TY - JOUR
T1 - When the Creampuff beat the boxer
T2 - Working memory, cost, and function in reading metaphoric reference
AU - Almor, Amit
AU - Arunachalam, Sudha
AU - Strickland, Brent
N1 - Funding Information:
Although no previous studies have examined working memory differences in processing metaphoric anaphors under a cost–function balance framework, the results from several previous studies are compatible with our claims. Some support for the idea that initial processing effort could be differentiated from overall reading times comes from a study by Budiu and Anderson (2002), which found that, although reading times for metaphoric anaphors were longer than for literal anaphors, reading times for the entire sentence did not significantly differ. If the cost–function balance view is correct, this could reflect the difficulty of the inferences required for processing their stimuli, so that the benefits were not “worth” deriving and readers did not fully process the meaning of these sentences. This interpretation is supported by Budiu and Anderson’s finding of a comprehension deficit in the metaphor condition.
PY - 2008/3/20
Y1 - 2008/3/20
N2 - Following Almor's (1999) cost-function analysis of referential processing, we hypothesized that reading times of metaphoric anaphors are affected by readers' working memory ability and reflect a balance between discourse function and processing cost. The results from 2 self-paced reading experiments supported this hypothesis. Low-span participants always read sentences with metaphoric anaphors slower than sentences with literal anaphors. In contrast, high-span participants did not take longer to read sentences with metaphoric anaphors than those with literal anaphors when the preceding context activated enough information to facilitate reference resolution. However, when the context activated so much information that the metaphor's function was obviated, high-span readers suffered and again read sentences with metaphoric anaphors more slowly than sentences with literal anaphors. These results show that, as with other types of anaphors, processing metaphoric anaphors is affected by working memory performance, and that the balance between processing cost and discourse function varies with working memory ability.
AB - Following Almor's (1999) cost-function analysis of referential processing, we hypothesized that reading times of metaphoric anaphors are affected by readers' working memory ability and reflect a balance between discourse function and processing cost. The results from 2 self-paced reading experiments supported this hypothesis. Low-span participants always read sentences with metaphoric anaphors slower than sentences with literal anaphors. In contrast, high-span participants did not take longer to read sentences with metaphoric anaphors than those with literal anaphors when the preceding context activated enough information to facilitate reference resolution. However, when the context activated so much information that the metaphor's function was obviated, high-span readers suffered and again read sentences with metaphoric anaphors more slowly than sentences with literal anaphors. These results show that, as with other types of anaphors, processing metaphoric anaphors is affected by working memory performance, and that the balance between processing cost and discourse function varies with working memory ability.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=41449110019&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=41449110019&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1080/10926480701235478
DO - 10.1080/10926480701235478
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:41449110019
VL - 22
SP - 169
EP - 193
JO - Metaphor and Symbol
JF - Metaphor and Symbol
SN - 1092-6488
IS - 2
ER -