Cancer health information is dominated by enemy and war metaphors intended to motivate the public to “fight” cancer. However, enemy metaphoric framing may influence understanding of, and responses to, cancer. Cancer prevention benefits from avoiding risk increasing behaviors, yet self-limitation is not closely associated with fighting enemies. If so, the metaphor may hurt prevention intentions involving self-limitation. Participants read messages with minute wording variations that established different metaphoric frames. Results show that metaphorically framing cancer as an enemy lessens the conceptual accessibility of (Study 1) and intention for self-limiting prevention behaviors while not increasing intention for monitoring and treatment behaviors (Studies 2 and 3). Framing self-limiting prevention behaviors in terms of fighting an enemy increases their appeal, illustrating the benefits of metaphor matching (Study 3). Overall, these results suggest that enemy metaphors in cancer information reduce some prevention intentions without increasing others, making their use potentially harmful for public health.
AckermanJ. M.NoceraC. C.BarghJ. A. (2010). Incidental haptic sensations influence social judgments and decisions. Science, 328, 1712-1715.
2.
AktipisC. A.MaleyC. C.NeubergS. L. (2010). Psychological barriers to evolutionary thinking in medicine. Evolution and Medicine Review. Retrieved from http://evmedreview.com/?p=231
3.
American Cancer Society. (2012). Cancer facts & figures 2012. Atlanta, GA: American Cancer Society.
AnnasG. J. (1995). Reframing the debate on health care reform by replacing our metaphors. New England Journal of Medicine, 332, 744-747.
6.
ArmitageC. J.ConnerM. (2001). Efficacy of the theory of planned behaviour: A meta-analytic review. British Journal of Social Psychology, 40, 471-499.
7.
BeliveauR.GingrasD. (2006). Foods that fight cancer: Preventing cancer through diet. Toronto, Ontario, Canada: McClelland & Stewart.
8.
BowkerJ. (1996). Cancer, individual process, and control: A case study in metaphor analysis. Health Communication, 8, 91-104.
9.
CamusJ. T. W. (2009). Metaphors of cancer in scientific popularization articles in the British press. Discourse Studies, 11, 465-495.
10.
ChandlerJ. J.ReinhardD.SchwarzN. (2012). To judge a book by its weight you need to know its content: Knowledge moderates the use of embodied cues. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48, 948-952.
11.
DaviesM. (2008). The Corpus of Contemporary American English: 450 million words, 1990-present. Retrieved from http://corpus.byu.edu/coca/
12.
GibbsR. W.Jr. (2014). Conceptual metaphor in thought and social action. In LandauM. J.RobinsonM. D.MeierB. P. (Eds.), The power of metaphor: Examining its influence on social life (pp. 17-40). Washington, DC: APA.
13.
GibbsR. W.Jr.FranksH. (2002). Embodied metaphor in women’s narratives about their experiences with cancer. Health Communication, 14, 139-165.
14.
GoatlyA. (2007). Washing the brain—Metaphor and hidden ideology. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
15.
GollwitzerP. M. (1999). Implementation intentions: Strong effects of simple plans. American Psychologist, 54, 493-503.
16.
HarringtonK. J. (2012). The use of metaphor in discourse about cancer: A review of the literature. Clinical Journal of Oncology Nursing, 16, 408-412.
17.
HigginsE. T. (1996). Knowledge activation: Accessibility, applicability, and salience. In HigginsE. T.KruglanskiA. W. (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (pp. 133-168). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
18.
HovlandC. I.JanisI. L.KelleyH. H. (1953). Communication and persuasion: Psychological studies of opinion change. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
19.
JiaL.SmithE. R. (2013). Distance makes the metaphor grow stronger: A psychological distance model of metaphor use. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 49, 492-497.
20.
JonesL. L.EstesZ. (2006). Roosters, robins, and alarm clocks: Aptness and conventionality in metaphor comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language, 55, 18-32.
21.
JostmannN. B.LakensD.SchubertT. W. (2009). Weight as an embodiment of importance. Psychological Science, 20, 1169-1174.
22.
KatoP. M.ColeS. W.BradlynA. S.PollockB. H. (2008). A video game improves behavioral outcomes in adolescents and young adults with cancer: A randomized trial. Pediatrics, 122, 305-317.
23.
KeeferL. A.LandauM. J.SullivanD.RothschildZ. K. (2011). Exploring metaphor’s epistemic function: Uncertainty moderates metaphor-consistent priming effects on social perceptions. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47, 657-660.
24.
