abstractConceptual metaphor theory and other important theories in metaphor research are often experimentally tested by studying the effects of metaphorical frames on individuals’ reasoning. Metaphorical frames can be identified by at least two levels of analysis: words vs. concepts. Previous overviews of metaphorical-framing effects have mostly focused on metaphorical framing through words (metaphorical-words frames) rather than through concepts (metaphorical-concepts frames). This means that these overviews included only experimental studies that looked at variations in individual words instead of at the broader logic of messages. For this reason, we conducted a meta-analysis (k = 91, N = 34,783) to compare the persuasive impact of both types of metaphorical frames. Given that patterns of metaphor usage differ across discourse domains, and that effects may differ across modalities and discourse domains, we focused on one mode of presentation and one discourse domain only: verbal metaphorical framing in political discourse. Results showed that, compared to non-metaphorical frames, both metaphorical-words and metaphorical-concepts frames positively influenced beliefs and attitudes. Yet, these effects were larger for metaphorical-concepts frames. We therefore argue that future research should more explicitly describe and justify which level of analysis is chosen to examine the nature and effects of metaphorical framing.

中文翻译：

---

通过文字与概念在政治话语中的隐喻框架：荟萃分析

摘要概念隐喻理论和隐喻研究中的其他重要理论经常通过研究隐喻框架对个人推理的影响来进行实验测试。隐喻框架可以通过至少两个层次的分析来识别：词与概念。先前对隐喻框架效应的概述主要集中在通过词（隐喻词框架）而不是通过概念（隐喻概念框架）进行隐喻框架。这意味着这些概述仅包括实验研究，这些研究着眼于单个单词的变化，而不是更广泛的信息逻辑。为此，我们进行了荟萃分析（ķ= 91,ñ= 34,783）比较两种隐喻框架的说服力。鉴于隐喻使用的模式在不同的语篇域中不同，而且效果可能因模态和语篇域而不同，我们只关注一种呈现模式和一个语篇域：政治话语中的语言隐喻框架。结果表明，与非隐喻框架相比，隐喻词和隐喻概念框架都对信念和态度产生了积极影响。然而，对于隐喻概念框架，这些影响更大。因此，我们认为，未来的研究应该更明确地描述和证明选择哪种分析水平来检查隐喻框架的性质和效果。