意识与无意识加工中隐喻映射的双向性及不平衡性

doi:10.19988/j.cnki.issn.2095-1159.2025.04.004

心理研究

2025, Vol. 18

Issue (4): 321-329 DOI: 10.19988/j.cnki.issn.2095-1159.2025.04.004

基础研究

本期目录 | 过刊浏览 | 高级检索

意识与无意识加工中隐喻映射的双向性及不平衡性

贾永萍¹, 薛玲玲¹, 吴云鹏², 刘贵雄¹, 曹颖³

1 新疆心智发展与学习科学重点实验室,新疆师范大学心理学院,乌鲁木齐 830017;
2 湖州师范学院教师教育学院,湖州 313000;
3 四川师范大学脑与心理科学研究院,成都 610068

Bidirectional and unbalance of metaphorical mapping in conscious and unconscious processing

JIA Yongping¹, XUE Lingling¹, WU Yunpeng², LIU Guixiong¹, CAO Ying³

1 Xinjiang Key Laboratory of Mental Development and Learning Science, School of Psychology, Xinjiang Normal University, Urumqi 830017;
2 School of Teacher Education, Huzhou University,Huzhou 313000;
3 Institute of Brain and Psychological Sciences, Sichuan Normal University, Chengdu 610068

摘要
图/表
参考文献
相关文章 (7)

全文: PDF (937 KB) HTML (1 KB)
输出: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

摘要本研究采用无线索回忆再认范式,对隐喻认知中意识与无意识加工机制进行深入探究,同时探索隐喻映射的方向性及平衡性。实验1以始源域为线索词,研究始源域向目标域的映射。结果发现,与学过目标域有隐喻关系的始源域回想正确率显著高于与学过目标域无隐喻关系的正确率;回想错误条件下,与学过目标域有隐喻关系的始源域熟悉性评分显著高于与学过目标域无隐喻关系的评分。实验2以目标域为线索词,研究目标域向始源域的映射。结果发现,与学过始源域有隐喻关系的目标域回想正确率显著高于与学过始源域无隐喻关系的;回想错误条件下,与学过始源域有隐喻关系的目标域熟悉性评分显著高于与学过始源域无隐喻关系的正确率。进一步将实验1与实验2的结果进行比较发现,以始源域为线索的回想正确率显著高于以目标域为线索的回想正确率;两个实验的熟悉性评分差异不显著。以上结果表明,在回想和熟悉性中隐喻映射均是双向的。在意识层面,隐喻映射具有不平衡性,始源域向目标域的映射力量较强;在无意识层面,隐喻映射具有平衡性。该结果为进一步探明隐喻在意识和无意识加工中的映射机制提供了经验性证据。

	服务

	把本文推荐给朋友
	加入我的书架
	加入引用管理器
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	作者相关文章
	贾永萍
	薛玲玲
	吴云鹏
	刘贵雄
	曹颖

关键词 ：意识, 无意识, 隐喻, 双向映射, 不平衡性

基金资助:国家社会科学基金项目(21XMZ058)、国家自然科学基金项目(31960173)、新疆维吾尔自治区社科基金专项项目(22VZX001)、博士科研启动基金项目（XJNUBS202206

通讯作者: 刘贵雄,男,副教授。Email：lgx_2001@126.com

引用本文:

贾永萍, 薛玲玲, 吴云鹏, 刘贵雄, 曹颖. 意识与无意识加工中隐喻映射的双向性及不平衡性[J]. 心理研究, 2025, 18(4): 321-329.
JIA Yongping, XUE Lingling, WU Yunpeng, LIU Guixiong, CAO Ying. Bidirectional and unbalance of metaphorical mapping in conscious and unconscious processing. Psychological Research, 2025, 18(4): 321-329.

