On 29 November, enthusiastic researchers, students, and employees joined together for the symposium "That’s Precisely Not How Quantum Works"—On the Reception of Metaphors for Quantum Sciencea and Technology, held at Leiden University. The event brought together people from various fields – from linguists to physicists, and from (science) communication researchers to communication officers – to discuss the use and reception of metaphors in communication about quantum science and technology.

Metaphors and quantum
Dunja Wackers, Julia Cramer, and Roosmaryn Pilgram (Leiden University) opened the symposium by introducing the key themes of the symposium: metaphor in discourse about quantum science and technology, and (critical) responses to these metaphors among different target audiences. The introduction highlighted how metaphors can help bridge the gap between the complexity of quantum and public understanding – yet, they are not always deemed appropriate for this purpose. The acceptance of or resistance to metaphors for quantum depends on a variety of factors, including metaphor characteristics, target domain characteristics, and specifics of the communicative context in which a metaphor is used. The symposium was meant to explore why some metaphors for quantum science are more accepted than others, and how different audiences may respond differently to these metaphors in online discussions.

The introduction set the stage for the subsequent talks, focusing on different nuances and challenges of metaphor usage.

Metaphor resistance, quantum expert opinions, and metaphors in online humor
Lotte van Poppel (University of Groningen) discussed metaphor reuse and resistance from a discourse dynamics approach. She exemplified different types of resistance to metaphor in different discourse settings, including face-to-face interactions and (online) media. Different case studies illustrated how context may affect the type of reuse of metaphor and the chance of resistance. In antagonistic settings – including online discussions on social media platforms – resistance is relatively likely to occur; in these contexts, resistance can also be directed at the person uttering a metaphor, and the circumstances in which they uttered the metaphor. Van Poppel concluded her talk with some challenges to studying resistance to metaphor in online discourse that can be taken into account when studying the reception of metaphors for quantum science and technology. These include the fact that one and the same metaphor can have multiple linguistic representations and that the same metaphor can occur (and be criticised) across multiple media platforms.

Aletta Meinsma (Leiden University) presented research on quantum experts’ perceptions of metaphors for quantum science and technology. She conducted a survey among 67 Dutch-speaking quantum experts to examine which metaphors these experts consider most suitable to explain superposition and entanglement to non-expert audiences. The results of the survey offer detailed insight into different considerations for determining whether a given metaphor is appropriate or not. These include the potential risk that (particular) metaphors oversimplify the complexities of quantum concepts or technologies, which may mislead the public or trivialise the depth of quantum phenomena. Moreover, some experts agreed that metaphors do not always make concepts more comprehensible but sometimes make them more complicated, or even mysterious. Meinsma’s talk highlighted the tension between the need for accessible communication and the desire for scientific precision.

Britta Brugman (University of Amsterdam) discussed approaches to studying metaphor use in humor on social media, and audience reactions to these metaphors. She discussed how humor can fulfill different functions in online media, from entertaining people to informing the public. In her own research, Brugman examined the characteristics of online humor as well as the effects of humor on different target audiences. Moreover, she studied the effects of metaphor use in online humor, demonstrating that humoristic metaphors on social media can have positive effects on engagement with the topic at hand. She concluded her talk with research opportunities for studying the reception of metaphors for quantum and audience reactions to these metaphors: for testing the mechanisms behind different effects on (social media) engagement, differences in effects based on metaphor characteristics should be distinguished from differences in effects between different individuals responding to a given metaphor.

During the plenary discussion, moderated by Dunja Wackers, Julia Cramer, and Roosmaryn Pilgram, the speakers joined the audience for addressing questions and expanding on key themes. Researchers, staff members and students participating in the symposium debated the complexities of metaphor use, audience reception, and the importance of adapting communication strategies to different contexts and audiences.

Key takeaways from the plenary discussion:

• Metaphors are double-edged tools: While metaphors like Schrödinger’s cat are widely recognised and help convey quantum concepts, they can also be misleading or resisted if they oversimplify or distort the science. As metaphors typically highlight one aspect of a topic and automatically background others, they can frame a topic in different ways.
• Context matters: The effectiveness and acceptance of a metaphor depend significantly on the audience’s background and the context in which the metaphor is presented. Depending on the communicative aim and the target audience, some metaphors will be (perceived as) more appropriate than others.
• Expert caution: Experts in quantum science can be wary of metaphors, fearing they may obscure the complexity of the field. Balancing accessibility and accuracy remains a challenge.
• Social media dynamics: Online platforms offer valuable data on how the public engages with metaphors, especially when humor is involved. Reactions on social media can reveal both the strengths and weaknesses of metaphorical communication.
• Public dialogue is important: Effective communication strategies, including the careful use of metaphors, are important for ensuring that quantum science developments align with public values and societal needs.

Conclusion

The symposium, well attended by a mixed and engaged audience, featured thought-provoking talks and discussions. The symposium successfully highlighted the complexities surrounding the use of metaphors in quantum science communication. By bringing together experts and participants from diverse fields, the event sparked meaningful discussions on how to bridge the gap between quantum science and public understanding.