Abstract
On each of 11 trials, an experimental group was presented a realistic picture (of the literal information in a proverb) and two abstract, nonrepresentational pictures. The subjects chose the abstract picture that provided the best conceptual match for the realistic picture. Control subjects chose from the abstract pictures without having seen the realistic pictures. The experimental group reliably selected the correct picture on most trials whereas the control group performed at chance. Also, when the experimental subjects’ rationales for their choices were appropriate, they chose the correct picture 92% of the time; inappropriate rationales were associated with a 56% correct response rate. Apparently, the subjects used analogical formats to map surface information in the two kinds of pictures and connected them via a more fundamental abstract medium.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Asch, S., & Nerlove, H. (1960). The development of double function terms in children. In B. Kaplan & S. Wapner (Eds.), Perspectives in psychological theory. New York: International Universities Press.
Connor, K., & Kogan, N. (1980). Topic-vehicle relations in metaphor: The issue of asymmetry. In R. P. Honeck & R. R. Hoffman (Eds.), Cognition and figurative language (pp. 283-310). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Feldhaus, R. (1987). On the interpretative basis of the gradedness of abstract categories. Unpublished master’s thesis, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH.
Gardner, H. (1974). Metaphors and modalities: How children project polar adjectives onto diverse domains. Child Development, 45, 84–91.
Gentner, D. (1977). Children’s performance on a spatial analogies task. Child Development, 48, 1034–1039.
Gentner, D. (1983). Structure-mapping: A theoretical framework for analogy. Cognitive Science, 7, 155–170.
Gentner, D., & Toupin, L. (1986). Systematicity and surface similarity in the development of analogy. Cognitive Science, 10, 277–300.
Honeck, R. P., Firment, M., & Kibler, C. (1987). Context and the generalizability of conceptually based categories. Unpublished manuscript, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH.
Honeck, R. P., & Kibler, C. (1985). Representation in cognitive psychological theories of figurative language. In W. Paprotté & R. Dirven (Eds.), The ubiquity of metaphor: Metaphor in language and thought (pp. 381-423). Philadephia: Benjamins.
Honeck, R. P., Kibler, C., & Sugar, J. (1985). The conceptual base view of categorization. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 14, 155–174.
Honeck, R. P., Sowry, B., & Voegtle, K. (1978). Proverbial understanding in a pictorial context. Child Development, 49, 327–331.
Honeck, R. P., Sugar, J., & Kibler, C. (1982). Stories, categories, and figurative meaning. Poetics, 11, 127–144.
Honeck, R. P., Voegtle, K., & Sowry, B. (1981). Figurative understanding of pictures and sentences. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 10, 135–153.
Verbrugge, R. R. (1977). Resemblances in language and perception. In R. E. Shaw & J. D. Bransford (Eds.), Acting, perceiving, and comprehending: Toward an ecological psychology. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
The authors wish to thank Stacy Martz and Melinda McDonald for running subjects and coding the data.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Honeck, R.P., Case, T.J.S. & Firment, M. Conceptual connections between realistic and abstract pictures. Bull. Psychon. Soc. 26, 5–7 (1988). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03334844
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03334844