The psychological status of image schemas

By J. Gibbs. 2005

105 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Cognitive Neuroscience, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, Information Systems

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/edc44cfd1b957368bf165eecb5aa084cb3db7379

How researchers see this paper

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

In Cognitive Neuroscience

1. M. Taylor
2. M. Wood
3. J. Van Ness
4. Diane Pecher
5. Inge Boot
6. Dustin S. Stoltz
7. Saskia van Dantzig

In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

1. M. Taylor
2. M. Wood
3. J. Van Ness
4. Diane Pecher
5. Inge Boot
6. Dustin S. Stoltz
7. Saskia van Dantzig

In Information Systems

1. Diane Pecher
2. Inge Boot
3. Saskia van Dantzig

Citations in the corpus

• Abstract concepts: sensory-motor grounding, metaphors, and beyond (2011, methodology): “Hampe (2005; see also Gibbs, 2005), for example, noted that there is no set of clear-cut criteria that distinguishes image schemas from other types of mental representations.”
• Schemas and Frames (2018, background): “The initial evidence for image schemas was the striking consistency among metaphors in cross-linguistic data, though the concept also finds support in developmental and neurocognitive research (Dodge and Lakoff 2005; Gibbs 2005; Gibbs and Colston 2006; Mandler 1992).”