The magical realism of metaphor: cross-cultural comparisons in use of metaphor in cognition

Three experiments explore the hypothesis that due to linguistic and cultural factors, metaphor usage – or thinking in terms of what something is like – differs across cultures. In Experiment 1, a lexical decision task supported the hypothesis that perception of what something is like tends to be faster and more automatic in Latino participants than in Anglo participants. In Experiment 2, Anglo participants were less able to solve a problem framed metaphorically than Latino participants were. To ensure that a preference for metaphor is not applicable to all bilingual populations, we included bilingual Asian participants in Experiment 3. In this study, Latino participants rated arguments presented with metaphors as more persuasive than arguments that did not have metaphors, while the opposite pattern was found in Anglo and Asian participants. The findings from these three studies provide support for the hypothesis that the Latino preference for metaphor is real and pervasive. Implications in the domains of education and public health interventions are briefly noted.

Planning across differences: collaborative planning processes for the California Central Valley's future

This dissertation examines the intersections between difference, participation, and planning processes. Rooted in scholarly conversations about deliberative democracy, collaborative planning, and nonprofit organizations in civil society, this research considers how planning practitioners can better plan across difference. Through case study research, this dissertation examines a collaborative planning process conducted by a nonprofit organization. Unlike more conventional participatory planning processes, the organization utilized scenario planning. Exercising their position in civil society, participation in the process was not open to all community members and the organization carefully selected a diverse set of participants. Findings from this research project indicate that this process, by moving away from a strict definition of rational discourse, focusing on multiple futures as opposed to a single, utopian future, and deliberately bringing together a broad cross-section of community members allowed for participants to speak freely and learn from one another’s perspectives and experiences. Experiences of process participants also demonstrate the degree to which cultural backgrounds shape participation in and expectations of planning processes. While there remains no clear answer in how to represent and respond to cultural differences in planning processes, the experiences of the organization, program staff, and community participants help scholars and practitioners move closer to planning across differences.