Is everything quantum spooky and weird? An exploration of popular communication about quantum science and technology in TEDx talks

Researchers point to four potential issues related to the popularisation of quantum science and technology. These include a lack of explaining underlying quantum concepts of quantum 2.0 technology, framing quantum science and technology as spooky and enigmatic, framing quantum technology narrowly in terms of public good and having a strong focus on quantum computing. To date, no research has yet assessed whether these potential issues are actually present in popular communication about quantum science. In this content analysis, we have examined the presence of these potential issues in 501 TEDx talks with quantum science and technology content. Results show that while most experts (70%) explained at least one underlying quantum concept (superposition, entanglement or contextuality) of quantum 2.0 technology, only 28% of the non-experts did so. Secondly, the spooky/enigmatic frame was present in about a quarter of the talks. Thirdly, a narrow public good frame was found, predominantly by highlighting the benefits of quantum science and technology (found in over 6 times more talks than risks). Finally, the main focus was on quantum computing at the expense of other quantum technologies. In conclusion, the proposed frames are indeed found in TEDx talks, there is indeed a focus on quantum computing, but at least experts explain underlying quantum concepts often.Comment: 30 pages, 7 figure

MSDIP: A method for coding source domains in metaphor analysis

This is the OSF file for the paper 'MSDIP: A method for coding source domains in metaphor analysis', containing the datasets, syntax, and output for the reliability analyses and small-scale analysis reported in the paper

The role of co-text in the analysis of potentially deliberate metaphor in discourse

This is the OSF file for the paper 'The role of co-text in the analysis of potentially deliberate metaphor in discourse', containing the annotated corpus for potentially deliberate metaphor

When do natural language metaphors influence reasoning? A follow-up study to Thibodeau and Boroditsky (2013).

In this article, we offer a critical view of Thibodeau and Boroditsky who report an effect of metaphorical framing on readers' preference for political measures after exposure to a short text on the increase of crime in a fictitious town: when crime was metaphorically presented as a beast, readers became more enforcement-oriented than when crime was metaphorically framed as a virus. We argue that the design of the study has left room for alternative explanations. We report four experiments comprising a follow-up study, remedying several shortcomings in the original design while collecting more encompassing sets of data. Our experiments include three additions to the original studies: (1) a non-metaphorical control condition, which is contrasted to the two metaphorical framing conditions used by Thibodeau and Boroditsky, (2) text versions that do not have the other, potentially supporting metaphors of the original stimulus texts, (3) a pre-exposure measure of political preference (Experiments 1-2). We do not find a metaphorical framing effect but instead show that there is another process at play across the board which presumably has to do with simple exposure to textual information. Reading about crime increases people's preference for enforcement irrespective of metaphorical frame or metaphorical support of the frame. These findings suggest the existence of boundary conditions under which metaphors can have differential effects on reasoning. Thus, our four experiments provide converging evidence raising questions about when metaphors do and do not influence reasoning

How polysemy affects concreteness ratings: The case of metaphor

Concreteness ratings are frequently used in a variety of disciplines to operationalize differences between concrete and abstract words and concepts. However, most ratings studies present items in isolation, thereby overlooking the potential polysemy of words. Consequently, ratings for polysemous words may be conflated, causing a threat to the validity of concreteness-ratings studies. This is particularly relevant to metaphorical words, which typically describe something abstract in terms of something more concrete. To investigate whether perceived concreteness ratings differ for metaphorical versus non-metaphorical word meanings, we obtained concreteness ratings for 96 English nouns from 230 participants. Results show that nouns are perceived as less concrete when a metaphorical (versus non-metaphorical) meaning is triggered. We thus recommend taking metaphoricity into account in future concreteness-ratings studies to further improve the quality and reliability of such studies, as well as the consistency of the empirical studies that rely on these ratings

Metaphor in communication:The distribution of potentially deliberate metaphor across register and word class

Item does not contain fulltextThere is renewed interest in the special role that metaphor can have in its communicative status as metaphor between language users. This paper investigates the occurrence of such deliberate metaphors in comparison with non-deliberate metaphors. To this end, a corpus of 24,762 metaphors was analysed for the presence of potentially deliberate (versus non-deliberate) metaphor use across registers and word classes. Results show that 4.36% of metaphors in the corpus are identified as potentially deliberate metaphors. News and fiction contain significantly more potentially deliberate metaphors, while academic texts and conversations exhibit significantly fewer potentially deliberate metaphors than expected. Moreover, nouns and adjectives are used relatively more frequently as potentially deliberate metaphors, while adverbs, verbs, and prepositions are used relatively less frequently as potentially deliberate metaphors. These results can be explained by referring to the overall communicative properties of the registers concerned, as well as to the role of the different word classes in those registers.26 p

On Metaphorical Views, Dynamite, and Doodlings: Functions of Domain Adjectives in Metaphorical Domain Constructions

This paper offers a systematic, bottom-up, investigation of the role of adjectives as metaphor signals in metaphorical domain constructions (MDCs) such as 'budgetary anorexia' and 'economic crash' within the framework of Deliberate Metaphor Theory (e.g., Steen, 2017). To this end, we analyse all MDCs in the VU Amsterdam Metaphor Corpus. Results of our analyses demonstrate that domain adjectives in MDCs do not by definition constitute signals of metaphor, and that not all nouns in MDCs are identified as potentially deliberate metaphors. We identify three different functions of domain adjectives: (1) signal of novel metaphor; (2) signal of conventional metaphor; (3) non-signal. The analyses in this paper provide new insights into both the role of domain adjectives in MDCs, and the position of MDCs as a typical manifestation of potentially deliberate metaphor

DMIP: A method for identifying potentially deliberate metaphor in natural language use

This is the OSF file for the reliability tests for the DMIP pape