链接本文:

http://xlyj.magtech.com.cn/CN/10.19988/j.cnki.issn.2095-1159.2025.04.004 或 http://xlyj.magtech.com.cn/CN/Y2025/V18/I4/321

[1] 范琪. (2013). 隐喻认知加工机制的事件相关电位(ERPs)研究.江苏师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版), 39(2), 65-71.
[2] 范淑云. (2002). 汉语中与人体部位相关语词的隐喻研究. 南京师范大学硕士学位论文.
[3] 贺晓玲, 陈俊. (2020). 3~5岁幼儿权力概念多重隐喻的认知发展.心理学报, 52(2), 149-161.
[4] 贾宁, 蒋高芳. (2016). 道德概念垂直空间隐喻的心理现实性及双向映射.心理发展与教育, 32(2), 158-165.
[5] 贾永萍, 周楚, 李林, 郭秀艳. (2016). 汉字的无线索回忆再认效应:重复学习和重复测验的作用.心理学报, 48(2), 111-120.
[6] 廖秋盈. (2019). 道德概念黑白隐喻理解中的映射:双向性及不平衡性. 云南师范大学硕士学位论文.
[7] 刘源, 梁南元, 王德进, 张社英, 杨铁鹰, 揭春雨, 孙伟. (1990). 现代汉语常用词词频词典. 北京: 宇航出版社.
[8] 刘泽军, 刘伟. (2022). 一体化促进联结记忆的作用机制:熟悉性和回想加工.心理科学进展, 30(10), 2240-2253.
[9] 鲁忠义, 郭少鹏, 蒋泽亮. (2017a). 道德概念大小隐喻的心理现实性及映射关系.华南师范大学学报(社会科学版), (2), 70-78.
[10] 鲁忠义, 贾利宁, 翟冬雪. (2017b). 道德概念垂直空间隐喻理解中的映射:双向性及不平衡性.心理学报, 49(2), 186-196.
[11] 吕军梅, 鲁忠义. (2013). 为什么快乐在“上”,悲伤在“下”:语篇阅读中情绪的垂直空间隐喻.心理科学, 36(2), 328-334.
[12] 吕勇, 韩宗义, 杜英春. (2003). 启动效应的ERP研究综述.心理与行为研究, (2), 151-155.
[13] 束定芳. (1998). 论隐喻的本质及语义特征.外国语(上海外国语大学学报), (6), 11-20.
[14] 王敏. (2019). 《博雅汉语》中隐喻类词语考察及教学策略研究. 鲁东大学硕士学位论文.
[15] 王小潞. (2008). 汉语隐喻认知的神经机制研究. 浙江大学博士学位论文.
[16] 王锃, 鲁忠义. (2013). 道德概念的垂直空间隐喻及其对认知的影响.心理学报, 45(5), 538-545.
[17] 吴念阳, 陈俊卿, 居银, 白洁, 马子凤. (2012). 汉语隐喻理解时程的ERPs研究.心理科学, 35(4), 811-816.
[18] 杨继平, 郭秀梅, 王兴超. (2017). 道德概念的隐喻表征:从红白颜色、左右位置和正斜字体的维度.心理学报, 49(7), 875-885.
[19] 于明阳, 姜英杰. (2021). FN400和LPC对熟悉性和回想的特异性指向分析.心理科学, 44(2), 302-308.
[20] 张静宇, 黄琳, 马利军. (2023). 粤语喻意型歇后语前、后语节相互作用的关系研究.心理研究, 16(5), 439-448.
[21] Black, M. (1979). More about metaphor.Metaphor and Thought, 2, 19-41.
[22] Bonnaud V., Gil R., & Ingrand P. (2002). Metaphorical and non-metaphorical links: A behavioral and ERP study in young and elderly adults.Neurophysiologie Clinique/Clinical Neurophysiology, 32(4), 258-268.
[23] Casasanto, D., & Boroditsky, L. (2008). Time in the mind: Using space to think about time.Cognition, 106(2), 579-593.
[24] Casasanto D., Fotakopoulou O., & Boroditsky L. (2010). Space and time in the child’s mind: Evidence for a cross-dimensional asymmetry.Cognitive Science, 34(3), 387-405.
[25] Cleary, A. M. (2004). Orthography, phonology, and meaning: Word features that give rise to feelings of familiarity in recognition.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11(3), 446-451.
[26] Cleary A. M., McNeely-White K. L., Huebert A. M., & Claxton A. B. (2021). Déjà vu and the feeling of prediction: An association with familiarity strength.Memory, 29(7), 904-920.
[27] Gibbs Jr, R. W. (1992). Categorization and metaphor understanding.Psychological Review, 99(3), 572-581.
[28] Gil R., Lefevre J. P., Pluchon C., Toullat G., & de Vendeuil A. (1980). A propos de certains aspects des perturbations sémantiques dans l’aphasie: Importance des transferts de sens et des structures phonologiques dans l'appréhension des champs sémantique-s.Neuropsychologia, 18(6), 721-725.
[29] Glucksberg S., Brown M., & McGlone M. S. (1993). Conceptual metaphors are not automatically accessed during idiom comprehension.Memory & Cognition, 21, 711-719.
