“The Brain Is the Prisoner of Thought”: A Machine-Learning Assisted Quantitative Narrative Analysis of Literary Metaphors for Use in Neurocognitive Poetics

References

• Altarriba, J., Bauer, L. M., & Benvenuto, C. (1999). Concreteness, context availability, and image ability ratings and word associations for abstract, concrete, and emotion words. Behavior Research Methods, 31(4), 578–602. doi:10.3758/BF03200738
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Altmann, U., Bohrn, I. C., Lubrich, O., Menninghaus, W., & Jacobs,A. M. (2012). The power of emotional valence-from cognitive to affective processes in reading. Frontiers Human Neuroscience, 6, 192. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2012.00192
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Altmann, U., Bohrn, I. C., Lubrich, O., Menninghaus, W., & Jacobs, A. M. (2014). Fact vs fiction-how paratextual information shapes our reading processes. Social Cognition Affect Neuroscience, 9, 22–29. doi:10.1093/scan/nss098
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Amsel, B. D., Urbach, T. P., & Kutas, M. (2012). Perceptual and motor attribute ratings for 559 object concepts. Behavior Research Methods, 44, 1028–1041. doi:10.3758/s13428-012-0215-z
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson, G. K., & Walton, E. L. (Eds.). (1939). This generation: A selection of British and American literature from 1914 to the present. Glenview, IL: Scott Foresman.
   Google Scholar
• Aryani, A., Kraxenberger, M., Ullrich, S., Jacobs, A. M., & Conrad, M. (2016). Measuring the basic affective tone of poems via phonological saliency and iconicity. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 10, 191–204. doi:10.1037/aca0000033
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barnstone, W., Terry, P., Friar, K., Raiziss, S., De Palchi, A., Reavey, G., & Flores, A. (Eds.). (1966). Modern European poetry. New York, NY: Bantam.
   Google Scholar
• Beardsley, M. C. (1958). Aesthetics, problems in the philosophy of criticism. New York, NY: Harcourt Brace & Co.
   Google Scholar
• Beardsley, M. C. (1962). The metaphorical twist. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 22, 293–307.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bestgen, Y., & Vincze, N. (2012). Checking and boot- strapping lexical norms by means of word similarity indexes. Behavior Research Methods, 44(4), 998–1006. doi:10.3758/s13428-012-0195-z
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Billow, R. (1977). Metaphor: A review of the psychological literature. Psychological Bulltin, 84, 81–92.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Black, M. (1977). More on metaphor. Dialectica, 31, 431–457.
   Google Scholar
• Blasko, D. (1999). Only the tip of the iceberg: Who understands what about metaphor? Journal of Pragmatics, 31, 1675–1683.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bohrn, I. C., Altmann, U., & Jacobs, A. M. (2012a). Looking at the brains behind figurative language—A quantitative meta-analysis of neuroimaging studies on metaphor, idiom and irony processing. Neuropsychologia, 50, 2669–2683. doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2012.07.021
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bohrn, I. C., Altmann, U., Lubrich, O., Menninghaus, W., & Jacobs, A. M. (2012b). Old proverbs in new skins—An FMRI study on defamiliarization. Frontiers Psychologist, 3, 204. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00204
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bohrn, I. C., Altmann, U., Lubrich, O., Menninghaus, W., & Jacobs, A. M. (2013). When we like what we know—A parametric fMRI analysis of beauty and familiarity. Brain and Language, 124, 1–8. doi:10.1016/j.bandl.2012.10.003
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Breiman, L. (2001). Random forests. Machine Learning, 45(1), 5–32.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brysbaert, M., Buchmeier, M., Conrad, M., Jacobs, A. M., Bölte, J., & Böhl, A. (2011). The word frequency effect: A review of recent developments and implications for the choice of frequency estimates in German. Experiments Psychologist, 58, 412–424. doi:10.1027/1618-3169/a000123
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brysbaert, M., & New, B. (2009). Moving beyond Kucera and Francis: A critical evaluation of current word frequency norms and the introduction of a new and improved word frequency measure for American English. Behavior Research Methods, 41, 977–990.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burke, M. (2015). The neuroaesthetics of prose fiction: Pitfalls, parameters and prospects. Frontiers Human Neuroscience, 9, 442. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2015.00442
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Byron, G. G. N. B. (1905). The complete poetical works of Lord Byron. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
   Google Scholar
• Campbell, S. J., & Raney, G. E. (2016). A 25-year replication of Katz et al.’s (1988) metaphor norms. Behavior Research Methods, 48, 330–340. doi:10.3758/s13428-015-0575-2
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cardillo, E. R., Schmidt, G. L., Kranjec, A., & Chatterjee, A. (2010). Stimulus design is an obstacle course: 560 matched literal and metaphorical sentences for testing neural hypotheses about metaphor. Behavior Research Methods, 42, 651–664. doi:10.3758/BRM.42.3.651
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chiappe, D. L., & Chiappe, P. (2007). The role of working memory in metaphor production and comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language, 56, 172–188. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2006.11.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Citron, F. M. (2012). Neural correlates of written emotion word processing: A review of recent electrophysiological and hemodynamic neuroimaging studies. Brain and Language, 122, 211–226. doi:10.1016/j.bandl.2011
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Citron, F. M., Cacciari, C., Funke, J. M., Hsu, C. T., & Jacobs, A. M. (2017). Idiomatic expressions elicit stronger emotional responses and enhanced processing than literal sentences, even when their content is emotionally neutral. in revision.
