Cover not available
Article published In:
Metaphor and the Social World
Vol. 13:2 (2023) ► pp.248–268

Metaphors as tools for understanding in science communication among experts and to the public

ORCID logo | National University of Singapore
ORCID logo | Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
ORCID logo | Radboud University
Science communication is highly important in present-day society. But mere factual information transfer does not suffice for enhancing public understanding of scientific results, theories, and concepts. In this paper we compare science communication among experts with communication from experts to laypeople, to better understand the role of metaphors in constructing understanding of abstract scientific concepts. As a case study, we analyze specialist and non-specialist scientific articles on epigenetics, the study of heritable changes in gene expression not altering DNA sequence. The results of our analysis show that there is no substantial difference between the two types of articles in frequency of metaphors and in their content. However, the function of the metaphors is different: the figurative aspect of metaphors is employed for public understanding but plays no role in specialist scientific articles. We outline the implications of these results for current philosophical debates on scientific understanding and public understanding of science: (1) metaphors are tools for rendering theoretical concepts intelligible, for both expert and lay audiences; (2) expert and public understanding differ in degree rather than in kind; (3) conveying understanding crucially involves skills: metaphors in this context do not so much add knowledge as enhance relevant conceptual reasoning abilities.
Keywords: Science communication, scientific understanding, metaphor analysis, epigenetic
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Theoretical Framework
    • 2.1Expert versus public understanding of science: A philosophical analysis
    • 2.2A linguistic perspective on the role of metaphor in understanding
    • 2.3Research aim and hypotheses
  • 3.Methods
    • 3.1Choice of case and research design
    • 3.2Metaphor analysis
    • 3.3Data sources
  • 4.Results
    • 4.1Quantitative results
    • 4.2Qualitative results
    • 4.3Open metaphors in non-specialist scientific articles
    • 4.4Closed metaphors in specialist scientific articles
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 4 August 2023
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/msw.22016.sme
References (62)
References
Baedke, J., & Schöttler, T. (2017). Visual metaphors in the sciences: The case of epigenetic landscape images. Journal for General Philosophy of Science, 48 (2), 173–194. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Baylin, S. B., & Herman, J. G. (2000). DNA hypermethylation in tumorigenesis: Epigenetics joins genetics. Trends in Genetics, 16 (4), 168–174. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Beger, A. (2015). Metaphors in psychology genres. In B. Herrmann & T. Berber Sardinha (Eds.), Metaphor in specialist discourse (pp. 53–75). John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bowdle, B. F., & Gentner, D. (2005). The career of metaphor. Psychological Review, 112 (1), 193–216. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brossard, D., & Lewenstein, B. V. (2009). A critical appraisal of models of public understanding of science: Using practice to inform theory. In L. Kahlor & P. Stout (Eds.), Communicating science (pp. 11–39). Routledge.Google Scholar
Cameron, L., & Maslen, R. (2010). Metaphor analysis. Equinox.Google Scholar
Cameron, L., Maslen, R., & Low, G. (2010). Finding systematicity in metaphor use. In L. Cameron & R. Maslen (Eds.), Metaphor analysis (pp. 116–146). Equinox.Google Scholar
Cloud, J. (2010). Why genes aren’t destiny. TIME Magazine (January 18), 49–53.Google Scholar
Cornelissen, J. P., Clarke, J. S., & Cienki, A. (2012). Sensegiving in entrepreneurial contexts: The use of metaphors in speech and gesture to gain and sustain support for novel business ventures. International small business journal, 30 (3), 213–241. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Crossley, M. (2013). Explainer: What is epigenetics? The Conversation. [URL] (accessed June 2, 2020).
De Regt, H.W., Leonelli, S., & Eigner, K. (Eds). (2009). Scientific understanding: Philosophical perspectives. University of Pittsburgh Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
De Regt, H. W. (2017). Understanding scientific understanding. Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dubois, M., Louvel, S., Le Goff, A., Guaspare, C., & Allard, P. (2019). Epigenetics in the public sphere: interdisciplinary perspectives. Environmental Epigenetics, 5(4), 1–11. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Duit, R. (1991). On the role of analogies and metaphors in learning science. Science Education, 75 (6), 649–672. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
English, K. (1998). Understanding science: When metaphors become terms. ASp: La Revue du GERAS [Online], 19–22. [URL]; DOI logo
Ennis, C. (2014). Epigenetics 101: A beginner’s guide to explaining everything. The Guardian. [URL] (accessed June 2, 2020).
Gee, B. (1978). Models as a pedagogical tool: Can we learn from Maxwell? Physics Education, 13 (5), 287–291. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gentner, D., & Gentner, D. R. (1983). Flowing waters or teeming crowds: Mental models of electricity. In D. Gentner & A. L. Stevens (Eds.), Mental models (pp. 99–129). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Gibbs, R. W., Jr. (1996). Why many concepts are metaphorical. Cognition, 61 1, 309–319. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Giles, T. D. (2001). The missing metaphor. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 31 (4), 373–390. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goatly, A. (1997). The language of metaphors. Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goldberg, A. D., Allis, C. D., & Bernstein, E. (2007). Epigenetics: A landscape takes shape. Cell, 128 (4), 635–638. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gorski, D. (2013). Epigenetics: It doesn’t mean what quacks think it means. Science-Based Medicine. [URL] (Last accessed June 2, 2020).