[30] He X., Chen J., Zhang E., & Li J. (2015). Bidirectional associations of power and size in a priming task.Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 27(3), 290-300.
[31] Hubbell, J. A., & O’Boyle, M. W. (1995). The effects of metaphorical and literal comprehension processes on lexical decision latency of sentence components.Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 24(4), 269-287.
[32] Jacoby, L. L. (1991). A process dissociation framework: Separating automatic from intentional uses of memory.Journal of Memory and Language, 30(5), 513-541.
[33] Jia Y., Liu H., Li B., Zhou C., Li L., Zheng L., & Guo X. (2020). Recognition without cued recall across Chinese and English: Exploring the role of phonological, orthographic, and semantic features.The Journal of General Psychology, 147(1), 62-89.
[34] Jostmann N. B., Lakens D., & Schubert T. W. (2009). Weight as an embodiment of importance.Psychological Science, 20(9), 1169-1174.
[35] Lakoff G.,& Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
[36] Lakoff G., Johnson M., & Sowa J. F. (1999). Review of philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to western thought.Computational Linguistics, 25(4), 631-634.
[37] Lee C.-Y., Tsai J.-L., Huang H.-W., Hung D. L., & Tzeng, O. J. L. (2006). The temporal signatures of semantic and phonological activations for Chinese sublexical processing: An event-related potential study.Brain Research, 1121(1), 150-159.
[38] Liu G., Wang Y., Jia Y., & Guo C. (2021). Unitization facilitates familiarity-based cross-language associative recognition.Neuroscience Letters, 744, 135501.
[39] McNeely-White K. L., McNeely-White D. G., Huebert A. M., Carlaw B. N., & Cleary A. M. (2022). Specifying a relationship between semantic and episodic memory in the computation of a feature-based familiarity signal using MINERVA 2.Memory & Cognition, 50(3), 527-545.
[40] Meier, B. P., & Robinson, M. D. (2004). Why the sunny side is up: Associations between affect and vertical position.Psychological Science, 15(4), 243-247.
[41] Qiu H., Watson B., & Tay D. (2022). Metaphors and trauma: An image schematic analysis of symptom-specific metaphors.Lingua, 271, 103244.
[42] Reid, J. N., & Katz, A. (2022). Conceptual metaphors influence memory automatically: Evidence from a divided attention false memory task.Memory & Cognition, 50(6), 1336-1349.
[43] Valenzuela, J. (2009). What empirical work can tell us about primary metaphors. Quaderns de Filologia-Estudis Lingüístics, 14, 235-249.
[44] Williams, L. E., & Bargh, J. A. (2008). Keeping one’s distance: The influence of spatial distance cues on affect and evaluation.Psychological Science, 19(3), 302-308.
[45] Yonelinas, A. P. (2002). The nature of recollection and familiarity: A review of 30 years of research.Journal of Memory and Language, 46(3), 441-517.
[46] Zhao X., Zheng Y., & Zhao X. (2023). Global bibliometric analysis of conceptual metaphor research over the recent two decades. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1042121.
[47] Zhong, C.-B., & Leonardelli, G. J. (2008). Cold and lonely: Does social exclusion literally feel cold?Psychological Science, 19(9), 838-842.