The Double Framing Effect of Emotive Metaphors in Argumentation

Frontiers in Psychology 12 (2021)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In argumentation, metaphors are often considered as ambiguous or deceptive uses of language leading to fallacies of reasoning. However, they can also provide useful insights into creative argumentation, leading to genuinely new knowledge. Metaphors entail a framing effect that implicitly provides a specific perspective to interpret the world, guiding reasoning and evaluation of arguments. In the same vein, emotions could be in sharp contrast with proper reasoning, but they can also be cognitive processes of affective framing, influencing our reasoning and behavior in different meaningful ways. Thus, a double (metaphorical and affective) framing effect might influence argumentation in the case of emotive metaphors, such as “Poverty is a disease” or “Your boss is a dictator,” where specific “emotive words” (disease, dictator) are used as vehicles. We present and discuss the results of two experimental studies designed to explore the role of emotive metaphors in argumentation. The studies investigated whether and to what extent the detection of a fallacious argument is influenced by the presence of a conventional vs. novel emotive metaphor. Participants evaluated a series of verbal arguments containing either “non-emotive” or “emotive” (positive or negative) metaphors as middle terms that “bridge” the premises of the argument. The results show that the affective coherence of the metaphor's vehicle and topic plays a crucial role in participants' reasoning style, leading to global heuristic vs. local analytical interpretive processes in the interplay of the metaphorical and the affective framing effects.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,271

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Emotive Language in Argumentation.Fabrizio Macagno & Douglas Walton - 2014 - New York: Cambridge University Press.
Arguments and Metaphors in Philosophy.Daniel Harry Cohen - 2004 - University Press of America.
The Argumentative Structure of Persuasive Definitions.Fabrizio Macagno & Douglas Walton - 2008 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 11 (5):525-549.
Theories of Metaphor.Sherrill Jean Begres - 1986 - Dissertation, Wayne State University
Metaphors and Argumentation.Cristian Santibanez Yanez - 2007 - Proceedings of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation Biennial Conference 7.

Analytics

Added to PP
2021-06-29

Downloads
32 (#483,225)

6 months
7 (#411,145)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Francesca Ervas
Universita di Cagliari

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations