Cover not available

Article published In: Metaphor and the Social World: Online-First Articles

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
EPUB logo with download linkDownload EPUB

Like a coin spinning in the air

The effect of (non-)metaphorical explanations on comprehension and attitudes towards quantum technology

ORCiD logo with link | Leiden University
 | Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
 | Leiden University
Open Access logo
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) 4.0 license.

For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at rights@benjamins.nl.

Open Access publication of this article was funded through a Transformative Agreement with Leiden University.

Published online: 29 January 2026
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/msw.25018.mei
Abstract
The complexity of the science underlying quantum technology may pose a barrier to its democratization. This study investigated whether metaphors improve comprehension of, and shape attitudes toward, quantum technology. Specifically, we examined effects on perceived comprehension of a newspaper article about a new quantum computer, actual comprehension of underlying quantum phenomena (superposition and entanglement), and affect- and cognition-based attitudes. In an online experiment (n = 1,167 participants representative of the Dutch population), participants read a news article that included a metaphorical, non-metaphorical, or no explanation of a quantum phenomenon. Both explanation types reduced perceived comprehension of the news article compared to the control group, but increased actual comprehension of the quantum phenomenon. No direct effects were found on affect-based or cognition-based attitudes. Mediation analyses revealed a very small negative indirect effect of explanations on attitudes, through lower perceived comprehension, and a very small positive indirect effect of explanations on attitudes via increased actual comprehension — though the latter was counteracted by a negative direct effect. As metaphors offered no additional benefit over non-metaphorical explanations, the findings suggest they do not provide a communicative advantage for enhancing understanding or shaping attitudes in this context.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Theory
    • 2.1Incomprehensible quantum science could limit public engagement
    • 2.2Effect of metaphor on comprehension
    • 2.3Effect of metaphor on attitude
    • 2.4Effect of comprehension on attitude
    • 2.5Metaphors in communication about quantum technology
  • 3.Methodology
    • 3.1Materials
      • 3.1.1Expert insights: Method
      • 3.1.2Expert insights: Results
    • 3.2Design and procedure
    • 3.3Participants
    • 3.4Dependent variables
    • 3.5Control variables
    • 3.6Data analysis and randomization checks
  • 4.Results
    • 4.1Main effects (RQ1)
    • 4.2Mediation effects (RQ2-3)
      • 4.2.1Perceived comprehension of the news article as mediator (RQ2)
      • 4.2.2Actual comprehension of the quantum phenomenon as mediator (RQ3)
  • 5.Discussion
    • 5.1Key findings and relation to previous research
    • 5.2Limitations and suggestions for future research
    • 5.3Conclusion
  • Data availability statement
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
References (57)
References
Akin, H., Cacciatore, M. A., Yeo, S. K., Brossard, D., Scheufele, D. A., & Xenos, M. A. (2021). Publics’ Support for Novel and Established Science Issues Linked to Perceived Knowledge and Deference to Science. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 33(2), 422–431. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Alexander, P. A., & Kulikowich, J. M. (1991). Domain Knowledge and Analogic Reasoning Ability as Predictors of Expository Text Comprehension. Journal of Reading Behavior, 23(2), 165–190. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Beger, A., & Smith, T. H. (Eds). (2020). How Metaphors Guide, Teach and Popularize Science. John Benjamins Publishing Company. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bernholt, S., Härtig, H., & Retelsdorf, J. (2023). Reproduction Rather than Comprehension? Analysis of Gains in Students’ Science Text Comprehension. Research in Science Education, 53(3), 493–506. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bornman, N. (2021, December 7). Quantum entanglement: What it is, and why physicists want to harness it. The Conversation. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Braasch, J. L. G., & Goldman, S. R. (2010). The Role of Prior Knowledge in Learning From Analogies in Science Texts. Discourse Processes, 47(6), 447–479. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Busby, A., Digby, A., & Fu, E. (2017). Quantum Technologies, Public Dialogue Report (p. 56). Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council [ESPRC].Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
CBS. (2024). Bevolking; kerncijfers. Available at: [URL]
