Reversibility, Aptness, and the Conventionality of Metaphors and Similes

By Dan Chiappe, John M. Kennedy, T. Smykowski. 2003

103 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Developmental and Educational Psychology, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, Social Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/33c7bcb8c10638638b6fda4db969af2b19b8e697

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Developmental and Educational Psychology

1. Zachary Estes
2. Lara L. Jones
3. Paul H. Thibodeau
4. Frank H. Durgin
5. Penny Chiappe
6. Dan Chiappe

In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

1. Paul H. Thibodeau
2. Frank H. Durgin
3. Zachary Estes
4. Lara L. Jones
5. Penny Chiappe
6. Dan Chiappe
7. Raymond W. Gibbs Jr.

In Social Psychology

1. Paul H. Thibodeau
2. Frank H. Durgin
3. Zachary Estes
4. Lara L. Jones
5. Raymond W. Gibbs Jr.

Citations in the corpus

• Metaphor Aptness and Conventionality: A Processing Fluency Account (2011, methodology): “Following prior research, aptness was defined as “the extent to which the statement captures important features of the topic” ( Chiappe, Kennedy, & Smykowski, 2003 , p.”
• The role of working memory in metaphor production and comprehension. (2007, background): “According to Kintsch (2000), it can explain the non-reversibility of metaphors (Chiappe et al., 2003; Glucksberg et al., 1997).”
• Roosters, robins, and alarm clocks : Aptness and conventionality in metaphor comprehension (2006, methodology): “Although conventionality and aptness are theoretically independent factors (Chiappe et al., 2003), a brief review of the literature indicates that the two factors exhibit strikingly similar influences on metaphorical processing.”