IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0052961.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Natural Language Metaphors Covertly Influence Reasoning

Author

Listed:
  • Paul H Thibodeau
  • Lera Boroditsky

Abstract

Metaphors pervade discussions of social issues like climate change, the economy, and crime. We ask how natural language metaphors shape the way people reason about such social issues. In previous work, we showed that describing crime metaphorically as a beast or a virus, led people to generate different solutions to a city’s crime problem. In the current series of studies, instead of asking people to generate a solution on their own, we provided them with a selection of possible solutions and asked them to choose the best ones. We found that metaphors influenced people’s reasoning even when they had a set of options available to compare and select among. These findings suggest that metaphors can influence not just what solution comes to mind first, but also which solution people think is best, even when given the opportunity to explicitly compare alternatives. Further, we tested whether participants were aware of the metaphor. We found that very few participants thought the metaphor played an important part in their decision. Further, participants who had no explicit memory of the metaphor were just as much affected by the metaphor as participants who were able to remember the metaphorical frame. These findings suggest that metaphors can act covertly in reasoning. Finally, we examined the role of political affiliation on reasoning about crime. The results confirm our previous findings that Republicans are more likely to generate enforcement and punishment solutions for dealing with crime, and are less swayed by metaphor than are Democrats or Independents.

Suggested Citation

  • Paul H Thibodeau & Lera Boroditsky, 2013. "Natural Language Metaphors Covertly Influence Reasoning," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(1), pages 1-7, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0052961
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0052961
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0052961
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0052961&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0052961?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Paul H Thibodeau & Lera Boroditsky, 2011. "Metaphors We Think With: The Role of Metaphor in Reasoning," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(2), pages 1-11, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Laura Toschi & Elisa Ughetto & Andrea Fronzetti Colladon, 2023. "The identity of social impact venture capitalists: exploring social linguistic positioning and linguistic distinctiveness through text mining," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 60(3), pages 1249-1280, March.
    2. Vincent X. Wang & Xi Chen & Lily Lim & Chu-Ren Huang, 2023. "Framing Covid-19 reporting in the Macau Daily News using metaphors and gain/loss prospects: a war for collective gains," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-10, December.
    3. Paul H Thibodeau & Lera Boroditsky, 2015. "Measuring Effects of Metaphor in a Dynamic Opinion Landscape," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(7), pages 1-22, July.
    4. Cotton, Matthew & Barkemeyer, Ralf & Renzi, Barbara Gabriella & Napolitano, Giulio, 2019. "Fracking and metaphor: Analysing newspaper discourse in the USA, Australia and the United Kingdom," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 1-1.
    5. Gerard J Steen & W Gudrun Reijnierse & Christian Burgers, 2014. "When Do Natural Language Metaphors Influence Reasoning? A Follow-Up Study to Thibodeau and Boroditsky (2013)," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(12), pages 1-25, December.
    6. Antonio Crego & José Ramón Yela & Rita Ozores-Pérez & Pablo Riesco-Matías & María Ángeles Gómez-Martínez, 2022. "Eudaimonic and Uncertainty Metaphors About Life are Associated with Meaningfulness, Experiential Avoidance, Mental Health and Happiness," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 23(8), pages 4119-4146, December.
    7. Farrow, Katherine & Grolleau, Gilles & Mzoughi, Naoufel, 2021. "‘Let's call a spade a spade, not a gardening tool’: How euphemisms shape moral judgement in corporate social responsibility domains," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 254-267.
    8. Legein Thomas & Randour François & Reuchamps Min & Vandeleene Audrey & Heyvaert Pauline & Perrez Julien, 2018. "Framing the Basic Income: An Experimental Study of How Arguments and Metaphors Influence Individuals’ Opinion Formation," Basic Income Studies, De Gruyter, vol. 13(2), pages 1-16, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Graupe, Silja & Steffestun, Theresa, 2018. ""The market deals out profit and losses": Wie ökonomische Standardlehrbücher das unreflektierte Denken in Metaphern fördern," Working Paper Series Ök-38, Cusanus Hochschule für Gesellschaftsgestaltung, Institut für Ökonomie.
