Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36844282›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in psychology2023

Global bibliometric analysis of conceptual metaphor research over the recent two decades.

Xia Zhao, Yi Zheng, Xincheng Zhao

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in psychology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Xia ZhaoSchool of Foreign Languages, Jiangsu University of Science and Technology, Zhenjiang, China.
Yi ZhengSchool of Foreign Languages, Jiangsu University of Science and Technology, Zhenjiang, China.
Xincheng ZhaoCenter for Applied English Studies, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Conceptual Metaphor has been a prevalent theme in the linguistic field for the recent twenty years. Numerous scholars worldwide have shown interest in it and published many academic papers from various stances on this topic. However, so far, there have been few rigorous scientific mapping investigations. With the help of bibliometric analysis tool, we selected 1,257 articles on Conceptual Metaphors published from 2002 to 2022, as collected in the Web of Sciences Core Collection database, from unique cognitive perspectives. The global annual scientific output of Conceptual Metaphor, including the cited articles, sources, keywords, and research trends, will be examined in this study. The most notable findings of this study are the following. First, there has been an upward trend in Conceptual Metaphor research over the last two decades. Second, the five most prominent research groups on Conceptual Metaphors are in Spain, the United States of America, China, Great Britain, and Russia. Third, future research on Conceptual Metaphors may focus on corpus linguistics, neurolinguistics, psychology, and critical discourse analysis. The interdisciplinary study may enhance the growth of Conceptual Metaphors.

Indexed as

bibliometric analysisevaluationinterdisciplinary studyquantitative and qualitativeresearch trends

Identifiers

PMID36844282
PMCPMC9951592

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.