   Google Scholar
• Citron, F. M., Cacciari, C., Kucharski, M., Beck, L., Conrad, M., & Jacobs, A. M. (2015). When emotions are expressed figuratively: Psycholinguistic and affective norms of 619 idioms for German (PANIG). Behavior Research Methods, 1–21.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coltheart, M. (1981). The MRC psycholinguistic database. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 33, 497–505.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cortese, M. J., & Khanna, M. M. (2008). Age of acquisition ratings for 3,000 monosyllabic words. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 791–794.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coulson, S. (2008). Metaphor comprehension and the brain. In R. W. Gibbs (Ed.), The cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought (pp. 177–194). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Dietterich, T. (2000). An experimental comparison of three methods for constructing ensembles of decision trees: Bagging, boosting and randomization. Machine Learning, 40, 139–157.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dixon, P., & Bortolussi, M. (2015). Measuring literary experience: Comment on Jacobs (2015). Scientific Study of Literature, 5(2), 178–182.
   Google Scholar
• Durrell, L. (1964). Selected poems, 1935-1963. London, England: Faber & Faber.
   Google Scholar
• Eliot, T. S. (1961). Selected poems. London, England: Faber & Faber.
   Google Scholar
• Falkenhainer, B., Forbus, K. D., & Gentner, D. (1989). The structure-mapping engine: Algorithm and examples. Artificial Intelligence, 41, 1–63.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fellbaum, C. (Ed.). (1998). WordNet: An electronic lexical database. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fludernik, M., Freeman, D. C., & Freeman, M. (1999). Metaphor and beyond: An introduction. Poetics Today, 20, 383–396.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flusberg, S. J., Thibodeau, P. H., Sternberg, D. A., & Glick, J. J. (2010). A connectionist approach to embodied conceptual metaphor. Front Psychology, 1, 197. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2010.00197
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Forgács, B., Bohrn, I. C., Baudewig, J., Hofmann, M. J., Pléh, C., & Jacobs, A. M. (2012). Neural correlates of combinatorial semantic processing of literal and figurative noun-noun compound words. Neuroimage, 63, 1432–1442. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.07.029
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Franzosi, R. (2010). Quantitative narrative analysis. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Gardner, W. H., & Mackenzie, N. H. (Eds.). (1967). Poems of gerald manley hopkins (4th ed.). London, England: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gentner, D. (1983). Structure-mapping: A theoretical framework for analogy. Cognitive Science, 7, 155–170.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gerrig, R. J., & Healy, A. F. (1983). Dual proffcesses in metaphor understanding: Comprehension and appreciation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 9, 667–675.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gibbs, R. (Ed.). (2008). The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gibbs, R., & Colston, H. (2012). Interpreting figurative meaning. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gibbs, R., & Kearney, L. R. (1994). When parting is such sweet sorrow: The comprehension and appreciation of oxymora. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 23, 75–89.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gibbs, R. W., & Matlock, T. (2008). Metaphor, imagination, and simulation. In R. W. Gibbs (Ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Metaphor and Thought, pp. 161–176. New York: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Glicksohn, J., & Goodblatt, C. (1993). Metaphor and Gestalt: Interaction theory revisited. Poetics Today, 14, 83–100.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goodblatt, C. (1996). Semantic fields and metaphor: Going beyond theory. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 14, 65–78.
