Skip to main content
Log in

Poetic comparisons: Psychological dimensions of metaphoric processing

  • Published:
Journal of Psycholinguistic Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A sample of 204 poetic metaphors was rated along 10 scales by 300 participants (30 different people for each of the scales). The scales were identical to ones previously used in a study involving ratings of artificially constructed metaphors, and were chosen on the basis of their relevance to current models of metaphor processing. Three major findings emerged. First, the overall pattern of findings was identical to the one obtained earlier using constructed metaphors, and aspects of it provided support for each major metaphor model without completely onfirming any one of them. Models that attribute an important role to perceptual like processes provided the most successful fit to the data. Second, all of the 10 scales were positively intercorrelated, although the correlations were generally moderate enough to permit independent experimental manipulations of the variables defined by the different scales. These results, too, are similar to those obtained earlier with constructed metaphors. Third, we identify and discuss some suggestive differences between the results of the two studies.

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

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Conrad, R. (1964). Acoustic confusions in immediate memory.British Journal of Psychology, 55, 75–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dawson, M. (1982).Multidimensional responses to metaphor. Unpublished master's thesis, University of Western Ontario.

  • Gentner, D. (1980).The structure of analogical models in science. Unpublished manuscript.

  • Johnson, M., & Malgady, R. (1979). Some cognitive aspects of figurative language: Association and metaphor.Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 8, 253–265.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, M. E., & Malgady, R. (1980). Toward a perceptual theory of metaphoric comprehension. In R. Honeck & R. Hoffman (Eds.),Cognition and figurative language. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Katz, A. N. (1982). Metaphoric relationships: The role of feature saliency.Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 11, 283–296.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marschark, M., & Hunt, R. (1983).On memory for metaphor. Memory and Cognition (in press).

  • Marschark, M., Katz, A. N., & Paivio, A. (1983). Dimensions of metaphor.Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 12, 17–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCabe, A. (1983). Conceptual similarity and quality of metaphor in isolated sentences versus extended contexts.Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 12, 41–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paivio, A. (1979). Psychological processes in the comprehension of metaphor. In A. Ortony (Ed.),Metaphor and thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reichman, P., & Coste, E. (1980). Mental imagery and the comprehension of figurative language: Is there a relationship? In R. Honeck & R. Hoffman (Eds.),Cognition and figurative language. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tourangeau, R., & Sternberg, R. J. (1981). Aptness in metaphor.Cognitive Psychology, 13, 27–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Verbrugge, R., & McCarrell, N. (1977). Metaphoric comprehension: Studies in reminding and resembling.Cognitive Psychology, 9, 493–533.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ziff, P. (1964). On understanding “understanding utterances”. In J. Fodor & J. Katz (Eds.),The structure of language. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Katz, A.N., Paivio, A. & Marschark, M. Poetic comparisons: Psychological dimensions of metaphoric processing. J Psycholinguist Res 14, 365–383 (1985). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01067881

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01067881

Keywords

Navigation