Similes on the Internet have explanations

Psychonomic Bulletin and Review

Volumn 13, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 74-77

  Roncero, Carlos ^a   Kennedy, John M ^a   Smyth, Ron ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33748777695     PISSN: 10699384     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/BF03193815     Document Type: Article

References (7)

1. CHIAPPE, D. L., & KENNEDY, J. M. (1999). Aptness predicts preference for metaphors or similes, as well as recall bias. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 6, 668-676.
2. CHIAPPE, D. L., KENNEDY, J. M., & CHIAPPE, P. (2003). Aptness is more important than comprehensibility in preference for metaphors and similes. Poetics, 31, 51-68.
3. CHIAPPE, D. [L.], KENNEDY, J. M., & SMYKOWSKI, T. (2003). Reversibility, aptness, and the conventionality of metaphors and similes. Metaphor & Symbol, 18, 85-105.
4. GENTNER, D., & BOWDLE, B. F. (2001). Convention, form, and figurative language processing. Metaphor & Symbol, 16, 223-247.
5. GIBSON, J. J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
6. GIORA, R. (2003). On our mind: Salience, context, and figurative language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
7. GLUCKSBERG, S. (2001). Understanding figurative language: From metaphors to idioms. Oxford: Oxford University Press.