Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42313177›Full record

ReviewPsychological research2026

A dual-process account of metaphorical embodiment.

Omid Khatin-Zadeh, Hassan Banaruee

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Psychological research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Omid Khatin-ZadehSchool of Foreign Languages, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, China. khatinzadeh.omid@yahoo.com.
Hassan BanarueeDepartment of Educational Psychology, University of Education Weingarten, Weingarten, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Theories of metaphorical embodiment have widely treated perceptual processes as an inseparable component of metaphoric conceptualization. This paper critically examines and synthesizes influential accounts of metaphor in cognitive linguistics and cognitive science, with particular attention to Gentner's structure-mapping theory, Lakoff's invariance principle, and Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez's extended invariance principle. We propose a distinction between metaphoric conceptualization and metaphoric perceptualization as analytically separable, though interrelated, processes. Our discussion is limited to metaphors that are interpreted through the projection of image-schematic or propositional structures. We suggest that metaphoric conceptualization primarily involves structural projection, whereby the abstract structure of a source domain-independent of its perceivable features-is mapped onto a target domain. Metaphoric perceptualization, by contrast, consists in the organization of the target domain's perceivable features within this projected structure, as well as, in some cases, the attribution of salient perceivable features from the source domain to the target domain. Through this process, a novel perceptual representation of the target domain may emerge. By integrating and reassessing existing theoretical frameworks, we conclude that metaphorical embodiment is best understood as comprising two distinct but related processes, with metaphoric perceptualization being guided and constrained by metaphoric conceptualization.

Indexed as

Concept FormationMetaphorHumans

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.