   Google Scholar
• Graesser, A. C., McNamara, D. S., Louwerse, M. M., & Cai, Z. (2004). Coh-Metrix: Analysis of text on cohesion and language. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36, 193–202. doi:10.3758/BF03195564
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Grainger, J., & Jacobs, A. M. (1996). Orthographic processing in visual word recognition: A multiple read-out model. Psychologist Reviews, 103, 518–565. doi:10.1037//0033-295x.103.3.518
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hardy, T. (1962). The collected poems of Thomas Hardy (4th ed.). London, England: Macmillan. (Original work published 1930).
   Google Scholar
• Hill, F., Reichart, R., & Korhonen, A. (2015). Simlex-999: Evaluating semantic models with (genuine) similarity estimation. Computational Linguistics, 41(4), 665–695.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hofmann, M. J., & Jacobs, A. M. (2014). Interactive activation and competition models and semantic context: From behavioral to brain data. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 46(1), 85–104. doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2014.06.011
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hsu, C. T., Jacobs, A. M., Citron, F., & Conrad, M. (2015). The emotion potential of words and passages in reading Harry Potter—An fMRI study. Brain and Language, 142, 96–114.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Inhoff, A. W., Lima, S. D., & Carroll, P. J. (1984). Contextual effects on metaphor comprehension in reading. Memory and Cognition, 12, 558–567.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacobs, A. (2015c). The scientific study of literary experience: Sampling the state of the art. Scientific Study of Literature, 5(2), 139–170.
   Google Scholar
• Jacobs, A. (2016). The scientific study of literary experience and neuro-behavioral responses to Literature: Reply to Commentaries. Scientific Study of Literature, 6(1), 164–174. . doi:10.1075/ssol.6.1.08jac
   Google Scholar
• Jacobs, A. M. (2011). Neurokognitive Poetik: Elemente eines Modells des literarischen Lesens [Neurocognitive poetics: Elements of a model of literary reading]. In R. Schrott & A. M. Jacobs (Eds.), Gehirn und Gedicht: Wie wir unsere Wirklichkeiten konstruieren [Brain and poetry: How we construct our realities] (pp. 492–520). Munich, Germany: Carl Hanser.
   Google Scholar
• Jacobs, A. M. (2015a). Neurocognitive poetics: Methods and models for investigating the neuronal and cognitive-affective bases of literature reception. Frontiers Human Neuroscience, 9, 186. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2015.00186
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacobs, A. M. (2015b). Towards a neurocognitive poetics model of literary reading. In R. Willems (Ed.), Towards a cognitive neuroscience of natural language use (pp. 135–159). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jacobs, A. M. (2017). Affective and aesthetic processes in literary reading: A neurocognitive poetics perspective. In M. Burke & E. Troscianko (Eds.), Dialogues between literature and cognition. (pp. 303–326), Oxford Univ. Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jacobs, A. M., Hofmann, M. J., & Kinder, A. (2016). On Elementary Affective Decisions: To Like Or Not to Like, That Is the Question. Frontiers Psychology, 7, 1836. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01836
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacobs, A. M., & Kinder, A. (2015). Worte als Worte erfahren: Wie erarbeitet das Gehirn Gedichte [Experience words as words: how the brain constructs poems]. In A. Pompe (Ed.), Kind und Gedicht [Child and Poem](pp. 57–76). Berlin, Germany: Rombach.
   Google Scholar
• Jacobs, A. M., & Lüdtke, J. (2017). Immersion into narrative and poetic worlds: A neurocognitive poetics perspective. In F. Hakemulder & M. Kuijpers, E. Tan, M. Doicaru, K. Balin, (Eds.) Narrative absorption (pp. 69–97) Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Jacobs, A. M., Lüdtke, J., Aryani, A., Meyer-Sickendiek, B., & Conrad, M. (2016a). Mood-empathic and aesthetic responses in poetry reception: A model-guided, multilevel, multimethod approach. Scientific Study of Literature, 6(1), 87–130. doi:10.1075/ssol.6.1.06jac
   Google Scholar
• Jacobs, A. M., Ml-H, V., Briesemeister, B. B., Conrad, M., Hofmann, M. J., Kuchinke, L., … Braun, M. (2015). 10 years of BAWLing into affective and aesthetic processes in reading: What are the echoes? Frontiers Psychologist, 6, 714. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00714
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacobs, A. M., Schuster, S., Xue, S., & Lüdtke, J. (2017). What’s in the brain that ink may character….: A quantitative narrative analysis of Shakespeare’s 154 sonnets for use in neurocognitive poetics. Working paper. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/project/Neurocognitive-Poetics
   Google Scholar
• Jacobs, A. M., & Willems, R. (2017). The fictive brain: Neurocognitive correlates of engagement in literature. Review of General Psychology. In press.