    2. Jinghan Hu & Xiaoyu Zhang & Ruonan Li & Jianxin Zhang & Wencai Zhang, 2023. "A Randomized Controlled Trial to Evaluate the Effect of Metaphors on Anxiety Symptoms Among Chinese Graduate Students: The Mediation Effect of Worry," Applied Research in Quality of Life, Springer;International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies, vol. 18(2), pages 849-867, April.
    3. Legein Thomas & Randour François & Reuchamps Min & Vandeleene Audrey & Heyvaert Pauline & Perrez Julien, 2018. "Framing the Basic Income: An Experimental Study of How Arguments and Metaphors Influence Individuals’ Opinion Formation," Basic Income Studies, De Gruyter, vol. 13(2), pages 1-16, December.
    4. Verena Komander & Andreas König, 2024. "Organizations on stage: organizational research and the performing arts," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 74(1), pages 303-352, February.
    5. Nisreen N. Al-Khawaldeh & Luqman M. Rababah & Ali F. Khawaldeh & Alaeddin A. Banikalef, 2023. "The art of rhetoric: persuasive strategies in Biden’s inauguration speech: a critical discourse analysis," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-8, December.
    6. Antonio Crego & José Ramón Yela & Rita Ozores-Pérez & Pablo Riesco-Matías & María Ángeles Gómez-Martínez, 2022. "Eudaimonic and Uncertainty Metaphors About Life are Associated with Meaningfulness, Experiential Avoidance, Mental Health and Happiness," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 23(8), pages 4119-4146, December.
    7. Michael Hallsworth, 2023. "A manifesto for applying behavioural science," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 7(3), pages 310-322, March.
    8. Athula Sumathipala, 2014. "Development of metaphors to explain cognitive behavioural principles for patients with medically unexplained symptoms in Sri Lanka," International Journal of Social Psychiatry, , vol. 60(2), pages 117-124, March.
    9. Daniele Vignoli & Alessandra Minello & Giacomo Bazzani & Camilla Matera & Chiara Rapallini, 2022. "Narratives of the Future Affect Fertility: Evidence from a Laboratory Experiment," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 38(1), pages 93-124, March.
    10. Biroli, Pietro & Bosworth, Steven J. & Della Giusta, Marina & Di Girolamo, Amalia & Jaworska, Sylvia & Vollen, Jeremy, 2020. "Framing the Predicted Impacts of COVID-19 Prophylactic Measures in Terms of Lives Saved Rather Than Deaths Is More Effective for Older People," IZA Discussion Papers 13753, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    11. Niamh M. Brennan & Doris M. Merkl-Davies, 2014. "Rhetoric and argument in social and environmental reporting: the Dirty Laundry case," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 27(4), pages 602-633, April.
    12. Matthew Feinberg & Elisabeth Wehling, 2018. "A moral house divided: How idealized family models impact political cognition," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(4), pages 1-31, April.
    13. Massara, Francesco & Porcheddu, Daniele & Melara, Robert D., 2014. "Asymmetric Perception of Sparse Shelves in Retail Displays," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 90(3), pages 321-331.
    14. Isoaho, K. & Burgas, D. & Janasik, N. & Mönkkönen, M. & Peura, M. & Hukkinen, J.I., 2019. "Changing forest stakeholders’ perception of ecosystem services with linguistic nudging," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    15. Aaron M. Scherer & Laura D. Scherer & Angela Fagerlin, 2015. "Getting Ahead of Illness," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 35(1), pages 37-45, January.
    16. Ison, Ray & Blackmore, Chris & Iaquinto, Benjamin L., 2013. "Towards systemic and adaptive governance: Exploring the revealing and concealing aspects of contemporary social-learning metaphors," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 34-42.
    17. Juan Carlos Henao & Carolina Isaza Espinosa, 2018. "Corrupción en Colombia Tomo 1 Corrupción, política y sociedad," Books, Universidad Externado de Colombia, Facultad de Derecho, number 1024, March.
    18. Glette-Iversen, Ingrid & Aven, Terje, 2021. "On the meaning of and relationship between dragon-kings, black swans and related concepts," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 211(C).
    19. Gerald Zaltman, 2016. "Marketing’s forthcoming Age of imagination," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 6(3), pages 99-115, December.
    20. Cotton, Matthew & Barkemeyer, Ralf & Renzi, Barbara Gabriella & Napolitano, Giulio, 2019. "Fracking and metaphor: Analysing newspaper discourse in the USA, Australia and the United Kingdom," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 1-1.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0052961. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.