Abstract
This study aimed to investigate how priming a metaphor by the gestural representation of its schema affects the understanding of that metaphor. In each of the two tests, different groups of participants were invited to judge the sensibility of the same 20 metaphors preceded by congruent versus incongruent gesture primes as compared to no prime. In the congruent gesture-prime conditions, each metaphor was preceded by a gesture that represented the schema of the subsequent metaphor whereas this gesture was not compatible with the schema of the subsequent metaphor in the incongruent gesture-prime conditions. Results showed that a higher proportion of sentences were judged to be sensible in the congruent gesture-prime conditions compared to no-prime and incongruent gesture-prime conditions. Also, response times of sensibility judgements were shorter in congruent gesture-prime conditions compared to no-prime and incongruent gesture-prime conditions. These results suggest that metaphor schema affects metaphor comprehension through the activation of metaphorically-relevant information and suppressing irrelevant information.
Funding source: Foreign Expert Program with Ministry of Science and Technology of the People's Republic of China http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100002855
Award Identifier / Grant number: G202000230036
-
Funding: This work was supported by the Foreign Expert Program with Ministry of Science and Technology of the People’s Republic of China (G202000230036).
-
Conflicts of interest: The authors declare that they have no conflict of interests.
-
Availability of data and material: This article has earned Open Data and Open Materials badges. Data and materials are available at https://figshare.com/s/c7f5cf89ccd81ea974ff.
-
Ethical statement: All participants of the study either received course credit or participated voluntarily and gave their written consent. The study was carried out according to the declaration of Helsinki (WMA 2013) and was approved by the local ethics committee.
1. Indecision is a whirlpool
Ali has a lot of options. But he seems to be in a circling boat.
2. An idea is a plant
The leaves and branches of Albert’s ideas were growing and taking shape
3. A security is a hunter
The criminal fell into the net that awaited him
4. A business is a living organism
Various businesses need to talk to each other to overcome the current challenges
5. A billboard is a wart
These days, billboards are growing warts on the skins of cities
6. A rumor is a virus
The rumor became viral and spread across the media
7. Quitting a habit is putting an object aside
You are always late at work. You need to put this habit aside
8. A project development is a forward movement
The project is moving forward and will reach its destination by the end of the year
9. Being rich is being in a high position
People living in the top floors of society are unaware of the poor
10. Bankruptcy is a downward movement
During economic depression, his business went down
11. Human progress is an upward movement
After years of hard work and study, he reached the skies
12. Wealth is body power
He is so powerful that he can buy a city
13. Friendship is a bond
Nothing can cut the bond between two old friends
14. Sadness is a downward movement
After hearing the sad news, he went down to the ground
15. Allowing someone to do something is the opening the door for him
The new government opened the door for illegal immigrants
16. Encouraging someone to do something is pushing him
The man pushed his son to get a job in the company
17. Preventing someone to do something is the stopping of his movement
Her illness stopped her rapid movement toward her old dreams
18. Disappointment is contraction
He let off air and contracted when he heard the disappointing news
19. Wasting is discarding
Smith discarded all the wealth he had collected over the long years
20. Being stingy is keeping something tightly
The old man is so frugal that it is impossible to take something out of him
References
Abrahamson, Dor, Mitchell J. Nathan, Caro Williams-Pierce, Candace Walkington, Erin R. Ottmar, Hortensia Soto & Martha W. Alibali. 2020. The future of embodied design for mathematics teaching and learning. Frontiers in Education 5. 147. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2020.00147.Search in Google Scholar
Alibali, Martha W. & Mitchell Nathan. 2012. Embodiment in mathematics teaching and learning: Evidence from learners’ and teachers’ gestures. Journal of the Learning Sciences 21(2). 247–286. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2011.611446.Search in Google Scholar
Beattie, Geoffrey & Laura Sale. 2012. Do metaphoric gestures influence how a message is perceived? The effects of metaphoric gesture-speech matches and mismatches on semantic communication and social judgment. Semiotica 192. 77–98. https://doi.org/10.1515/sem-2012-0067.Search in Google Scholar
Bilgic, Yusuf & Herbert Susmann. 2013. rlme: An R package for rank-based estimation and prediction in random effects nested models. The R Journal 5(2). 71–79. https://doi.org/10.32614/rj-2013-027.Search in Google Scholar
Bobek, Eliza & Barbara Tversky. 2016. Creating visual explanations improves learning. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications 1(1). 27. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-016-0031-6.Search in Google Scholar
Cartmill, Erica A., Sian Beilock & Susan Goldin-Meadow. 2012. A word in the hand: Action, gesture and mental representation in humans and non-human primates. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 367(1585). 129–143. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2011.0162.Search in Google Scholar
Chui, Kawai. 2011. Conceptual metaphors in gesture. Cognitive Linguistics 22(3). 437–458. https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.2011.017.Search in Google Scholar
Gernsbacher, Morton A., Boaz Keysar, Rachel Robertson & Necia K. Werner. 2001. The role of suppression and enhancement in understanding metaphors. Journal of Memory and Language 45(3). 433–450. https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.2000.2782.Search in Google Scholar
Gibbs, Raymond W. 2006. Embodiment and cognitive science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Gibbs, Raymond W. 2011. Evaluating conceptual metaphor theory. Discourse Processes 48(8). 529–562. https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853x.2011.606103.Search in Google Scholar
Glenberg, Arthur M., Marc Sato, Luigi Cattaneo, Lucia Riggio, Daniele Palumbo & Giovanni Buccino. 2008. Processing abstract language modulates motor system activity. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 61(6). 905–919. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470210701625550.Search in Google Scholar
Glenberg, Arthur M. & Michael P. Kaschak. 2002. Grounding language in action. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 9(3). 558–565. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03196313.Search in Google Scholar
Glucksberg, Sam, Mary R. Newsome & Yevgeniya Goldvarg. 2001. Inhibition of the literal: Filtering metaphor-irrelevant information during metaphor comprehension. Metaphor and Symbol 16(3–4). 277–298. https://doi.org/10.1080/10926488.2001.9678898.Search in Google Scholar
Hegarty, Mary & Marcel A. Just. 1993. Constructing mental models of machines from text and diagrams. Journal of Memory and Language 32(6). 717–742. https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.1993.1036.Search in Google Scholar
Hegarty, Mary, Patricia A. Carpenter & Marcel A. Just. 1990. Diagrams in the comprehension of scientific text. In Rebecca Barr, Michael L. Kamil, Peter B. Mosenthal & P. David Pearson (eds.), Handbook of Reading Research, 641–669. New York: Longman.Search in Google Scholar
Hostetter, Autumn B. & Martha W. Alibali. 2019. Gesture as simulated action: Revisiting the framework. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 26(3). 721–752. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-018-1548-0.Search in Google Scholar
Ianì, Francesco, Dalila Burin, Adriana Salatino, Lorenzo Pia, Raffaella Ricci & Monica Bucciarelli. 2018. The beneficial effect of a speaker’s gestures on the listener’s memory for action phrases: The pivotal role of the listener’s premotor cortex. Brain and Language 180–182. 8–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2018.03.001.Search in Google Scholar
Johnson-Glenberg, Mina C. & Colleen Megowan-Romanowicz. 2017. Embodied science and mixed reality: How gesture and motion capture affect physics education. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications 2(1). 24. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-017-0060-9.Search in Google Scholar
Johnson, Mark. 1987. The body in the mind: The bodily basis of meaning, imagination, and reason. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.10.7208/chicago/9780226177847.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Jones, Lara L. & Zachary Estes. 2005. Metaphor comprehension as attributive categorization. Journal of Memory and Language 53(1). 110–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2005.01.016.Search in Google Scholar
Kang, Seokmin & Barbara Tversky. 2016. From hands to minds: Gestures promote understanding. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications 1. 4. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-016-0004-9.Search in Google Scholar
Khatin-Zadeh, Omid & Hooshang Khoshsima. 2021. Homo-schematic metaphors: A study of metaphor comprehension in three different priming conditions. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 50(4). 923–948. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-020-09754-z.Search in Google Scholar
Khatin-Zadeh, Omid, Hooshang Khoshsima, Nahid Yarahmadzehi & Fernando Marmolejo-Ramos. 2019. The impact of metaphorical prime on metaphor comprehension processes. Australian Journal of Linguistics 39(3). 375–388. https://doi.org/10.1080/07268602.2019.1623759.Search in Google Scholar
Khatin-Zadeh, Omid & Sedigheh Vahdat. 2015. Abstract and concrete representation in structure-mapping and class-inclusion. Cognitive Linguistic Studies 2(2). 349–360. https://doi.org/10.1075/cogls.2.2.07kha.Search in Google Scholar
Lakens, Daniel. 2021. Sample size justification. Collabra: Psychology 8(1). https://doi.org/10.1525/collabra.33267.Search in Google Scholar
Lakoff, George. 1987. Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.10.7208/chicago/9780226471013.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Lakoff, George & Rafael Núñez. 2000. Where mathematics comes from: How the embodied mind brings mathematics into being. New York: Basic Books.Search in Google Scholar
Macedonia, Manuela. 2019. Embodied learning: Why at school the mind needs the body. Frontiers in Psychology 1010. 2098. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02098.Search in Google Scholar
Mandler, Jean M. & Cristóbal Pagán Cánovas. 2014. On defining image schemas. Language and Cognition: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Language and Cognitive Science 6(4). 510–532. https://doi.org/10.1017/langcog.2014.14.Search in Google Scholar
Marghetis, Tyler & Rafael Núñez. 2013. The motion behind the symbols: A vital role for dynamism in the conceptualization of limits and continuity in expert mathematics. Topics in Cognitive Science 5(2). 299–316. https://doi.org/10.1111/tops.12013.Search in Google Scholar
Noguchi, Kimihiro, Frank Konietschke, Fernando Marmolejo-Ramos & Markus Pauly. 2021. Permutation tests are robust and powerful at 0.5% and 5% significance levels. Behavior Research Methods 3(6). 2712–2724. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-021-01595-5.Search in Google Scholar
Núñez, Rafael & George Lakoff. 1998. What did Weierstrass really define? The cognitive structure of natural and δ-ε continuity. Mathematical Cognition 4(2). 85–101. https://doi.org/10.1080/135467998387343.Search in Google Scholar
Ping, Raedy M., Susan Goldin-Meadow & Sian L. Beilock. 2014. Understanding gesture: Is the listener’s motor system involved? Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 143(1). 195–204. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032246.Search in Google Scholar
Wilson, Nicole L. & Raymond W. Gibbs. 2007. Real and imagined body movement primes metaphor comprehension. Cognitive Science 31(4). 721–731. https://doi.org/10.1080/15326900701399962.Search in Google Scholar
Wojciechowska, Sylwia & Konrad Juszczyk. 2014. Metaphor, metonymy and emotions. Poznan Studies in Contemporary Linguistics 50(1). 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1515/psicl-2014-0001.Search in Google Scholar
World Medical Association. 2013. Ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. Journal of the American Medical Association 310(20). 2191–2194.10.1001/jama.2013.281053Search in Google Scholar
© 2022 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