   Google Scholar
• Janschewitz, K. (2008). Taboo, emotionally valenced, and emotionally neutral word norms. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 1065–1074. doi:10.3758/BRM.40.4.1065
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson, M., & Malgady, R. G. (1979). Some cognitive aspects of figurative language association and metaphor. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 8, 249–265.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jones, L. L., & Estes, Z. (2006). Roosters, robins, and alarm clocks: Aptness and conventionality in metaphor comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language, 55(1), 18–32.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Juhasz, B. J., & Yap, M. J. (2013). Sensory experience ratings for over 5,000 mono- and disyllabic words. Behavior Research Methods. doi:10.3758/s13428-012-0242-9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Just, M., & Carpenter, P. (1992). A capacity theory of comprehension: Individual differences in working memory. Psychological Review, 99, 122–149.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Katz, A., Paivio, A., Marschark, M., & Clark, J. (1988). Norms for 204 literary and 260 non-literary metaphors on psychological dimensions. Metaphor and Symbolic Activity, 3(4), 191–214.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Katz, A. N. (1989). On choosing the vehicles of metaphors: Referential concreteness, semantic distances, and individual differences. Journal of Memory and Language, 28, 486–499.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Katz, A. N. (1992). Psychological studies in metaphor processing: Extensions to the placement of terms in semantic space. Poetics Today, 13, 607–632.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Katz, A. N., Paivio, A., & Marschark, M. (1985). Poetic comparisons: Psychological dimensions of metaphoric processing. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 14, 365–383.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kintsch, W. (2000). Metaphor comprehension: A computational theory. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 7, 257–266.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kintsch, W. (2001). Predication. Cognitive Science, 25, 173–202. doi:10.1016/S0364-0213(01)00034-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kintsch, W. (2008). How the mind computes the meaning of metaphor: A simulation based on LSA. In R. Gibbs (Ed.), Handbook of metaphor and thought (pp. 129–142). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kövecses, Z. (2008). The conceptual structure of happiness and pain. In C. Lascaratou, A. Despotopoulou, & E. Ifantidou (Eds.), Reconstructing pain and joy: Linguistic, literary and cultural perspectives (pp. 17–33). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
   Google Scholar
• Kuhlmann, M., Hofmann, M. J., Briesemeister, B. B., & Jacobs, A. M. (2016). Mixing positive and negative valence: Affective-semantic integration of bivalent words. Scientific Reports, 6(30718), 1–7. doi:10.1038/srep30718
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lakoff, G. (2008). The neural theory of metaphor. In R. Gibbs (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought (pp. 17–38). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Landauer, T. K., & Dumais, S. T. (1997). A solution to Plato’s problem: The latent semantic analysis theory of acquisition, induction and representation of knowledge. Psychological Review, 104, 211–240.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leech, G. N. (1969). A linguistic guide to English poetry. London, UK: Longman.
   Google Scholar
• Lüdtke, J., & Jacobs, A. M. (2015). The emotion potential of simple sentences: Additive or interactive effects of nouns and adjectives? Frontiers Psychologist, 6, 1137. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01137
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lüdtke, J., Meyer-Sickendiek, B., & Jacobs, A. M. (2014). Immersing in the stillness of an early morning: Testing the mood empathy hypothesis in poems. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 8, 363–377. doi:10.1037/a0036826
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lynott, D., & Connell, L. (2013). Modality exclusivity norms for 400 nouns: The relationship between perceptual experience and surface word form. Behavior Research Methods, 45, 516–526. doi:10.3758/s13428-012-0267-0
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Malgady, R., & Johnson, M. (1976). Modifiers in metaphors: effects of constituent phrase similarity on the interpretation of figurative sentences. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 5, 43–52.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mandera, P., Keuleers, E., & Brysbaert, M. (2015). How useful are corpus-based methods for extrapolating psycholinguistic variables? The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 68(8), 1623–1642. doi:10.1080/17470218.2014.988735
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mandera, P., Keuleers, E., & Brysbaert, M. (2017). Explaining human performance in psycholinguistic tasks with models of semantic similarity based on prediction and counting: A review and empirical validation. Journal of Memory and Language, 92, 57–78. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2016.04.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marschark, M., Katz, A. N., & Paivio, A. (1983). Dimensions of metaphor. Journal of Psycholinguistie Research, 12, 17–40.
