ArticleFrontiers in psychology2022
The effect of incongruous contextual cues on pictorial metaphor processing.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
An eye-tracking experiment was conducted to investigate the effects of incongruous contextual cues, both perceptual and conceptual, on pictorial metaphor processing. In a metaphoricity decision task, 38 participants independently viewed a total of 36 pictures equally divided into three different conditions: metaphoric pictures (MP), anomalous literal pictures (ALP) with perceptual congruity, and congruous literal pictures (LP). By initiating the midway condition ALP, the effect of contextual cues of conceptual incongruity were distinguished from that of perceptual incongruity. The eye movement data during each picture viewing were collected before the participant made a decision whether the picture was metaphorical or not. The behavioral results showed that the more abundant incongruous contextual cues were there, the more likely the pictures would be judged as metaphors. It took longer for the participants to make decisions on the literal pictures, be them in congruous or incongruous condition. The results of eye-tracking statistics showed that the perceptual incongruity cues were detected earlier than the conceptual ones. The perceptual-conceptual incongruity cues evoked more fixations and longer duration than the perceptual incongruity alone. The processing of conceptual incongruity proceeded after that of perceptual incongruity. The overall result of the study supports the contextual cues of perceptual incongruity as triggers for pictorial metaphor processing, whereas the contextual cues of conceptual incongruity play a decisive role in the metaphoric interpretation, which in turn renders the processing of MP more mental effort consuming than that of ALP or LP. The present findings have vital implications in revealing the triggering and determining mechanisms of pictorial metaphor processing, which are significant in exploring human cognition and have great impacts on various facets of social and cultural communications.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.