↓ Skip to main content

Semantic properties, aptness, familiarity, conventionality, and interpretive diversity scores for 84 metaphors and similes

Overview of attention for article published in Behavior Research Methods, July 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (65th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
peer_reviews
1 peer review site

Citations

dimensions_citation
28 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
37 Mendeley
Title
Semantic properties, aptness, familiarity, conventionality, and interpretive diversity scores for 84 metaphors and similes
Published in
Behavior Research Methods, July 2014
DOI 10.3758/s13428-014-0502-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Carlos Roncero, Roberto G. de Almeida

Abstract

For 84 unique topic-vehicle pairs (e.g., knowledge-power), participants produced associated properties for the topics (e.g., knowledge), vehicles (e.g., power), metaphors (knowledge is power), and similes (knowledge is like power). For these properties, we also obtained frequency, saliency, and connotativeness scores (i.e., how much the properties deviated from the denotative or literal meaning). In addition, we examined whether expression type (metaphor vs. simile) impacted the interpretations produced. We found that metaphors activated more salient properties than did similes, but the connotativeness levels for metaphor and simile salient properties were similar. Also, the two types of expressions did not differ across a wide range of measures collected: aptness, conventionality, familiarity, and interpretive diversity scores. Combined with the property lists, these interpretation norms constitute a thorough collection of data about metaphors and similes, employing the same topic-vehicle words, which can be used in psycholinguistic and cognitive neuroscience studies to investigate how the two types of expressions are represented and processed. These norms should be especially useful for studies that examine the online processing and interpretation of metaphors and similes, as well as for studies examining how properties related to metaphors and similes affect the interpretations produced.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 37 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 24%
Student > Bachelor 5 14%
Researcher 4 11%
Student > Master 4 11%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 8%
Other 5 14%
Unknown 7 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 11 30%
Linguistics 9 24%
Computer Science 4 11%
Social Sciences 2 5%
Neuroscience 2 5%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 8 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 November 2021.
All research outputs
#15,169,543
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Behavior Research Methods
#1,364
of 2,525 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#121,125
of 240,567 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Behavior Research Methods
#9
of 26 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,525 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.1. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 240,567 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 26 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.