Cobb, M. D., & Macoubrie, J. (2004). Public perceptions about nanotechnology: Risks, benefits and trust. Journal of Nanoparticle Research, 6(4), 395–405. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Coenen, C., Grinbaum, A., Grunwald, A., Milburn, C., & Vermaas, P. (2022). Quantum Technologies and Society: Towards a Different Spin. NanoEthics, 16(1), 1–6. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cozzens, S., Gatchair, S., Kang, J., Kim, K.-S., Lee, H. J., Ordóñez, G., & Porter, A. (2010). Emerging Technologies: Quantitative Identification and Measurement. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 22(3), 361–376. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
De Jong, E. (2025). Functional Understanding of Quantum Technology Is Essential yo the Ethical Debate About Its Impact. arXiv.Org.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Druckman, J. N., & Bolsen, T. (2011). Framing, Motivated Reasoning, and Opinions About Emergent Technologies. Journal of Communication, 61(4), 659–688. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
European Commission, Directorate-General for Communication. (2021). Special Eurobarometer 516: European citizens’ knowledge and attitudes towards science and technology version (v1.00).Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Feynman, R. (1967). The Character of Physical Law. The MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fox, M. F. J., Zwickl, B. M., & Lewandowski, H. J. (2020). Preparing for the Quantum Revolution: What is the Role of Higher Education? Physical Review Physics Education Research, 16(2), 020131. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Glynn, S. M., & Takahashi, T. (1998). Learning from Analogy-Enhanced Science Text. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(10), 1129–1149. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grinbaum, A. (2017). Narratives of Quantum Theory in the Age of Quantum Technologies. Ethics and Information Technology, 19(4), 295–306. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hilkamo, O., & Granqvist, N. (2022). Giving Sense to Market Categories: Analogies and Metaphors in the Early Emergence of Quantum Computing. In C. Lockwood & J.-F. Soublière (Eds), Advances in Cultural Entrepreneurship (Vol. 801, pp. 57–79). Emerald Publishing Limited. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jaeger, A. J., & Wiley, J. (2015). Reading an Analogy Can Cause the Illusion of Comprehension. Discourse Processes, 52(5–6), 376–405. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kurath, M., & Gisler, P. (2009). Informing, Involving or Engaging? Science Communication, in the Ages of Atom-, Bio- and Nanotechnology. Public Understanding of Science, 18(5), 559–573. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Conceptual Metaphor in Everyday Language. The Journal of Philosophy, 77(8), 453–486. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Meem, F. N., Smith, J., & Johnson, B. (2024). Challenges and Opportunities for Survey Research in the Age of Generative AI: An Experience Report. 2024 IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing (VL/HCC), 423–428. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Meinsma, A. L., Kristensen, S. W., Reijnierse, W. G., Smeets, I., & Cramer, J. (2023). Is Everything Quantum ‘Spooky and Weird’? An Exploration of Popular Communication about Quantum Science and Technology in TEDx Talks. Quantum Science and Technology, 8(3), 035004. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Meinsma, A. L., Rothe, T., Reijnierse, W. G., Smeets, I., & Cramer, J. (2025). Quantum in the Media: A Content Analysis of Dutch Newspapers. Science Communication, 10755470251318300. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Miele, D. B., & Molden, D. C. (2010). Naive Theories of Intelligence and the Role of Processing Fluency in Perceived Comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 139(3), 535–557. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mooney, C. (2010). Do Scientists Understand the Public? American Academy of Arts and Sciences.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
NOS. (2024, October 23). Nederland krijgt een van acht grote Europese quantumcomputers. [URL]
O’Keefe, D. J., & Hoeken, H. (2021). Message Design Choices Don’t Make Much Difference to Persuasiveness and Can’t Be Counted On — Not Even When Moderating Conditions Are Specified. Frontiers in Psychology, 121:664160. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
O’Rourke, H. P., & MacKinnon, D. P. (2018). Reasons for Testing Mediation in the Absence of an Intervention Effect: A Research Imperative in Prevention and Intervention Research. Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs, 79(2), 171–181. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Outeiral, C., Strahm, M., Shi, J., Morris, G. M., Benjamin, S. C., & Deane, C. M. (2021). The Prospects of Quantum Computing in Computational Molecular Biology. WIREs Computational Molecular Science, 11(1), e1481. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Reijnierse, W. G., Brugman, B. C., & Droog, E. (2025). The Differential Effects of Metaphor on Comprehensibility and Comprehension of Environmental Concepts. JCOM, 24(04), A01. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Roberson, T., Leach, J., & Raman, S. (2021). Talking about Public Good for the Second Quantum Revolution: Analysing Quantum Technology Narratives in the Context of National Strategies. Quantum Science and Technology, 6(2), 025001. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schäfer, M. S. (2023). The Notorious GPT: Science Communication in the Age of Artificial Intelligence. JCOM, 22(2), Y02. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Scheufele, D. A., & Lewenstein, B. V. (2005). The Public and Nanotechnology: How Citizens Make Sense of Emerging Technologies. Journal of Nanoparticle Research, 7(6), 659–667. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Seel, N. (2012). Persuasion and Learning. In N. Seel (Eds.), Encyclopedia of the Sciences of Learning (pp. 2600–2604). Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Servifyspheresolutions. (2025, March 21). Superposition Explained: The Spinning Coin Analogy. SSS Quantum. [URL]