   Google Scholar
• Martindale, C. (1975). Romantic progression: The psychology of literary history. Washington, DC: Hemisphere.
   Google Scholar
• McQuire, M., McCollum, L., & Chatterjee, A. (2016). Aptness and beauty in metaphor. Language and Cognition. doi:10.1017/langcog.2016.13
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Menninghaus, W., Bohrn, I. C., Knoop, C., Kotz, S. A., Schlotz, W., & Jacobs, A. M. (2015). Rhetorical features facilitate prosodic processing while handicapping ease of semantic comprehension. Cognition, 143, 48–60. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2015.05.026
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meredith, W. (Ed.). (1962). The Laurel poetry series: Shelley. New York, NY: Dell.
   Google Scholar
• Nicklas, P., & Jacobs, A. M. (2017). Rhetorics, neurocognitive poetics and the aesthetics of adaptation. Poetics Today. In press.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ortony, A. (1979). Beyond literal similarity. Psychological Review, 86, 161–180.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ortony, A., Schauert, D. L., Reynolds, R. E., & Antos, S. J. (1978). Interpreting metaphors and idioms: Some effects of context on comprehension. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 17, 465–477.
   Google Scholar
• Ortony, A., Vondruska, R., Foss, M., & Jones, L. (1985). Salience, similes, and the asymmetry of similarity. Journal of Memory and language, 24, 569–594.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pedersen, T., Patwardhan, S., & Michelizzi, J. (2004). Wordnet: Similarity—Measuring the relatedness of concepts. In Proceedings of the Nineteenth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-04) (pp. 1024–1025). Cambridge, MA: AAAI Press.
   Google Scholar
• Reinhart, T. (1976). On understanding poetic metaphor. Poetics, 5, 383–401.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schmidtke, D. S., Schröder, T., Jacobs, A. M., & Conrad, M. (2014). ANGST: Affective norms for german sentiment terms, derived from the affective norms for english words. Behavioral Researcher Methods, 46, 1108–1118. doi:10.3758/s13428-013-0426-y
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schrott, R., & Jacobs, A. M. (2011). Gehirn und Gedicht: Wie wir unsere Wirklichkeiten konstruieren (Brain and Poetry: How We Construct Our Realities). München, Germany: Hanser.
   Google Scholar
• Schuster, S., Hawelka, S., Hutzler, F., Kronbichler, M., & Richlan, F. (2016). Words in context: The effects of length, frequency, and predictability on brain responses during natural reading. Cerebral Cortex, 26(10), 3889–3904.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schuster, S., Hawelka, S., Richlan, F., Ludersdorfer, P., & Hutzler, F. (2015). Eyes on words: A fixation-related fMRI study of the left occipito-temporal cortex during self-paced silent reading of words and pseudowords. Scientific Reports, 5, 12686. doi:10.1038/srep12686
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shaaber, M. A. (Ed.). (1958). John Donne: Selected poems. New York, NY: Appleton- Century-Crofts.
   Google Scholar
• Shanon, B. (1992). Metaphor: From fixedness and selection to differentiation and creation. Poetics Today, 13, 659–685.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shen, Y. (1987). The structure and processing of the poetic oxymoron. Poetics Today, 8, 105–122.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shen, Y. (1995). Constraints on directionality in poetic vs. non-poetic metaphors. Poetics, 23, 255–274.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shen, Y. (1997). Cognitive constraints on poetic figures. Cognitive Linguistics, 8, 33–71.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shen, Y. (2008). Metaphor and poetic gures. In R. W. Gibbs Jr. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought (pp. 295–307). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Simonton, D. K. (1990). Lexical choices and aesthetic success: A computer content analysis of 154 Shakespeare sonnets. Computers and the Humanities, 24, 254–264.