Greally, J. M. (2018). A user’s guide to the ambiguous word ‘epigenetics’. Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology, 19 (4), 207–208. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grimm, S., Baumberger, C., & Ammon, S. (Eds). (2017). Explaining understanding. New perspectives from epistemology and philosophy of science. Routledge.Google Scholar
Henikoff, S., & Matzke, M. A. (1997). Exploring and explaining epigenetic effects. Trends in Genetics, 13 (8), 293–295. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hesse, M. (1963). Models and analogies in science. Sheed and Ward.Google Scholar
Hill, R. C., & Levenhagen, M. (1995). Metaphors and mental models: Sensemaking and sensegiving in innovative and entrepreneurial activities. Journal of Management, 21 (6), 1057–1074. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hyland, K. (2005). Stance and engagement: A model of interaction in academic discourse. Discourse Studies, 7 (2), 173–192. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Johnson-Sheehan, R. D. (1998). Metaphor in the rhetoric of scientific discourse. In J. T. Battalio (Ed.), Essays in the study of scientific discourse, Methods, Practice, and Pedagogy, ATTW Contemporary Studies in Technical Communication, 6 1 (pp. 167–179), Ablex.Google Scholar
Khalifa, K. (2017). Understanding, explanation, and scientific knowledge. Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Knudsen, S. (2003). Scientific metaphors going public. Journal of Pragmatics, 35 (8), 1247–1263. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kyratzis, A. (1997). Metaphorically speaking: Sex, politics, and the Greeks [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Lancaster University.
Laird, P. W., & Jaenisch, R. (1996). The role of DNA methylation in cancer genetics and epigenetics. Annual Review of Genetics, 30 (1), 441–464. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lipton, P. (2004). Inference to the best explanation (2nd edition). Routledge.Google Scholar
Macmillan online dictionary (2007). Macmillan English Dictionary for Advanced Learners. (2nd ed.). Oxford: Macmillan Publishers, Retrieved April 10, 2018, from [URL]
Miller, G. (1979). Images and models, similes and metaphors. In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought (pp. 202–250). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Miller, P. (2012). A thing or two about twins. National Geographic Magazine, January issue. [URL] (accessed June 2, 2020).
Miller, S. (2001). Public understanding of science at the crossroads. Public Understanding of Science, 10 1, 115–120. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Miller, T. (1998). Visual persuasion: A comparison of visuals in academic texts and the popular press. English for Specific Purposes, 17 (1), 29–46. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Müller, C. (2008). Metaphors dead and alive, sleeping and waking: A dynamic view. University of Chicago Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nerlich, B., Stelmach, A., & Ennis, C. (2020). How to do things with epigenetics: An investigation into the use of metaphors to promote alternative approaches to health and social science, and their implications for interdisciplinary collaboration. Social Science Information, 59 (1), 59–92. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Park, A. (2015). Explaining ‘epigenetics’: The health buzzword you need to know. TIME Magazine. [URL] (accessed June 2, 2020).
Pecher, D., Boot, I., & Van Dantzig, S. (2011). Abstract concepts: Sensory-motor grounding, metaphors, and beyond. In B. Ross (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (pp. 217–248). Academic Press.Google Scholar
Pragglejaz Group. (2007). MIP: A method for identifying metaphorically used words in discourse. Metaphor and Symbol, 22 1, 1–39. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Reik, W., Dean, W., & Walter, J. (2001). Epigenetic reprogramming in mammalian development. Science, 293 (5532), 1089–1093. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Reincke, C. M., Bredenoord, A. L., & Van Mil, M. H. W. (2020). From deficit to dialogue in science communication. EMBO Reports 211: e51278. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Richards, I. A. (1936). The philosophy of rhetoric. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Schön, D. (1963). Displacement of concepts. Tavistock.Google Scholar
Schrödinger, E. (1944). What is life? Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Smedinga, M., de Regt, H. W., & Cienki, A. (2023, May 7). Data of metaphor analysis related to publication: “Metaphors as tools for understanding in science communication among experts and to the public.” Retrieved from [URL]
Steen, G. (2015). Developing, testing and interpreting deliberate metaphor theory. Journal of Pragmatics, 90 1, 1–6. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stelmach, A., & Nerlich, B. (2015). Metaphors in search of a target: The curious case of epigenetics. New Genetics and Society, 34 (2), 196–218. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Strevens, M. (2013). No understanding without explanation. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 44 1, 510–515. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Taylor, C., & Dewsbury, B. M. (2018). On the problem and promise of metaphor use in science and science communication. Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education, 19 (1), 1–5. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Turan, N., Katari, S., Coutifaris, C., & Sapienza, C. (2010). Explaining inter-individual variability in phenotype: Is epigenetics up to the challenge? Epigenetics, 5 (1), 16–19. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vervaeke, J., & J. M. Kennedy. (2004). Conceptual metaphor and abstract thought. Metaphor and Symbol, 19 (3), 213–231. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Waddington, C. H. (1957). The strategy of the genes. Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
Wilkenfeld, D. (2013). Understanding as representation manipulability. Synthese, 190 1, 997–1016. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Williams Camus, J. T. (2009). Metaphors of cancer in scientific popularization articles in the British press. Discourse Studies, 11 (4), 465–495. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Yob, I. (2003). Thinking constructively with metaphors. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 22 1, 127–138. DOI logoGoogle Scholar