Do metaphors make opinions?

Pub Date : 2022-01-20 DOI:10.1075/msw.20028.moh
Margaux Mohnke, U. Christmann, Yannick Roos, C. Thomale
{"title":"Do metaphors make opinions?","authors":"Margaux Mohnke, U. Christmann, Yannick Roos, C. Thomale","doi":"10.1075/msw.20028.moh","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n \n Introduction: A frame makes specific information about a topic more salient. Metaphors can be used as\n frames to influence people’s opinions on controversial political topics as well as on health-related topics. This study aims to\n determine the influence of metaphorical frames on the opinion towards surrogacy and examines whether specific aspects of surrogacy\n are more prone to the influence than others.\n \n Method: 236 participants were assigned to one of three groups with different metaphorical frames for\n surrogacy and thereafter completed the Attitude Towards Surrogacy Questionnaire. To investigate if participants’ opinions on\n surrogacy were influenced by the frame used for surrogacy, three ANOVAS were conducted.\n \n Result: The main effect of the ANOVAS revealed that opinion towards payment of the surrogate mothers,\n but not the attitude towards surrogacy in general, was influenced by the metaphorical frame used for surrogacy.\n \n Discussion: The results support the idea that a metaphorical frame can evoke reactance regarding the\n payment of surrogate mothers. Participants might resist the frame of the metaphorical term for surrogacy as an unemotional\n business act, by favouring less monetary compensation of the surrogate mother, when the metaphorical frame implies that surrogates\n only help intended parents for the monetary compensation.","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1075/msw.20028.moh","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Introduction: A frame makes specific information about a topic more salient. Metaphors can be used as frames to influence people’s opinions on controversial political topics as well as on health-related topics. This study aims to determine the influence of metaphorical frames on the opinion towards surrogacy and examines whether specific aspects of surrogacy are more prone to the influence than others. Method: 236 participants were assigned to one of three groups with different metaphorical frames for surrogacy and thereafter completed the Attitude Towards Surrogacy Questionnaire. To investigate if participants’ opinions on surrogacy were influenced by the frame used for surrogacy, three ANOVAS were conducted. Result: The main effect of the ANOVAS revealed that opinion towards payment of the surrogate mothers, but not the attitude towards surrogacy in general, was influenced by the metaphorical frame used for surrogacy. Discussion: The results support the idea that a metaphorical frame can evoke reactance regarding the payment of surrogate mothers. Participants might resist the frame of the metaphorical term for surrogacy as an unemotional business act, by favouring less monetary compensation of the surrogate mother, when the metaphorical frame implies that surrogates only help intended parents for the monetary compensation.
分享
查看原文
隐喻能形成观点吗?
引言:框架使有关某个主题的具体信息更加突出。隐喻可以作为框架来影响人们对有争议的政治话题以及与健康相关的话题的看法。本研究旨在确定隐喻框架对代孕观点的影响,并考察代孕的特定方面是否比其他方面更容易受到影响。方法:236名参与者被分到三组中的一组,每组具有不同的代孕隐喻框架,然后完成对代孕的态度问卷。为了调查参与者对代孕的看法是否受到代孕框架的影响,进行了三次方差分析。结果:方差分析的主要效应表明,代孕所使用的隐喻框架影响了代孕母亲对支付的看法,而不是对代孕的总体态度。讨论:研究结果支持这样一种观点,即隐喻框架可以引发对代孕母亲付款的抵制。参与者可能会抵制代孕这个隐喻性术语作为一种非情感商业行为的框架,因为它倾向于对代孕母亲进行较少的金钱补偿,而这个隐喻性框架意味着代孕者只会帮助有意的父母获得金钱补偿。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信