The effects of creativity and crystallized intelligence on metaphor comprehension
Journal: Region - Educational Research and Reviews DOI: 10.32629/rerr.v5i5.1519
Abstract
The nature of the cognitive processes involved in metaphor comprehension has spurred ongoing debate, particularly concerning the relative contributions of general analogy versus language-specific categorization. One prominent proposal posits that metaphor comprehension necessitates analogical reasoning to establish a relationship between the target and the source. An alternative perspective posits that metaphors can be interpreted as categorization statements. This paper adopts an individual-differences approach to probe metaphor comprehension, encompassing both literary and non-literary metaphors. The research conducted a metaphor-comprehension study involving college students, measuring both creativity (using the Chinese Remote Association Test) and crystallized verbal intelligence (using the verbal subscale of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale). The research findings revealed distinct predictive relationships between each measure and metaphor comprehension. Specifically, it had been observed that crystallized intelligence significantly influences comprehension across a wide spectrum of metaphor types, encompassing both literary and non-literary examples. Conversely, individual differences in creativity predominantly impact the comprehension of more cognitively intricate metaphors, notably those originating from literary sources.
Keywords
creativity; crystallized intelligence; metaphor comprehension
Full Text
PDF - Viewed/Downloaded: 2 TimesReferences
[1] Patterson KJ. 2016. The analysis of metaphor: to what extent can the theory of lexical priming help our understanding of metaphor usage and comprehension? Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 45:237-258.
[2] Stamenković D, Ichien N, Holyoak KJ. 2020. Individual differences in comprehension of contextualized metaphors. Metaphor and Symbol, 35(4):285-301.
[3] Faust M, Kenett YN. 2014. Rigidity, chaos and integration: hemispheric interaction and individual differences in metaphor comprehension. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8:511.
[4] Holyoak KJ. 2019. The Spider's Thread: Metaphor in Mind, Brain, and Poetry. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
[5] Beaty RE, Silvia P J. 2013. Metaphorically speaking: cognitive abilities and the production of figurative language. Memory & Cognition, 41(2):255-267.
[6] Bowdle B, Gentner D. 2005. The career of metaphor. Psychological Review, 112:193-216.
[7] Coulson S, Van Petten C. 2007. A special role for the right hemisphere in metaphor comprehension: ERP evidence from hemifield presentation. Brain Res, 1146:128-145.
[8] Sun L, Chen H, Zhang C, Cong F, Li X, Hämäläinen T. 2022. Decoding brain activities of literary metaphor comprehension: an event-related potential and EEG spectral analysis. Front. Psychol., 13:913521.
[9] Estes Z, Glucksberg S. 2000. Interactive property attribution in concept combination. Memory & Cognition, 28:28-34.
[10] Fetterman AK, Bair JL, Werth M, Landkammer F, Robinson MD. 2016. The scope and consequences of metaphoric thinking: using individual differences in metaphor usage to understand how metaphor functions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 110(3):458-476.
[11] Cardillo ER, Watson CE, Schmidt GL, Kranjec A, Chatterjee A. 2012. From novel to familiar: tuning the brain for metaphors. NeuroImage, 59:3212-3221.
[12] De Grauwe S, Swain A, Holcomb PJ, Ditman T, Kuperberg GR. 2010. Electrophysiological insights into the processing of nominal metaphors. Neuropsychologia, 48:1965-1984.
[13] Rai S, Chakraverty S. 2020. A survey on computational metaphor processing. ACM Computing Surveys, 53(2):24.
[14] Jacobs AM. 2015. Neurocognitive poetics: methods and models for investigating the neuronal and cognitive-affective bases of literature reception. Frontiers Human Neuroscience, 9:186.
[15] Kenett YN, Gold R, Faust M. 2018. Metaphor comprehension in low and high creative individuals. Frontiers in Psychology, 9:482.
[16] Lai VT, Curran T, Menn L. 2009. Comprehending conventional and novel metaphors: an ERP study. Brain Research, 1284:145-155.
[2] Stamenković D, Ichien N, Holyoak KJ. 2020. Individual differences in comprehension of contextualized metaphors. Metaphor and Symbol, 35(4):285-301.
[3] Faust M, Kenett YN. 2014. Rigidity, chaos and integration: hemispheric interaction and individual differences in metaphor comprehension. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8:511.
[4] Holyoak KJ. 2019. The Spider's Thread: Metaphor in Mind, Brain, and Poetry. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
[5] Beaty RE, Silvia P J. 2013. Metaphorically speaking: cognitive abilities and the production of figurative language. Memory & Cognition, 41(2):255-267.
[6] Bowdle B, Gentner D. 2005. The career of metaphor. Psychological Review, 112:193-216.
[7] Coulson S, Van Petten C. 2007. A special role for the right hemisphere in metaphor comprehension: ERP evidence from hemifield presentation. Brain Res, 1146:128-145.
[8] Sun L, Chen H, Zhang C, Cong F, Li X, Hämäläinen T. 2022. Decoding brain activities of literary metaphor comprehension: an event-related potential and EEG spectral analysis. Front. Psychol., 13:913521.
[9] Estes Z, Glucksberg S. 2000. Interactive property attribution in concept combination. Memory & Cognition, 28:28-34.
[10] Fetterman AK, Bair JL, Werth M, Landkammer F, Robinson MD. 2016. The scope and consequences of metaphoric thinking: using individual differences in metaphor usage to understand how metaphor functions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 110(3):458-476.
[11] Cardillo ER, Watson CE, Schmidt GL, Kranjec A, Chatterjee A. 2012. From novel to familiar: tuning the brain for metaphors. NeuroImage, 59:3212-3221.
[12] De Grauwe S, Swain A, Holcomb PJ, Ditman T, Kuperberg GR. 2010. Electrophysiological insights into the processing of nominal metaphors. Neuropsychologia, 48:1965-1984.
[13] Rai S, Chakraverty S. 2020. A survey on computational metaphor processing. ACM Computing Surveys, 53(2):24.
[14] Jacobs AM. 2015. Neurocognitive poetics: methods and models for investigating the neuronal and cognitive-affective bases of literature reception. Frontiers Human Neuroscience, 9:186.
[15] Kenett YN, Gold R, Faust M. 2018. Metaphor comprehension in low and high creative individuals. Frontiers in Psychology, 9:482.
[16] Lai VT, Curran T, Menn L. 2009. Comprehending conventional and novel metaphors: an ERP study. Brain Research, 1284:145-155.
Copyright © 2023 Yue CHEN
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License