Framing the Basic Income: An experimental study on the framing impact of metaphors on the opinion formation process

Abstract

A revised version of this paper has been published in: "Basic Income Studies : an international journal of basic income research" - Vol. 13, no. 2, p. 1-16 https://dial.uclouvain.be/pr/boreal/object/boreal:206958 Many studies in cognitive linguistics have highlighted the important role of metaphors in political discourse, and more specifically their ability to frame complex concepts (Lakoff 1996). The key question is however under which conditions different framings lead to different representations of such complex political issues. Using an experimental design, this paper tackles the question of the framing impact of metaphors by focusing on the opportunity to implement a basic income (BI) system in a given polity. We take advantage of the preliminary stage of the BI debate in Belgium to study the influence of discursive strategies on the opinion formation process of individuals. As De Wispelaere and Noguera (2012) highlighted, the framing of the BI proposal may significantly increase its psychological feasibility. Carefully choosing the arguments employed to address this question can help avoid triggering negative perceptions and ensure positive attitudes toward this policy. While most studies on the BI so far have been either normative or descriptive, our experiment aims at determining to what extent the confrontation of individuals to metaphors illustrating the BI system impact the way they apprehend its implementation in Belgium. We show that very light variations in an informative text can induce major differences in the opinion formation process of the participants. This suggests that, when a debate is controversial and ambiguous, citizens' opinions are sensitive to framing effects. BI proponents or opponents should thus pay particular attention to which arguments and metaphors are put forward in the public debate, as this could modify its outcome.