Seskir, Z. C., Umbrello, S., Coenen, C., & Vermaas, P. E. (2023). Democratization of Quantum Technologies. Quantum Science and Technology, 8(2), 024005. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Slater, D. M., Peter, J., & Valkenburg, P. M. (2015). Message Variability and Heterogeneity: A Core Challenge for Communication Research. Annals of the International Communication Association. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Smedinga, M., Cienki, A., & De Regt, H. W. (2023). Metaphors as Tools for Understanding in Science Communication among Experts and to the Public. Metaphor and the Social World, 13(2), 248–268. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sopory, P., & Dillard, J. P. (2002). The Persuasive Effects of Metaphor: A Meta-Analysis. Human Communication Research, 28(3), 382–419. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stichting Quantum Delta NL. (2020). Projectvoorstel Nationaal Groeifonds (No. v8.0; p. 122).Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stray, B., Lamb, A., Kaushik, A., Vovrosh, J., Rodgers, A., Winch, J., Hayati, F., Boddice, D., Stabrawa, A., Niggebaum, A., Langlois, M., Lien, Y.-H., Lellouch, S., Roshanmanesh, S., Ridley, K., de Villiers, G., Brown, G., Cross, T., Tuckwell, G., … Holynski, M. (2022). Quantum Sensing for Gravity Cartography. Nature, 602(7898), Article 7898. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ten Holter, C., Inglesant, P., Srivastava, R., & Jirotka, M. (2022). Bridging the Quantum Divides: A Chance to Repair Classic(al) Mistakes? Quantum Science and Technology, 7(4), 044006. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tsang, S., Royse, C. F., & Terkawi, A. S. (2017). Guidelines for developing, translating, and validating a questionnaire in perioperative and pain medicine. Saudi Journal of Anaesthesia, 11 (Suppl 1), S80–S89. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Van Dam, F., De Bakker, L., Dijkstra, A., & Jensen, E. (2020). Science Communication — An Introduction. World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Van de Merbel, A., Peer, J., Willems, S. J. W., & Cramer, J. (2024). ‘Quantum Technology Will Change My Life.’ Citizens’ Attitudes and Knowledge of Quantum Science and Technology. Journal of Physics Communications, 8(7), 075005. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Van Giesen, R. I., Fischer, A. R. H., Van Dijk, H., & Van Trijp, H. C. M. (2015). Affect and Cognition in Attitude Formation toward Familiar and Unfamiliar Attitude Objects. PLOS ONE, 10(10), e0141790. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Van Giesen, R. I., Fischer, A. R. H., & Van Trijp, H. C. M. (2018). Changes in the Influence of Affect and Cognition over Time on Consumer Attitude Formation toward Nanotechnology: A Longitudinal Survey Study. Public Understanding of Science, 27(2), 168–184. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Van Stee, S. K. (2018). Meta-Analysis of the Persuasive Effects of Metaphorical vs. Literal Messages. Communication Studies, 69(5), 545–566. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vermaas, P. E., Nas, D., Vandersypen, L., & Elkouss Coronas, D. (2019). Quantum Internet Vision Team. Delft University of Technology.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wackers, D., Meinsma, A. L., Reijnierse, W. G., Van der Heijden, M., Smeets, I., & Cramer, J. (2025). ‘Like a light switch that is on and off at the same time’. A content analysis of signaled metaphors for quantum science and technology in Dutch newspapers (SSRN Scholarly Paper No. 5684902). Social Science Research Network.
Wehner, S., Elkouss, D., & Hanson, R. (2018). Quantum Internet: A Vision for the Road ahead. Science, 362(6412). Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wiley, J., Jaeger, A. J., Taylor, A. R., & Griffin, T. D. (2018). When Analogies Harm: The Effects of Analogies on Metacomprehension. Learning and Instruction, 551, 113–123. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wyer, R. S., & Shrum, L. J. (2015). The Role of Comprehension Processes in Communication and Persuasion. Media Psychology, 18(2), 163–195. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Yanowitz, K. L. (2001). Using Analogies to Improve Elementary School Students’ Inferential Reasoning About Scientific Concepts. School Science and Mathematics, 101(3), 133–142. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zook, K. B., & Maier, J. M. (1994). Systematic Analysis of Variables that Contribute to the Formation of Analogical Misconceptions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86(4), 589–600. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue