Cover not available
Part of
Visual Metaphor: Structure and process
Edited by Gerard J. Steen
[Converging Evidence in Language and Communication Research 18] 2018
► pp. 147–162

Chapter 6
How visual form affects metaphoric conceptualization

The role of shape similarity

Article outline
  • 6.1Introduction
  • 6.2Formal differences between verbal and visual metaphor
  • 6.3Juxtaposition as a visual syntactic template
  • 6.4Shape Similarity
  • 6.5Study 1
    • 6.5.1Experiment 1
    • 6.5.2Experiment 2
  • 6.6Study 2
  • 6.7Conclusion
  • Note
  • References
Published online: 6 December 2018
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/celcr.18.06van
References (21)
References
Barsalou, L. W. (1983). Ad hoc categories. Memory & Cognition, 11(3), 211–227.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Belongie, S., Malik, J., & Puzicha, J. (2002). Shape matching and object recognition using shape context. IEEE Transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence, 24(4), 509–522.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bowdle, B. F., & Gentner, D. (2005). The career of metaphor. Psychological Review, 112(1), 193–215.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Forceville, C. (1996). Pictorial metaphor in advertising. London, UK: Routledge.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gentner, D., & Clement, C. (1988). Evidence for relational selectivity in the interpretation of analogy and metaphor. In G. H. Bower (Ed.) The psychology of learning and motivation: Advances in research and theory (pp. 307–358). New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Gentner, D., & Kurtz, K. (2005). Relational categories. In W. K. Ahn, R. L. Goldstone, B. C. Love, A. B. Markman & P. W. Wolff (Eds.), Categorization inside and outside the laboratory (pp. 151–175). Washington, DC: APA.Google Scholar
Gounden, Y. & Nicolas, S. (2012). The impact of processing time on the bizarreness and orthographic distinctiveness effects. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 53, 287–294.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Humphreys, G. W., & Forde, E. M. E. (2001). Hierarchies, similarity, and interactivity in object recognition: “Category-specific” neuropsychological deficits. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24, 453–509.Google Scholar
Maes, A., & Schilperoord, J. (2008). Classifying visual rhetoric: Conceptual and structural heuristics. In E. F. McQuarrie & B. J. Phillips (Eds.), Go figure new directions in advertising rhetoric (pp. 227–257). New York/London: ArmonkGoogle Scholar
McQuarrie, E. F., & Mick, D. G. (1999). Visual rhetoric in advertising: Text-interpretive, experimental and reader-response analyse. The Journal of Consumer Research, 26 (1), 37–54.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Michelon, P., Snyder, A. Z., Buckner, R. L., McAvoy, M., & Zacks, J. M. (2003). Neural correlates of incongruous visual information: An event-related fMRI study. NeuroImage, 19(4), 1612–1626.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Phillips, B. J., & McQuarrie, E. F. (2004). Beyond visual metaphor: A new typology of visual rhetoric in advertising. Marketing Theory, 4(1/2), 113–136.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schilperoord, J. (This vol.). Ways with pictures: Visual incongruities and metaphor.
Schilperoord, J., Maes, A., & Ferdinandusse, H. (2009). Perceptual and conceptual visual rhetoric: The case of symmetric object alignment. Metaphor and Symbol, 24, 155–173.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schmidt, S. R. (1991). Can we have a distinctive theory of memory? Memory and Cognition, 19(6), 523–542.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Steen, G. (2007). Finding Metaphor in Grammar and Usage. Amsterdam: John Benjamins BV.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van Mulken, M. (2003). Analyzing rhetorical devices in print advertisements. Document Design, 4(2), 114–128.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van Mulken, M., Le Pair, R. & Forceville, C. (2010). The impact of perceived complexity, deviation and comprehension on the appreciation of visual metaphor in advertising across three European countries. Journal of Pragmatics, 42, 3418–3430.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van Weelden, L., Maes, A., Schilperoord, J., & Cozijn, R. (2011). The role of shape in comparing objects: How perceptual similarity may affect visual metaphor processing. Metaphor and Symbol, 26(4), 272–298.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van Weelden, L., Maes, A., Schilperoord, J., & Swerts, M. (2012). How object shape affects visual metaphor processing. Experimental Psychology, 59(6), 364–371.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van Weelden, L. (2013). Metaphor in good shape. Doctoral thesis, Tilburg University.Google Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Coëgnarts, Maarten
2022. Chapter 6. Time-creation in film. In Time Representations in the Perspective of Human Creativity [Human Cognitive Processing, 75], ► pp. 125 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 27 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.