerprint, and it has a much higher accuracy rate than previous methods (Augustyn et al.). Around the same time, a breakthrough for victims of sexual assault was discovered. In the case of assault, bodily fluids of both the victim and the assaulter can get mixed. A process called differential lysis was created which could selectively increase the concentration of sperm in a fluid sample thereby allowing for accurate DNA testing (Jobling and Gill). Forensics evolved to use single-locus probe testing after several years because of its ease of interpretation. It looked at specific minisatellites that had high variability between subjects. This was the first DNA-based method to be used in a criminal investigation. Two murder homicides from several years apart were connected using DNA evidence. The evidence was then used to exonerate an innocent man, and the guilty party was found when he tried to evade mandatory DNA testing for all men in the small town. His guilt was then reinforced when the DNA profiles matched, and he gave a confession (Jobling and Gill). Finding DNA at a crime scene doesn’t guarantee that you’ll find a murderer. There are issues with non-pure samples and limited samples that make DNA work difficult, and accreditation of facilities and new techniques and take time (Jobling and Gill).  

Subjectivity of DNA Interpretation:

In a 2009 publication, the National Academy of Science discusses the possibility for subjective influence in lab based forensics. The interpretation bias happens in complex cases where, for example, there could be a mixture of DNA. A study published in 2011 looked specifically at this issue. A gang rape happened in Georgia, and the mixture in DNA from the case was used to prosecute one suspect after another suspect took a plea bargain to testify against him. With DNA mixtures, there are three possible conclusions: suspect excluded, suspect cannot be excluded, and inconclusive. If the suspect is excluded, it means that there’s little to no possibility that his DNA is part of the sample. If the suspect cannot be excluded, it means that there’s a possibility that his DNA is part of the sample. In the trial, the DNA examiners who knew the context of the case concluded that the suspect being prosecuted could not be excluded. The 2011 study gave the DNA evidence from this case and the DNA profiles of the suspects to 17 forensic examiners. These examiners had no context of the case, and they all worked independently. Of the 17, only 1 came to the same conclusion (suspect cannot be excluded) as the examiners who knew the context of the case. Twelve of the 17 concluded that the suspect who was prosecuted and convicted had no relation to the DNA found in the sample. Not only does this show that subjectivity occurs due to the context of the case, but the 17 examiners came up with different findings based on their past experiences meaning that not all DNA analysis is objective. Some organizations like the Scientific Working Group on DNA Analysis Methods say that quantitative statistical evidence should be presented with every categorical conclusion, but the US doesn’t require this (Dror and Hampikian).

False Positives:

There are two categories that cause wrongful identification in a DNA report: coincidental matches and false positives. Coincidental matches are DNA matches between two unrelated people. The probability of these matches is about 1 to 500,000 for white individuals and about 1 to 350,000 for black individuals. This small probability of coincidental matches makes people feel confident in DNA evidence. False positives, on the other hand, are matches between DNA and test DNA that result from issues in the forensics lab. There have been multiple cases of forensics labs accidentally switching victim and suspected rapist DNA which lead to convictions that were later overturned when the lab realized the error. There are also cases of misreading or misunderstanding a sample. In a case from 1993, a man was convicted of rape because someone interpreted a mixed sample of victim and perpetrator DNA as an individual sample. The conviction was again overturned. To prevent false convictions, retesting DNA is allowed, but it’s not an efficient solution. Many people are pushing for statistical information on the probability of false positives, so that the jurors can make accurate judgements based on DNA evidence (Thomas et al.).  

Conclusion:

DNA analysis is a useful tool for the criminal justice system, but subjectivity can be an issue in forensic testing. To combat wrongful convictions, there are organizations like The Innocence Project who use DNA testing to free the innocent, but reformed forensic testing standards should be put in place to prevent subjectivity and to ensure juries are correctly informed during trials. https://www.innocenceproject.org/    

Citation:

Augustyn , Adam, et al. “DNA Finerprinting.” Encyclopedia Britannica , 26 Apr. 2018, www.britannica.com/science/DNA-fingerprinting#ref153186. Dror, Itiel E., and Greg Hampikian. “Subjectivity and Bias in Forensic DNA Mixture Interpretation.” Science & Justice, vol. 51, no. 4, 2011, pp. 204–208., doi:10.1016/j.scijus.2011.08.004. Jobling, Mark A., and Peter Gill. “Encoded Evidence: DNA in Forensic Analysis.” Nature Reviews: Genetics, vol. 5, no. 10, Oct. 2004, pp. 739–751., doi:10.1038/nrg1455. Thompson, William C, et al. “How the Probability of a False Positive Affects the Value of DNA Evidence.” Journal of Forensic Sciences, vol. 48, no. 1, Jan. 2003, pp. 1–8., doi:10.1520/jfs2001171.