This paper aims at describing the role and the different manifestations of metaphor in scientific discourse, drawing a distinction between creative and conventional metaphors. To this end, a corpus ...composed of nineteen Nobel lectures, delivered by nineteen women, will be analysed by means of the critical discourse analysis theoretical and methodological tool, with particular attention to the framing that metaphor produced in scientific discourse. Our analysis shows that scientific discourse tends to privilege conventional metaphors, rather than creative ones, above all as far as the main shared domain concepts are concerned.
Although current scholarship has shown that firms strategically frame their new technologies to persuade market stakeholders, such as investors and customers, we know less about how they use ...strategic framing tactics to influence politicians when the new technology challenges the regulatory framework. This is a significant omission, given that market and political stakeholders have very different interests and legitimacy judgments. Therefore, this paper aims to systematically examine the variations and antecedents of framing tactics of technologies in the political arena. It distinguishes between two types of political framing tactics of technologies: public interest framing tactics, which align the technology with the interests of the public, and special interest framing tactics, which condemn the incumbents as representatives of a special interest that stifles innovation. It also suggests that technology firms' political framing tactics are influenced by the instrumental interests and ideologies of targeted politicians. Based on a keyword-based content analysis of Uber's political statements in the most populous US cities between 2012 and 2018, it finds that the use of public interest framing tactics is specifically related to politicians' electoral pressure, whereas the use of special interest framing tactics is associated with politicians' liberal tendencies.
•Firms strategically frame their new technologies to establish legitimacy with both market and political stakeholders.•It distinguishes between two strategic framing tactics of technologies in the political arena: public interest and special interest.•Technology firms’ political framing tactics are influenced by the electoral pressure and ideologies of politicians.
Relative to younger adults, older adults have a preference and memory advantage for appeals framed to focus on emotion goals (e.g., loving or caring) or positive outcomes (e.g., benefits of health ...behaviors). Here we examined whether combining goal (emotion vs. future) and valence framing (positive vs. negative) could optimize older adults' appraisal and memory for health appeals. Sixty younger (ages 18-29) and 60 older (ages 64-87) adults viewed, rated and recalled one of the four versions of a health pamphlet, each with a unique combination of goal and valence framing. The results showed a memory advantage for pamphlets focusing on emotion over future goals in both age groups. Older adults also showed a more favorable appraisal and a weak memory advantage for the positively- and emotion-framed pamphlet, relative to younger adults. Thus combining goal and valence framing could optimize the effectiveness of older adults' health appeal communication..
Unit donations are an alternative fundraising scheme in which potential donors choose how many units of a charitable good to fund rather than just giving money. Based on evidence from an online ...experiment with 8,673 participants, we demonstrate that well-designed unit donation schemes can significantly boost giving above and beyond the standard money donation scheme. A decomposition of the underlying mechanisms shows patterns consistent with the conjecture that unit donations increase impact salience and leverage donors’ cognitive biases by changing the metric of the donation space. Managers need to weigh the potential fundraising benefits of a unit scheme against some important challenges, such as expert handling of the choice of unit sizes. This paper was accepted by Yan Chen, behavioral economics and decision analysis. Funding: Funding by Heidelberg University Field of Focus IV under the Excellence Strategy and the Austrian Science Fund Grant SFB F63 is gratefully acknowledged. Supplemental Material: The online appendix and data files are available at https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2021.00157 .
AbstractTo promote the development of cross-laminated timber (CLT) structures, the Japanese Government Notifications on Structural Design of CLT Buildings (GN 611) was issued in 2016. In GN 611, ...three types of platform-framing CLT structures were classified in the simple calculation method of Route-1. Compared with a platform-framing structure, which has been clarified in GN 611, a balloon-framing structure is superior in shortening the construction period and reducing the number of CLT panels and metal connectors. To study the seismic properties of balloon-framing CLT structures and develop new structures for a CLT building, four full-scale, 3-story CLT structures were tested under quasi-static cyclic loading: Specimen 1 was a platform-framing structure with narrow wall panels; Specimen 2 was a balloon-framing structure with continuous wall panels; Specimen 3 a was platform-framing structure with wide wall panels; and Specimen 4 was a balloon-framing structure with continuous wall panels and glulam beams. In this study, experiments were conducted, and the seismic performance of the balloon- and platform-framing CLT structures were evaluated and compared. The test results indicated that the seismic properties of Specimens 1, 2, and 3 were similar and that the design method of Specimen 1, as specified in GN 611, was applicable for Specimens 2 and 3. Specimen 4 exhibited higher lateral load resistance than the other three specimens. The performance of Specimen 4 depended on the moment-resisting performance of the glulam beam and CLT wall joint. In this case, the moment-resisting performance obtained through the experiment was significantly higher than the predicted performance.
Governance of social-ecological systems (SES) involves multiple stakeholders with different perspectives on the system and associated problems, and different ways to value and use the system. This ...has implications for decision making because this diversity of interests and framings may cause conflicts between stakeholders and/or marginalization of certain groups. In general, the literature agrees that strategically considered stakeholder participation is key to well-informed and legitimate SES governance and to alleviate differences and conflicts between stakeholders. Because SES represent uncertain, complex governance contexts, methodologies that address complexity and future uncertainty are needed. In this regard, participatory scenario planning is widely regarded as a useful tool. However, little explicit analysis exists about its role in framing. We therefore analyzed two scenario-guided policy formulation cases to assess how and to what extent it contributes to system and problem framing. We developed an analytical framework building on critical systems and resilience scholarship: the questions of "resilience of what, to what, for whom and over what timeframe?" are important framing dimensions. As such, we used them as the basis for our framework. We analyzed two scenario-guided policy formulation processes in East Africa, facilitated by the CGIAR's Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security. We found that participatory scenario planning significantly contributes to system and problem framing and can add to efficacy, legitimacy, and analytical rigor of planning processes through involving a diverse range of stakeholders in strategic dialogues about futures. Our results also highlight its potential to make the political dimension of policy and broader SES governance processes more explicitly visible by addressing the "for whom?" dimension. We recommend designing novel participatory scenario approaches that explicitly use insights from critical system theory, incorporating questions of who decides how the system and problems are framed, who should benefit, and whose knowledge is used.
Addressing the biodiversity crisis depends fundamentally on mapping the distributions of plants, animals, and ecosystems. These maps are readily used as ‘boundary objects’ to span the interface ...between science and policy. As scientists, we tend assume that geographical depictions of nature are accurate and bias-free representations of the real world. However, they are actually abstractions of reality, framed by our scientific worldviews. Such framings may introduce hidden meanings, which can alienate observers from the realities in nature. Here I consider biodiversity maps through the lens of framing in social theory. Framing is the way individuals use metaphors, narratives and anecdotes to make sense of the world around them. I describe how biodiversity maps, which are intended as neutral boundary objects, can unintentionally activate inappropriate frames of interpretation that present nature from a technocratic and human-centred perspective. Such framings can introduce subliminal meaning into science-policy dialogues, encourage complacency, or erode scientific buy-in. I conclude that conservation science stands to benefit from interrogating not only the technical, but also the symbolic, aspects of biodiversity maps and describe four ways to limit unintentional framings and, ultimately, communicate scientific messages about biodiversity more effectively.
•Biodiversity maps are abstractions of reality, shaped by scientific worldviews.•These maps can unintentionally trigger unconscious mental frames in observers.•Failing to consider these unintended framings can undermine multi-stakeholder policy discussions.•Considering the symbolic aspects of biodiversity maps can communicate scientific messages more effectively.
The acceptability of low carbon policies is an important precondition for energy system transitions, such as the German Energiewende. This long-term experimental study examines the potential for ...behavioural spillover on the acceptability of low carbon policies, caused by a framed intervention to promote electricity saving behaviour. Clients of a German energy provider were randomly assigned to continuously receive electricity saving tips with either monetary framing (saving potential in €) or environmental framing (saving potential in CO2). The control group did not receive any information. In two follow-up surveys, four (N=333) and nine months (N=258) later, participants rated the acceptability of several low carbon policies. A pre-survey assessed the personal ecological norm for saving electricity. Participants with strong personal ecological norms reported generally higher policy acceptability. After environmental framing they also indicated higher acceptability compared to the monetary framing or control group. These results indicate that information campaigns should be designed carefully in order to promote positive spillover effects. Environmental framing of private-sphere behaviour can increase the disposition for further pro-environmental behaviour in the public sphere, e.g. policy acceptability. When appealing to monetary benefits in pro-environmental behaviour, there is a risk of inhibiting positive spillover effects.
•Policy acceptability may be influenced by type of framing and individual factors.•We examined long-term spillover effects in association with type of framing.•Framing (environmental vs. monetary) interacts with personal ecological norms.•For strong personal ecological norms, environmental framing increases acceptability.•Also, strong personal ecological norms increase low carbon policy acceptability.
During March 2020, as the American President and the British Prime Minister addressed their constituencies, they were also framing their perceptions regarding COVID-19. By analyzing the formal ...pronouncements of both leaders, we show that they used terminology and frames that are associated with conflicts: They described the pandemic as a war, saying they had a plan on how to "win" it; they defined isolation as patriotism and conferred war hero status on their medical teams, all the while expounding how their plan for handling the situation was better than the plans of others (although fighting a global pandemic). We claim that the leaders used words, language, and frames that resonated with what they believed their audiences would know and accept. In doing so, they allowed themselves considerably more leverage in what they asked of the public, such as a complete change in their everyday behavior, acceptance of higher casualty numbers, and compliance with harsher measures. They even went so far as to paint extreme images of potential outcomes-namely expecting a complete victory. COVID-19 changed the behaviors of billions of people, but the framing used by the leaders was based on the traditional way societies build their conflict stories.
Public Significance Statement
This study's contribution is threefold: Firstly, Understanding how leaders used war-framing in order to structure the way their constituencies perceived COVID-19. Secondly, explaining how war framings enable leaders to demand certain actions and to make the public anticipate certain outcomes. Lastly, showing how framings of a violent conflict are "copy-pasted" to different circumstances.
Full text
Available for:
CEKLJ, FFLJ, NUK, ODKLJ, PEFLJ
PDF