KhalilG. E. (2012). When losing means winning: The impact of conflict in a digital game on young adults’ intentions to get protected from cancer. Games for Health: Research, Development, and Clinical Applications, 1, 279-286.
25.
KushiL. H.DoyleC.McCulloughM.RockC. L.Demark-WahnefriedW.BanderaE. V., . . . The American Cancer Society 2010 Nutrition and Physical Activity Guidelines Advisory Committee. (2012). American Cancer Society guidelines on nutrition and physical activity for cancer prevention. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, 62, 30-67.
26.
LakoffG.JohnsonM. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
27.
LandauM. J.MeierB. P.KeeferL. A. (2010). A metaphor-enriched social cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 1045-1067.
28.
LandauM. J.SullivanD.GreenbergJ. (2009). Evidence that self-relevant motives and metaphoric framing interact to influence political and social attitudes. Psychological Science, 20, 1421-1427.
29.
LandauerT. K.DumaisS. T. (1997). A solution to Plato’s problem: The latent semantic analysis theory of acquisition, induction, and representation of knowledge. Psychological Review, 104, 211-240.
30.
LeeS. W. S.SchwarzN. (2014a). Framing love: When it hurts to think we were made for each other. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 54, 61-67.
31.
LeeS. W. S.SchwarzN. (2014b). Metaphors in judgment and decision making. In LandauM. J.RobinsonM. D.MeierB. P. (Eds.), The power of metaphor: Examining its influence on social life (pp. 85-108). Washington, DC: APA.
McGuireW. J. (1972). Attitude change: The information-processing paradigm. In McClintockC. G. (Ed.), Experimental social psychology (pp. 108-141). New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
34.
MeierB. P.HauserD. J.RobinsonM. D.FriesenC. K.SchjeldahlK. (2007). What’s “up” with God?: Vertical space as a representation of the divine. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 699-710.
35.
MeierB. P.RobinsonM. D. (2004). Why the sunny side is up: Associations between affect and vertical position. Psychological Science, 15, 243-247.
36.
MukherjeeS. (2010). The emperor of all Maladies: A biography of cancer. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.
37.
NesseR. M.WilliamsG. C. (1996). Why we get sick: The new science of Darwinian medicine. New York, NY: Vintage Books.
38.
OttatiV.RenstromR. A. (2010). Metaphor and persuasive communication: A multifunctional approach. Social & Personality Psychology Compass, 4, 783-794.
39.
OttatiV.RenstromR. A.PriceE. (2014). The metaphoric framing model: Political communication and public opinion. In LandauM. J.RobinsonM. D.MeierB. P. (Eds.), The power of metaphor: Examining its influence on social life (pp. 179-202). Washington, DC: APA.
40.
OttatiV.RhoadsS.GraesserA. C. (1999). The effect of metaphor on processing style in a persuasion task: A motivational resonance model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 688-697.
41.
ReisfieldG. M.WilsonG. R. (2004). Use of metaphor in the discourse on cancer. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 22, 4024-4027.
SchererA. M.SchererL. D.FagerlinA. (2014). Getting ahead of illness using metaphors to influence medical decision making. Medical Decision Making. Advance online publication. doi:10.1177/0272989X14522547
44.
SchubertT. W. (2005). Your highness: Vertical positions as perceptual symbols of power. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 1-21.
45.
SontagS. (1978). Illness as metaphor. New York, NY: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
46.
SoporyP. (2005). Metaphor in formative evaluation and message design: An application to relationships and alcohol use. Health Communication, 17, 149-172.
47.
SoporyP.DillardJ. P. (2002). The persuasive effects of metaphor: A meta-analysis. Human Communication Research, 28, 382-419.
48.
StephensonM. T.WitteK. (1998). Fear, threat, and perceptions of efficacy from frightening skin cancer messages. Public Health Reviews, 26, 147-174.
49.
StibbeA. (1996). The metaphorical construction of illness in Chinese culture. Journal of Asian Pacific Communication, 7, 177-188.
50.
StroebeW.StrackF. (2014). The alleged crisis and the illusion of exact replication. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 9, 59-71.
ThibodeauP. H.DurginF. H. (2008). Productive figurative communication: Conventional metaphors facilitate the comprehension of related novel metaphors. Journal of Memory and Language, 58, 521-540.
53.
ThibodeauP. H.DurginF. H. (2011). Metaphor aptness and conventionality: A processing fluency account. Metaphor and Symbol, 26, 206-226.
World Cancer Research Fund, & American Institute for Cancer Research. (2007). Food, nutrition, physical activity, and the prevention of cancer: A global perspective. Washington DC: American Institute for Cancer Research.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
