Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
PIRA download icon_1.1View/Download Full Text
Title: Surveying views of metaphor vs. literal language in psychotherapy : a factor analysis
Authors: Tay, D 
Issue Date: Nov-2020
Source: Metaphor and the social world, Nov. 2020, v. 10, no. 2, p. 273-291
Abstract: Five key therapeutic functions of metaphors are often discussed by psychotherapists. They (i) help clients express emotions and experiences, (ii) help therapists and clients explain difficult concepts, (iii) introduce new frames of reference, (iv) help work through client resistance, and (v) build a collaborative relationship between therapists and clients. Research on how these functions are enacted in psychotherapy talk tends to assume that they are indeed perceived as such by clients, and that metaphorical language is preferred to comparable literal language in performing them. This paper reports a survey study (N= 84) to critically interrogate these assumptions. Participants read two constructed therapy dialogues, controlled and counterbalanced for presentation sequence, where therapist and client discuss an issue using metaphorical and literal language respectively. Each dialogue is followed by a 15-item questionnaire to rate how well the presumed functions were performed (e.g. the therapist and client can work effectively together, the therapist is able to explain difficult concepts). A combined Confirmatory (CFA) and Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) suggests that, instead of the five distinct functions proposed in the literature, participants discerned three functions which reflect a more holistic view of what metaphors can do. A second EFA conducted on literal responses yielded only two factors. This contrast in factor structure further suggests that (i) literal language is less functionally nuanced, and (ii) metaphors are not simply perceived as an ‘add-on’ to literal language, but are evaluated across an extended narrative in fundamentally different ways. Within-subjects metaphor vs. literal ratings of the items under the emergent three-factor structure were then compared. Metaphor ratings were significantly higher in all factors (p< 0.01), suggesting that metaphorical language is indeed perceived as more effective than literal language when discussing clients’ issues. Implications, limitations, and future directions are discussed.
Keywords: Confirmatory factor analysis
Experimental survey
Exploratory factor analysis
Metaphor functions
Publisher: John Benjamins
Journal: Metaphor and the social world 
ISSN: 2210-4070
DOI: 10.1075/msw.00007.tay
Rights: © John Benjamins Publishing Company
Permission from John Benjamins Publishing Company must be obtained for re-use of reprint the material in any form.
This is the author accepted manuscript of the following article: Tay, D. (2020). Surveying views of metaphor vs. literal language in psychotherapy: A factor analysis. Metaphor and the Social World, 10(2), 273-291, which has been published in final form at
Appears in Collections:Journal/Magazine Article

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
a0611-n03_05 Tay.pdfPre-Published version584.28 kBAdobe PDFView/Open
Open Access Information
Status open access
File Version Final Accepted Manuscript
View full-text via PolyU eLinks SFX Query
Show full item record

Page views

Last Week
Last month
Citations as of Jun 4, 2023


Citations as of Jun 4, 2023


Citations as of Jun 8, 2023


Citations as of Jun 8, 2023

Google ScholarTM



Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.