The Double Framing Effect of Emotive Metaphors in Argumentation

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...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Francesca Ervas, Maria Grazia Rossi, Amitash Ojha, Bipin Indurkhya
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Frontiers Media S.A. 2021-06-01
Series:Frontiers in Psychology
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.628460/full
id doaj-2c4c6e5a1b104b409e992ab98da45179
record_format Article
spelling doaj-2c4c6e5a1b104b409e992ab98da451792021-06-14T06:28:25ZengFrontiers Media S.A.Frontiers in Psychology1664-10782021-06-011210.3389/fpsyg.2021.628460628460The Double Framing Effect of Emotive Metaphors in ArgumentationFrancesca Ervas0Maria Grazia Rossi1Amitash Ojha2Bipin Indurkhya3Department of Education, Psychology, Philosophy, University of Cagliari, Cagliari, ItalyInstituto de Filosofia da Nova (IFILNOVA), Facultade de Ciências Sociais e Humanas, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Lisbon, PortugalDepartment of Humanities and Social Sciences, Indian Institute of Technology Jammu, Jammu, IndiaDepartment of Cognitive Science, Jagiellonian University, Kraków, PolandIn 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.https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.628460/fullmetaphoremotionsframingequivocation fallacyaffective coherencereasoning
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Francesca Ervas
Maria Grazia Rossi
Amitash Ojha
Bipin Indurkhya
spellingShingle Francesca Ervas
Maria Grazia Rossi
Amitash Ojha
Bipin Indurkhya
The Double Framing Effect of Emotive Metaphors in Argumentation
Frontiers in Psychology
metaphor
emotions
framing
equivocation fallacy
affective coherence
reasoning
author_facet Francesca Ervas
Maria Grazia Rossi
Amitash Ojha
Bipin Indurkhya
author_sort Francesca Ervas
title The Double Framing Effect of Emotive Metaphors in Argumentation
title_short The Double Framing Effect of Emotive Metaphors in Argumentation
title_full The Double Framing Effect of Emotive Metaphors in Argumentation
title_fullStr The Double Framing Effect of Emotive Metaphors in Argumentation
title_full_unstemmed The Double Framing Effect of Emotive Metaphors in Argumentation
title_sort double framing effect of emotive metaphors in argumentation
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
series Frontiers in Psychology
issn 1664-1078
publishDate 2021-06-01
description 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.
topic metaphor
emotions
framing
equivocation fallacy
affective coherence
reasoning
url https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.628460/full
work_keys_str_mv AT francescaervas thedoubleframingeffectofemotivemetaphorsinargumentation
AT mariagraziarossi thedoubleframingeffectofemotivemetaphorsinargumentation
AT amitashojha thedoubleframingeffectofemotivemetaphorsinargumentation
AT bipinindurkhya thedoubleframingeffectofemotivemetaphorsinargumentation
AT francescaervas doubleframingeffectofemotivemetaphorsinargumentation
AT mariagraziarossi doubleframingeffectofemotivemetaphorsinargumentation
AT amitashojha doubleframingeffectofemotivemetaphorsinargumentation
AT bipinindurkhya doubleframingeffectofemotivemetaphorsinargumentation
_version_ 1721378562312765440