Conceptualizing Change in Communication Through Metaphor

Abstract

Modeling communication patterns by individuals and organizations dealing with institutional and social change is an important challenge for communication scholars. Metaphors provide frames of thinking about societal topics. The ways metaphors change can thus reveal how conceptualizations of social topics change over time. Change occurs in two temporal paces: evolutionary (continuous) or revolutionary (discontinuous). Furthermore, change occurs in two ways: through incremental (meaning of extant metaphors change) or fundamental (old metaphors are replaced) transformation. I propose that studying shifts of metaphors can be used to model incremental and fundamental change in communication at both evolutionary and revolutionary pace. I describe how such shifts have been studied on the microlevel, mesolevel, and macrolevel through both qualitative and quantitative research methods.

Metaphors that communicate weight-based stigma in political news: A case study of New Jersey Governor Chris Christie

“…People communicate through metaphors, because they think metaphorically (Gibbs, 1994;Landau & Keefer, 2014). Metaphors are inherently communicative, because their meaning is generated through social interaction (Burgers, 2016;Steen, Reijnierse, & Burgers, 2014). This parallels the conceptualization of stigma as a communicative process (Smith, 2007).…”

“…Conceptual mapping refers to the constellation of linkages made between the source and target, which help the audience to better understand the abstract target in terms of the concrete source's characteristics (Landau & Keefer, 2014). This type of conceptual mapping frames the target in certain ways (Burgers, 2016;Landau & Keefer, 2014) to highlight some aspects of the target while obscuring others (Landau et al, 2009).…”

Framing Big Data: The discursive construction of a radio cell query in Germany

“…In this respect, a field of research has emerged that looks at the public understanding of technoscientific innovations more generally like genetics, bioengineering, or nanomechanics. As these are a matter of discursive contestation rather than neutral information, they are conceptualized with regard to different areas of application and reasoning that prioritize certain ways of knowing and acting (Burgers, 2016;Druckman and Bolsen, 2011). Discourses are ''representing aspects of the world'', Fairclough (2003) writes, so that ''different discourses are different perspectives on the world'' (p. 124).…”

How journalists and experts metaphorically frame emerging information technologies: The case of cyberinfrastructure for big data

“…Therefore, at the time of being studied, metaphorical frames had already been formed, and were widely known and used. Emerging technologies, in contrast, do not yet have established frames (Burgers, 2016). Emerging information technologies are therefore suitable for studying frame-building (how new frames are created) and sense-making of innovations (Burgers, 2016;Scheufele, 1999).…”