Familiarity and Aptness in Metaphor Comprehension

The career of metaphor hypothesis suggests that novel metaphors are understood through a search for shared features between the topic and vehicle, but with repeated exposure, the figurative meaning is understood directly as a new category is established. the categorization hypothesis argues that ins...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:The American journal of psychology 2016-03, Vol.129 (1), p.49-64
Main Authors: Damerall, Alison Whiteford, Kellogg, Ronald T.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Adult
Automobiles
Classification
Cognition & reasoning
Comprehension
Comprehension - physiology
Computational linguistics
Conventionality
Experimental psychology
Familiarity
Humans
Hybrid vehicles
Hypothesis testing
Language
Language comprehension
Language processing
Meaning
Memory
Metaphor
Metaphors
Natural language interfaces
Natural language processing
Prime numbers
Psychological aspects
Psychology
Reading
Recognition (Psychology) - physiology
Similes
Social Sciences
Speed
Vehicles
Young Adult
Citations: Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The career of metaphor hypothesis suggests that novel metaphors are understood through a search for shared features between the topic and vehicle, but with repeated exposure, the figurative meaning is understood directly as a new category is established. the categorization hypothesis argues that instead good or apt metaphors are understood through a categorization process, whether or not they are familiar. only poor metaphors ever invoke a literal comparison. in experiment 1, with aptness equated, we found that high familiarity speeded comprehension time over low- familiarity metaphors. in experiment 2a, providing a literal prime failed to facilitate interpretation of low- familiarity metaphors, contrary to the career of metaphor hypothesis. in experiment 2b, with familiarity equated, high- and low- aptness metaphors did not differ, contrary to the categorization hypothesis.
ISSN:0002-9556
1939-8298
DOI:10.5406/amerjpsyc.129.1.0049