   Google Scholar
• Sopory, P. (2007). Metaphor and affect. Poetics Today, 26, 433–458.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Steen, G. (2004). Can discourse properties of metaphor affect metaphor recognition? Journal of Pragmatics, 36, 1295–1313.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Steyvers, M., & Griffiths, T. (2007). Probabilistic topic models. In T. Landauer, D. S. McNamara, S. Dennis, & W. Kintsch (Eds.), Handbook of latent semantic analysis (pp. 424–440). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Stockwell, P. (2009). The cognitive poetics of literary resonance. Language and Cognition, 1, 25–44. doi:10.1515/LANGCOG.2009.002
   Google Scholar
• Thibodeau, P. H., & Durgin, F. H. (2011). Metaphor aptness and conven- tionality: A processing fluency account. Metaphor and Symbol, 26, 206–226.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thomas, D. (1952). Collected poems, 1934–1952. Letchworth, England: Dent & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Tillotson, S. M., Siakaluk, P. D., & Pexman, P. M. (2008). Body–object interaction ratings for 1,618 monosyllabic nouns. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 1075–1078. doi:10.3758/BRM.40.4.1075
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Todd, R. (Ed.). (1960). The Laurel poetry series: Blake. New York, NY: Dell.
   Google Scholar
• Tourangeau, R., & Rips, L. (1991). Interpreting and evaluating metaphors. Journal of Memory and Language, 30, 452–472.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tourangeau, R., & Sternberg, R. J. (1981). Aptness in metaphor. Cognitive Psychology, 13, 27–55.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trick, L., & Katz, A. N. (1986). The domain interaction approach to metaphor processing: Relating individual differences and metaphor characteristics. Metaphor and Symbolic Activity, 1, 185–213.
   Google Scholar
• Ullrich, S., Aryani, A., Kraxenberger, M., Jacobs, A. M., & Conrad, M. (2017). On the relation between the general affective meaning and the basic sublexical, lexical, and interlexical features of poetic texts—A case study using 57 poems of H. M. Enzensberger. Frontiers Psychologist, 7, 2073. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2016.02073
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van den Broek, P. (2010). Using texts in science education: Cognitive processes and knowledge representation. Science, 328, 453–456. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1182594
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Võ, M. L. H., Conrad, M., Kuchinke, L., Urton, K., Hofmann, M. J., & Jacobs, A. M. (2009). The Berlin Affective Word List Reloaded (BAWL-R). Behavioral Researcher Methods, 41, 534–538. doi:10.3758/B.R.M.41.2.534
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Võ, M. L. H., Jacobs, A. M., & Conrad, M. (2006). Cross-validating the berlin affective word list. Behavioral Researcher Methods, 38, 606–609. doi:10.3758/BF03193892
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Warriner, A. B., Kuperman, V., & Brysbaert, M. (2013). Norms of valence, arousal, and dominance for 13,915 English lemmas. Behavior Research Methods, 45, 1191–1207. doi:10.3758/s13428-012-0314-
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Werth, P. (1994). Extended metaphor: A text-world account. Linguistics and Literature, 3, 79–103.
   Google Scholar
• Westbury, C., Keith, J., Briesemeister, B. B., Hofmann, M. J., & Jacobs, A. M. (2014). Avoid violence, rioting, and outrage; approach celebration, delight, and strength: Using large text corpora to compute valence, arousal, and the basic emotions. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 68, 1599–1622. doi:10.1080/17470218.2014.970204
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Whiting, B. J. (Ed.). (1942). The college survey of Engliah literature. New York, NY: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
   Google Scholar
• Willems, R., & Jacobs, A. M. (2016). Caring about Dostoyevsky: The untapped potential of studying literature. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 20, 243–245.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yang, J. (2014). The role of the right hemisphere in metaphor comprehension: A meta-analysis of functional magnetic resonance imaging studies. Human Brain Mapping, 35, 107–122. doi:10.1002/hbm.22160
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yarkoni, T., Speer, N. K., Balota, D., McAvoy, M. P., & Zacks, J. M. (2008). Pictures of a thousand words: Investigating the neural mechanisms of reading with extremely rapid event-related fMRI. NeuroImage, 42(2), 973–987. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2008.04.258
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar