Content uploaded by Jorge Groß
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Jorge Groß on Mar 13, 2022
Content may be subject to copyright.
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=tsed20
International Journal of Science Education
ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tsed20
Students’ conceptions about animal ethics: the
benefit of moral metaphors for fostering decision-
making competence
Nadine Tramowsky, Denis Messig & Jorge Groß
To cite this article: Nadine Tramowsky, Denis Messig & Jorge Groß (2022): Students’ conceptions
about animal ethics: the benefit of moral metaphors for fostering decision-making competence,
International Journal of Science Education, DOI: 10.1080/09500693.2022.2028924
To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2022.2028924
© 2022 The Author(s). Published by Informa
UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis
Group
Published online: 12 Mar 2022.
Submit your article to this journal
View related articles
View Crossmark data
Students’conceptions about animal ethics: the benefitof
moral metaphors for fostering decision-making competence
Nadine Tramowsky
a
, Denis Messig
b
and Jorge Groß
b
a
Department of Biology and its Didactics, University of Education Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany;
b
Department
of Science Education, University of Bamberg, Bamberg, Germany
ABSTRACT
The analysis of students’conceptions is a crucial element in modern
science education research. Based on a large number of studies, we
know that learning environments should build upon students’
existing knowledge to initiate conceptual change towards an
adequate scientific understanding. This also holds true when it
comes to moral reasoning. In this case, the implementation of
educational standards, such as decision-making competence,
strongly relies on students’conceptions about ethical issues. In
this study the Conceptual Metaphor Theory is used empirically in
order to analyse students’language in regard to conceptual
metaphors. To date, little educational research exists on the
effects of moral metaphors in science education. For this reason,
we conducted a two-part qualitative interview study (n=9+6
and 6) in order to identify German high-school students’moral
conceptions about animal ethics. The conceptions were identified
and analysed by means of qualitative content analysis. A key
finding can be seen in the underlying embodied conceptions and
image schemas that are in particular linked to human well-being.
Apparently, students use these metaphorical thinking patterns
and are therefore capable of conceiving abstract conceptions
about animal ethics. As a consequence, we propose an
alternative approach in order to foster decision-making
competence.
ARTICLE HISTORY
Received 21 June 2020
Accepted 10 January 2022
KEYWORDS
Animal ethics; decision-
making competence;
students’moral conceptions;
socio-scientific issues (SSIs);
Conceptual Metaphor Theory
Introduction
Morality includes individual conceptions and beliefs, according to which, people value
actions as morally good or evil. According to moral scepticism, no valid morally good
or bad exists and the the discussions on this topic are are quite controversial.
However, humans are able to make moral statements, act morally and express values.
The rationalistic approaches according to Kohlberg (1976) and Piaget (1997) assume
that moral thinking develops progressively and irreversibly in stages through rational
thinking and empathy. Unlike Piaget and Kohlberg, Haidt (2012) challenges the purely
© 2022 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any
medium, provided the original work is properly cited, and is not altered, transformed, or built upon in any way.
CONTACT Nadine Tramowsky nadine.tramowsky@ph-freiburg.de Department of Biology and its Didactics,
University of Education Freiburg, Kunzenweg 21, Freiburg 79117, Germany
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE EDUCATION
https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2022.2028924
rationalistic traditional model of moral judgement. From his intuitionist perspective,
moral judgements are the result of a quick and automatic assessment; an intuition.
Our approach aims at clarifying the genesis and the resulting consequences of these
moral conceptions from a perspective of understanding. Thus, we follow a different
path: From a cognitive-linguistic perspective, morality includes abstract conceptions
and can therefore be understood in a metaphorical form. Based on this approach, we
shall show that moral conceptions are structured by metaphors.
In 1980, George Lakoffund Mark Johnson published their views on the underlying
processes of abstract thinking. This approach has become one of the most accepted the-
ories in the field of cognitive linguistics. The Conceptual Metaphor Theory (hereinafter
referred to as CMT) was one of the first theories to propose a connection between meta-
phors in language and cognition. Lakoffand Johnson (1980) argued that individuals con-
ceive abstract conceptions on the basis of embodied conceptions. Consequently, human
thinking is based on experience and, due to neuronal networking, is predominantly
structured in a metaphorical way (Gallese & Lakoff,2005). Conceptual metaphors thus
facilitate the understanding of abstract ideas by neuronal mapping.
Not only did Lakoffand Johnson’s theory influence the field of neurobiology, but
especially in policy making, the importance of language with its associations and conno-
tations has also been analysed and used for political campaigns, elections and parliamen-
tary discourse respectively (Lakoff,2002). Besides this, the CMT has also tremendously
influenced other disciplines such as philosophy and education, e.g. Niebert et al.
(2012). According to Johnson’s(2008) theory of experientialism, philosophical reflec-
tions on whether a true nature of reality exists or not is just one example. Because con-
ceptual metaphors are a crucial part of human thought and moral reasoning, it is of
utmost importance to understand specific correlations between metaphoric thinking
and learning processes of any kind. Particularly in the field of science education, research
on decision-making competence is gaining increasing importance. Apart from that, a
large amount of international research has been carried-out on socio-scientific issues
(SSIs) (Lee & Grace, 2012). SSIs are defined as authentic problems, such as the issue of
sustainable development (Bögeholz et al., 2017) or climate change (Lombardi et al.,
2016), and thus provide suitable topics for argumentation, moral reasoning and multi-
perspective decision-making (Ceyhan et al., 2021; Höttecke et al., 2010). Animal
ethics, such as meat consumption is a common SSI that encourages students to think
from different perspectives (Jiménez-Aleixandre & Brocos, 2017). It combines different
fields, such as environment, science, politics, sociology as well as culture, economy,
morals and ethics (Chang Rundgren & Rundgren, 2010). With the aid of SSIs, teachers
can assess and reflect on moral arguments in order to promote decision-making compe-
tences (Boerwinkel & Waarlo, 2010). But enhancing decision-making competences is still
quite a challenge. Taking students’perspectives into account and creating learning
environments that can trigger conceptual change (Duit & Treagust, 2003) belong to
the most important skills science educators should possess (Driver, 1989). Correspond-
ingly, empirical research in science education addresses the identification of students’
conceptions in a diverse range of biological issues –for example, microcosm (Niebert
& Gropengiesser, 2015), climate change (Niebert & Gropengießer, 2013), and evolution
(Zabel & Gropengießer, 2015). In contrast to similar studies on students’conceptions,
these papers make use of the CMT by focusing on the genesis of students’conceptions
2N. TRAMOWSKY ET AL.
and exploring strategies for teaching scientific issues more effectively and evolving
theory-based learning environments. However, as far as decision-making competence
and SSIs (Morin et al., 2014) are concerned, only a small amount of research exists
that focuses on the analysis of students’moral conceptions and their deeper understand-
ing. Animal ethics issues such as welfare are becoming increasingly important in Europe
from a social, political, ethical and scientific viewpoint (Mazas et al., 2013). In general,
Biology curricula are heavily weighted towards humans, and animal ethics issues play
a subordinate role in German biology classes and teacher training courses (Binngießer
et al., 2013). Indeed, studies on the genesis of students’conceptions in respect to morality
and animal ethics are hitherto entirely lacking. Reiss (2017) provided a coherent frame-
work with which science educators can assess how animal ethics should be taught: In
review, students gain ethical sensitivity and ethical knowledge and possibly gain skills
in implementing normatively correct choices. As closely related research has revealed,
a cognitive-linguistic approach towards animal ethics and decision-making processes
could lead to feasible conclusions about competence-oriented teaching and fruitful learn-
ing environments.
For these reasons, a qualitative interview study should aim at the identification and
analyzation of high school students’moral conceptions about animal ethics using the
CMT (Lakoff& Johnson, 1999). This will make it possible to derive conclusions about
the genesis of moral conceptions in respect to animal ethics in order to develop a diag-
nostic tool. The results can give evidence about learning barriers and potentials that are
capable of fostering decision-making competences. Based on these theoretical and evi-
denced frameworks, our main research questions are:
.Which moral conceptions and moral metaphors can be found in students’decisions
about the animal-human relationship and livestock farming and which embodied con-
ceptions and metaphors are fundamental for inducing such decisions? (RQ1)
.Which theoretical conditions are significant for the diagnosis of moral conceptions?
(RQ2)
.Which implications can be derived from the results of promoting decision-making
competences? (RQ3)
Theoretical assumptions
Embodied conceptions
Our understanding of learning is based on the paradigm of a moderate constructivism
and the revised conceptual change approach (Duit & Treagust, 2003). Subsequently, stu-
dents are seen as self-controlled, social and actively constructing subjects with prior
knowledge (Phillips, 2000). Studies show that newly derived conceptions can be either
favourable or obstructive for learning and cognition (Duit & Treagust, 1998). For a
deeper understanding of moral reasoning, we have used Lakoffand Johnson’s Concep-
tual Metaphor Theory (2003) to discern how students’conceptions develop.
According to the CMT, every human being recurrently interacts with his/her environ-
ment in physical and social ways. Neurological, psychological and linguistic evidence
suggests that bodily interactions result in embodied thinking patterns in the human
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE EDUCATION 3
neuronal circuitry (Gallese & Lakoff,2005). For abstract cognition, among the most
important embodied patterns are so called image schemata, which form when recurring
interactions with consistent structures occur (Lakoff& Johnson, 2003). For example,
when people are sad, they literally make themselves smaller or walk with a stoop
instead of standing erect and upright. Thus, the Up–Down-Schema is formed by
experiences.
If human cognition was merely based on our sensorimotor experiences, how could
abstract reasoning ultimately be possible? The CMT figures that embodied conceptions
in a source domain (based on sensormotoric experiences) are metaphorically mapped
onto specific target domains, which thus enables us to conceptualise abstract ideas.
Imaging methods have demonstrated this neuronal process called cross-domain
mapping (Rohrer, 2005). It explains how image schemata are used to facilitate abstract
reasoning. The trajectory in this process is called a conceptual metaphor. In this
context, a conceptual metaphor is not seen as a stylistic device but rather as the result
of a neuronal construction to express one idea in terms of another. This mechanism
can be observed in statements such as ‘She deserves a higher benefit’. Although
benefits –physically seen –cannot be higher or lower, people are capable of conceiving
the idea because they have an embodied conception of what is low and high in a physical
manner (source domain), which they use for conceiving abstract conceptions (target
domain).
For our research project, it seems to be important that if conceiving abstract con-
ceptions is based on embodied conceptions (Flanagan, 1991), then abstract reasoning
associated with morality and ethics will also be inevitably intertwined with embodied
conceptions (Churchland, 1995) (see Figure 1). In turn, it becomes possible to draw con-
clusions on the genesis of students’conceptions about abstract scientific phenomena
(Gropengießer, 1998). By using the CMT as an analytical approach, interview transcripts
Figure 1. Genesis of abstract conceptions resulting from sensorimotor experiences and embodied
conceptions based on the Conceptual Metaphor Theory (CMT).
4N. TRAMOWSKY ET AL.
can be analysed from a language point of view and thus can help to answer questions
about the conceptions’source domain and the underlying image schemata, as well as
conceptual metaphors. These deductions can help to identify implications suitable for
fostering decision-making competences.
Embodied conceptions and moral metaphors
According to the CMT, conceptual metaphors help individuals to grasp the world around
them. With regard to moral reasoning in a political discourse, the CMT proposes that
different political ideologies are constructed on the basis of different metaphorical
models (Lakoff,2002). For example, Lakoffargues that members of the US-American
Republican and Democratic parties consider the nation as ‘a family’, the government
as ‘a parent’, and citizens as ‘children’. In contrast, Republicans often follow a strict
parent model, whereas Democrats rather feel aligned towards a nurturant parent
model (Lakoff& Johnson, 1999). Strict parents are characterised by self-discipline and
self-reliance and, subsequently, conservative governments focus on protection. On the
other hand, nurturing parents emphasise empathy and responsibility and focus on pro-
moting fairness and caring for individuals. According to Lakoff, these two metaphorical
models explain why Republicans and Democrats favour different political policies
(Lakoff,2002).
For our our part, we assume that conceptual metaphors are also one of the most fun-
damental forms of moral reasoning (Bialostok, 2014) and decision-making processes in
education. Human well-being is essential for moral reasoning (Lakoff& Johnson, 1999).
In particular, cross-cultural physical and social experiences are important for increasing
or decreasing human well-being. Recurring experiences with feelings of well-being such
as health and disease, freedom and pressure or nurturance and severity can provide a
basis for the embodiment of conceptions of well-being in the source domain (Baumeister
& Exline, 2000). These embodied conceptions can be mapped imaginatively with concep-
tual metaphors on abstract target domains; for example, in order to understand moral
politics (Wehling, 2013) and to categorise good and evil, as well as right and wrong.
As a result, moral reasoning seems to be based on embodiment and moral metaphors.
The assumption that metaphors provide an approach towards understanding moral
thoughts and influencing our actions has already been published in various research
papers, such as Zhong and Liljenquist (2006). As an example, in order to understand
the categories of good and evil, human beings often apply the Up–Down Schema
(Lakoff,1987). This embodied conception is used metaphorically to reflect on superna-
tural and religious conceptions; for instance, God Is Up and Devil Is Down and Up Is
Good and Down Is Bad (Meier et al., 2007). Moral metaphors provide metaphorical map-
pings that link source domains with target domains. For Lakoffand Johnson (1999), the
body serves as a source domain to understand morality, based on the embodied con-
ception of well-being, and they described a set of categories of moral metaphors used
in the western world (1999, pp. 290–334).
As an example, the metaphor of moral order is based on experiences with regimes and
authorities: God is ‘naturally’more powerful than humans. Humans are more powerful
than animals, adults are more powerful than children and men are more powerful than
women. This ‘natural’order can become a corresponding moral order (see Lakoff&
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE EDUCATION 5
Johnson, 1999, pp. 298–304). Other metaphors form a basis for moral empathy and nur-
turance. For instance, the community is understood metaphorically as the family, the
moral agents as the nurturing parents; the humans needing help as children, moral
actions as nurturing acts, and the well-being of others as one’s own well-being (see
ibid., pp. 309–310). Another example demonstrates that economic concepts are
applied to moral problems. Moral actions can also be understood as an accounting
process to balance moral accounts. It is moral to pay debts and immoral not to do so.
Fairness is an imaginative process of balancing moral accounts; fair treatment and distri-
bution are moral actions, whereas unfair treatment and distribution are immoral actions
(see ibid., pp. 292–298). Here, the experience with justice is transferred to other moral
areas. This relates to the equitable distribution of objects or goods (e.g. smartphones,
money, a pretty pebble found on the beach) or immaterial objects (e.g. career prospects,
participation, responsibility or power). The moral in this case is the equitable distri-
bution. But what exactly is meant by simple distribution is a subject of dispute (ibid.).
Other metaphors can structure decisions by establishing freedom as moral, and restric-
tions as immoral (ibid., p. 304). And other metaphors reveal that so-called moral people
are described as healthy and pure (‘you have a clean vest’) and immoral people as sick,
infectious and unclean. Each object has a moral essence that establishes moral behaviour.
Moreover, embodied conceptions of well-being are used metaphorically in decision-
making processes (Brugman et al., 2019). For our research, we therefore created a
design that aims at students’moral conceptions used during in decision-making pro-
cesses in the field of animal ethics in science education. The study focuses on the
genesis of moral conceptions and its significance for enhancing decision-making pro-
cesses in science classes. The identification of learning potentials and means of improving
decision-making competences also belong to the scope of research.
Methods
Model of Educational Reconstruction
The Model of Educational Reconstruction (hereinafter referred to as MER) was devel-
oped as a theoretical framework for research and development in science education
(Duit et al., 2012). Its main intention is to identify and analyse both students’as well
as scientists’conceptions in order to draw conclusions about improving learning pro-
cesses and to optimise skills and competences. In this study, the MER is used to foster
decision-making competence. Thus, the following research tasks were performed:
.content-based identification and analysis of students’perspectives to understand the
genesis of students’moral conceptions (RQ1, 2), and
.development of a diagnostic tool to construct learning environments based on ident-
ified learning potentials (RQ3).
The MER consisted originally of three tasks, all of which we have covered. However,
we decided not to include the task ‘clarification of scientific content’explicitly in this
paper, because we wish to focus on student conceptions and the development of learning
environments. In addition, especially in the case of moral questions (also because of the
6N. TRAMOWSKY ET AL.
absolutely necessary multi-perspectivity), the clarification of the scientific background
represents an extensive task that would fill a separate paper. Nevertheless, these results
find their way into the paper implicitly, since the technical concepts were used in the
interpretation of the students’statements. The findings from the ‘clarification of scientific
content’have been published monographically (see Tramowsky, 2019).
Individual and group discussions
This paper focuses on the identification of students’moral conceptions and metaphors in
the field of animal ethics. In order to encourage discussion and reflection processes with
respect to morality and the structure of moral conceptions, we conducted a two-part
qualitative interview study. On this basis, high-school students’moral conceptions and
moral metaphors relating to animal ethics were identified. This led to the development
of a tool for analysing moral metaphors.
In cooperation with science teachers, we recruited participants from a secondary
school in Bavaria, Germany. We intentionally addressed students at the end of secondary
school to ensure that they were capable of making self-determined decisions (Piaget,
1997). As the interviews were conducted at our university lab, parental as well as
school administration permissions were required and obtained. Involved teachers, stu-
dents and parents/guardians were informed about the aim of the study, data recording,
storage and protection as well as place and time of the interviews. Participation was
always voluntary. Additionally, they were informed that the study focuses on spon-
taneous and authentic statements, rather than those induced by predefined or given situ-
ations. The topic of study remained unknown to the participants. During the study, the
students were asked specific questions about different types of livestock farming, animal
slaughter, suffering and compassion and the use of animals. Furthermore, we questioned
about personal experience, values, and attitudes as well as ratings and decisions (for
example, ‘How do you rate mass livestock-farming?’). The revised interview guideline
of the study was used to identify and interpret the structuring of the moral conceptions.
All personalised data was anonymized.
The interview guideline was developed on the basis of theory and formed the structure
for the nature and content of the personal interview. The interview guideline has a struc-
turing function and contains (1) questions on animal husbandry and the assessment of
animal husbandry systems (e.g. ‘Where does the meat you eat come from?’), (2) questions
on meat consumption and the assessment of meat consumption (e.g. ‘What do you look
for when you buy and consume meat?’) and (3) questions on your own family situation
(e.g. ‘Who cooks and chooses the meat at home and why is that?’). In the in-depth ques-
tions, care was taken to use simple, clear and concrete wording and to differentiate. The
guideline also provided sufficient openness to be able to react flexibly to the answers of
the interviewees. During the creation of the guideline, repetitions in the form of ques-
tions and summaries were built in for testing reliability by means of internal triangu-
lation. These repetitions were formulated differently, but were basically intended to
capture similar statements (e.g. ‘Summarise again. How do you judge intensive animal
husbandry?)’. The theory-based interview guideline was formally checked and redesigned
with aid of a mock interview. In the first part of our study, nine students in groups of
three (5 m/4f), aged 15 years on average, were questioned about the aforementioned
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE EDUCATION 7
ethical issues. A structured guideline throughout an initial individual interview followed
by a group discussion (20–30 minutes long) was used (based on Bortz & Döring, 2006).
This procedure intended to identify and analyse students’conceptions about animal
ethics and moral metaphors. For saturation, we additionally interviewed six students
(3 m/3f), aged 11 years on average, in two group discussions in order to analyse
further moral conceptions.
Another important aim of our research is the development of a diagnostic tool for the
construction of learning environments based on the identified conceptions. Therefore, in
part two, we questioned a further six students (2 m/4f), aged 15 years on average, to
analyse their moral conceptions. We proceeded as in part one.
The children lived in a small town in Bavaria (Bamberg) or in the surrounding district.
Both the county and the town are rather rural and mainly Catholic. Two groups with
different students were used. Basically, the same questions were posed in both groups.
However, since we may have possibly influenced the children with our questions, we
carefully revised the interview guideline after the first round (see internal triangulation).
The students in the first group were in grade 9 and took the same biology course. The
students in the other group were from grades 9 and 5. In doing so, we hoped to
receive more information about the connection between age and metaphorical judgment.
This data has not yet been analysed.
Qualitative content analysis
The collected data was analysed in accordance with Qualitative Content Analysis
(Mayring, 2004) in the following manner (see Figure 2): (1) The statements and
actions of the students were documented by means of audio and video recordings. (2)
The statements were transcribed into a legible form with the help of transcription
rules. (3) The material was reduced in its content (redacted utterances) leading to
more syntactic and grammatically appropriate statements. (4) Data evaluation took
place (context-oriented utterances). Taking our research questions into account, we
Figure 2. Methodical approach to editing and analyzing students’conceptions and deriving superor-
dinate moral metaphors. White boxes showing an example of the Ruler Metaphor illustrate important
steps of Qualitative Content Analysis.
8N. TRAMOWSKY ET AL.
rearranged the statements to create sections with coherent content. To achieve this, we
summarised context-related utterances with the help of a detailed category system repre-
senting the scientific and everyday conceptions (result of the clarification of scientific
content). Having Lakoffand Johnson’s(1999) twenty theory-based general moral meta-
phors in mind, a category coding scheme was developed. With the aid of selective coding
using the software MAXQDA, the edited statements were specifically analysed to estab-
lish whether they contained the theory-based general moral metaphors. In a next step,
these statements were arranged thematically; para-conceptions were examined and
bundled into coherent statements. 5) With the aid of a cognitive linguistic theoretical
approach, we explicated the statements according to the CMT: According to the state-
ments’semantic structure, moral conceptions were defined and described. Thus,
image-schema- and content-related statements were joined to form specific moral con-
ceptions and moral metaphors. Thereafter, we were able to draw conclusions about the
genesis of the identified moral conceptions and moral metaphors. Here, the interpret-
ation of the identified metaphors was seen as a chance to improve the understanding
of learners’moral thinking patterns. Following the rules of qualitative content analysis,
the identified moral conceptions were sequenced, explained and contextualised by
means of anchor examples. We refer herein to the line numbers (referred to as Ln.) of
the respective transcripts. 6) In a final step, we summarised, listed and compared the
identified moral conceptions and moral metaphors. Thus, the twenty moral metaphors
described by Lakoffand Johnson (1999) were sorted into five superordinate moral meta-
phors. The moral metaphors were assigned to superordinate moral metaphors on the
basis of similarity of content and theoretical connection. For example, the Ruler Meta-
phor was allocated to the Up–Down Schema (Lakoff,1987) and the Empathy Metaphor
was assigned to the Person Schema (Lakoff& Johnson, 2003). In this manner, these five
superordinate moral metaphors were derived by categorising the theory-based moral
metaphors and the empirically identified moral conceptions of this study.
During the entire data processing, it was monitored whether the utterances were auth-
entic or whether they were confounding variables. This procedure was supported by
internal triangulation. A repetitive methodology in form of questioning, task assigning
and recapping in interviews and group discussions was used to control the reliability
and validity.
For this article, relevant German statements were translated into English by three
independent researchers and one native speaker. We are aware that translation is
always subject to interpretation. However, Lakoffand Johnson point to the cross-cultural
spread of moral metaphors, which can be seen as a particularly large part of the Western
moral tradition (1999, pp. 311–313).
Data results
Moral conceptions and moral metaphors in students’decisions about the
animal-human relationship and livestock farming (RQ1)
Our first research question focused on the identification of moral conceptions and meta-
phors which can be derived from the conducted interviews and group discussions. In
consistence with other research on the conceptualisation of animals (Gebhard, 2013),
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE EDUCATION 9
results of the qualitative content analysis confirm the idea that students often use meta-
phorical conceptions to conceptualise the nature of animals, as the following examples
show. For further examples and details see Table 1. In part one, Eva (15 years old)
was asked to justify her meat consumption. Her reply was as follows:
Humans are on TOP here on earth, because there is also God, but He’s not directly on earth.
Humans are on TOP of this world and they can decide about everything and man have con-
tinuously evolved in that way. I think that puts humans ABOVE animals. […] Humans keeps
animals in order to eat them and then he is, so to speak, the RULEROVERTHEANIMALS. (Eva,
Ln. 31–45)
Table 1. Examples of students’statements with their corresponding moral conceptions, superordinate
moral metaphors and occurrence about animal-human relationships and livestock farming.
Anchor example Moral conception
Superordinate
moral metaphor
Number of
students (N=
21)
Students’Statements about the Animal-Human Relationship
‘Humans are on top here on earth, because there
is also God, but He’s not directly on earth.
Humans are on top of this world, and they can
decide about everything and man have
continuously evolved in that way. I think that
puts humans above animals’(Eva, Ln. 31–37).
Humans have an elevated
special position.
Ruler Metaphor n=10
‘Humans have placed themselves above the
other animals, because he has developed more
abilities through his brain […] I don’t know if
there is anyone else who is above humans, but
maybe among religious people, they say God’
(Milan, Ln. 25–30).
Humans are above
animals.
n=10
‘I think that humans are actually some kind of
rulers. […] Humans have simply placed
themselves above everything and we can
actually only do that by evolution’(Paul, Ln.
12–17).
Humans rule over animals. n=13
‘Some people think that animals are subordinate
to people, and we have the right to treat
animals like this […] that they are not worth as
much as people. […] In my opinion, animals
should have equal rights’(Luisa, Ln. 74–78, 96–
98).
Animals and humans are
equal.
n=6
Students’Statements about Livestock Farming
‘I think that animals are also living things […]
and we can also feed ourselves with vegetarian
products. […]’(Luisa, Ln. 96–98).
Animals are living
individuals.
Empathy Metaphor n=17
‘If you slip into the role of a pig, then you
experience everything that happened’(Peter,
Ln. 481).
Animals are persons. n=16
‘The animal feels bad because I would also feel
bad if I had to be locked up in such a small
space with lots of others. That is not fair to
animals because we would not treat ourselves
like that’(Nora, Ln. 98–111).
Animal-friendly livestock
farming means human
well-being.
n=15
‘[…] Because animals also have feelings, just like
us humans. […] Animals can suffer when they
are in cramped cages […] You know that
yourself, it burns even when you only have a
small scratch […]It’s like us, we also go to the
doctor so that we get help and don’t have to
suffer pain. With animals, this is usually
ignored’(Lisa, Ln. 18–31).
Animal-friendly livestock
farming consider human
emotions.
n=12
10 N. TRAMOWSKY ET AL.
In accordance with our research goal, we focused on the underlying embodied moral
conceptions and moral metaphors. Eva uses terms such as ‘top’and ‘above’, which indi-
cate the use of the Ruler Metaphor as well as an underling kinesthetic image schema, such
as the Up–Down Schema. Interestingly, Eva often used similar expressions to describe
and explain her notion of animal-human relationships as hierarchical (HUMANS HAVE
AN ELEVATED SPECIAL POSITION and HUMANS ARE ABOVE ANIMALS). In fact, we found
references to hierarchical orders between humans and animals throughout almost all
of our interviews (see Table 1). Terms such as TOP and ABOVE indicate the important
role of physical experiences; UP and DOWN when it comes to statements about value.
Other participants shared this moral conception called HUMANS RULE OVER ANIMALS.
It seems that students such as Eva transfer this experiential knowledge to the topic of
the animal-human relationship and moral conceptions of the treatment of animals.
Several of the interviewed students shared the common conception: HUMANS RULE
OVER ANIMALS. According to Lakoffand Johnson (1999), moral conceptions have their
origin in embodied experience. The human body is perceived and conceived with the
help of the Up–Down Schema (Lakoff,1987, pp. 275–278). Because this embodied struc-
ture is a crucial part of the Metaphors of Moral Authority and Moral Order, it seems that
students used it as a spatial arrangement to conceptualise the relationship between
humans and animals: The embodied image schema UPand DOWN (source domain) is
metaphorically transferred to abstract animal ethical issues (target domain). Thus,
moral conceptions are likely to derive from image schemas linked with the human
well-being. UPis experienced as something good and valuable, whereas DOWN is seen
as something bad and invaluable. Thus, our research confirms existing studies that stu-
dents associate things such as God, power and the morally good with UP (Meier et al.,
2007). Based on hierarchical conceptions, our results reveal that students are likely to
understand the treatment of animals either in a conservative and therefore authoritarian,
or in a progressive and nurturing way. This bias can also be observed in examples such as
Luisa (14 years old). Compared to Eva, she argues quite differently in respect to animal-
human relationships:
Some people think that animals are SUBORDINATE to people and we have the RIGHT to treat
animals like this (…) that they are not WORTH as much as people. (…) I think that animals
are also living things (…) and we can also feed ourselves with vegetarian products. In my
opinion, animals should have EQUAL RIGHTS. (Luisa, Ln. 74–78, 96–98)
The analysis of this statement reveals that Luisa uses a moral conception of equality
(ANIMALS AND HUMANS ARE EQUAL), expressing the parity between humans and
animals. In contrast to Eva, Luisa uses the concept of morality in a progressive form
and argues from a different perspective. It seems that Eva and Luisa conceptualise the
relationship between humans and animals on the basis of the Metaphor of Moral
Order (Lakoff& Johnson, 1999). As both statements indicate, Luisa has the conception
that describes the equality between humans and animals (progressive value orientation),
whereas Eva uses a more conservatively valued orientation in which people are worth
more than animals. In contrast to Eva, Luisa does not understand the animal-human
relationship as superior or inferior but as on a par (see Figure 3). When analytically
reviewing all interviews, another important difference between Eva’s and Luisa’s
method of conceptualising human-animal relationships emerges: Eva’s statements only
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE EDUCATION 11
allude to a hierarchical perspective based on social conditions. In contrast, Luisa also
describes top-down differences between humans and animals, which she morally
rejects. Instead, she proceeds by referring to an alternative conception in which equality
and parity are crucial arguments describing a state that should be achieved. Particularly
in group interviews, we encountered that our participants often juxtaposed the two
aspects of how things are and how they should be.
Besides human-animal relationships, one SSI of the conducted study consisted of the
topic of livestock farming. The following statement represents a typical answer on this
subject. After being asked about her opinion on livestock farming, Nora (15-years-old)
expressed her views as follows:
The animal feels bad because I WOULD ALSO FEEL BAD if I had to be locked up in such a SMALL
SPACE with lots of others. That is NOT FAIR to animals because we would not TREAT OUR-
SELVES like that. (Nora, Ln. 98–111)
The analysis suggests that Nora argued by showing compassion. In doing so, she created an
analogy between the animal’s and her own discomfort. Statements such as Norás were
found very often throughout the conducted interviews and group discussions. The
animals were described as living individuals with human emotions also in pursuit of
freedom and independence. Furthermore, other students linked animal-friendly livestock
farming with animal well-being, which they equated with human well-being (ANIMAL-
FRIENDLY LIVESTOCK FARMING MEANS HUMAN WELL-BEING). Further data confirms that
most participants spoke similarly of animals as if they were speaking of humans; about
animal feelings analogous to human feelings and emotions (ANIMAL-FRIENDLY LIVESTOCK
FARMING CONSIDERS HUMAN EMOTIONS) and about animal well-being similarly to their
own well-being. Based on our research, it can be determined that students often refer to
their own well-being when making decisions about livestock farming. Again, the concep-
tual metaphor theory provides a suitable explanation for this phenomenon:
Figure 3. Genesis of differently structured abstract conceptions based on metaphorical transfer in the
context of human-animal relationships.
12 N. TRAMOWSKY ET AL.
It seems that experiences gained about human feelings play an important role when it
comes to moral judgments. Moreover, students tend to transfer experiential knowledge
about nurturance to the topic of animal well-being and livestock farming. In science edu-
cation research, it is known that students use such analogies in order to conceive abstract
biological phenomena (e.g. Driver, 1989). It seems that students such as Nora are relying
on analogies in this case. However, according to Lakoffand Johnson (2003), an analogy is
considered as the product of a metaphor. By linking the source and the target domain, a
similarity is thereby established. Analogies are thus perceptions of similarity. This means
that they are the direct result of a metaphorical projection. According to Lakoffand
Johnson (1999), moral nurturance requires empathy (for animals) and help for those
in need (Bialostok, 2014). It seems that in this case, moral conceptions have their
origin in the embodied experience of one’s own well-being.
Consequently, morality is perceived and conceived with the help of metaphors such as
Metaphors of Moral Nurturance and Empathy (Lakoff& Johnson, 1999). These meta-
phors are connected with the Person Schema (Lakoff& Johnson, 2003). In our study,
embodied conceptions about well-being (source domain) were metaphorically trans-
ferred to the abstract biological phenomenon of animal well-being (target domain).
As our data shows, when using the Metaphor of Moral Empathy (Lakoff& Johnson,
1999) for their judgments, the participants often empathise with an individual animal: ‘If
YOU SLIP INTO the role of APIG, then YOU EXPERIENCE everything that happened’(Peter,
Ln. 481). In addition, few of the interviewed students described animals as living individ-
uals (ANIMALS ARE LIVING INDIVIDUALS) or used anthropomorphic conceptions
(ANIMALS ARE PERSONS) when they imagined an individual animal, for example a pet
or a wild animal. In summary, our results indicate that students’moral conceptions
often attribute human characteristics to animals.
Educational moral metaphors system (RQ2)
According to the identified moral conceptions and their theoretical analysis, our data also
shows that 14 of 20 categories of moral metaphors (Lakoff& Johnson, 1999) were used by
the participants (see Figure 4): Moral Authority, Moral Order, Moral Empathy, Moral
Nurturance, Restitution, Moral Fairness, Rights, Moral Freedom, Moral Rights of
Freedom, Moral Purity and Moral Essence. The metaphors identified from the data
formed a mentally coherent framework of conceptions. In order to apply this to edu-
cational processes, matching metaphors were merged to create superordinate moral
metaphors. Figure 4 graphically illustrates this coherent process by presenting identified
moral metaphors and moral conceptions allocated with the respective superordinate
moral metaphor. In this manner, the following superordinate moral metaphors were
determined:
.The metaphors of strength, authority and order are a combination that cannot be con-
sidered separately and build on each other. Moral strength establishes moral order,
which in turn establishes moral authority. Of the three metaphors in this group,
two were used by the students to speak about meat consumption and animal husban-
dry. Because of the connections, all three metaphors are combined into the overarch-
ing Ruler Metaphor in the rest of this paper.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE EDUCATION 13
.The metaphors of empathy and moral nurturance expressed by the students are not
always distinguishable from each other, but form an interconnected framework of
ideas. Empathy and compassion form the basis for moral care. The two metaphors
were used by all students to assess animal husbandry. With the help of personifica-
tions, pupils metaphorically understand the nature of other species. Because of the
similarities and connections, the two metaphors and the analogies found will be com-
bined into the overarching Empathy Metaphor in the remainder of this paper.
.The metaphors of moral balance (code 1–9) used by the pupils cannot always be clearly
distinguished from each other, but form an interconnected framework of ideas. The
metaphor of moral rights ascribes rights to animals that are to be respected on the
basis of one’s own experience. The metaphor of fairness is a method of diagnosing
justice and injustice in terms of disregard for moral rights. According to this con-
ception, the metaphor of moral compensation is a way of rebalancing the moral
account that has fallen into imbalance, thus restoring morality. Of the nine metaphors
in the moral account, five were used by the students to speak about justice. In the
remainder of this paper, due to the similarities and interconnections, all nine metaphors
of the moral balance will be combined into one overarching Accounting Metaphor.
.Pupils use a direct understanding in the literal sense as well as anthropomorphisms,
which can differ in principle from professionally oriented conceptions when assessing
different types of attitudes. Of the three metaphors of freedom (see Figure 4), two were
Figure 4. The system of moral metaphors based on embodied conceptions of well-being. Lower grey
boxes illustrate moral metaphors used by students. Corresponding metaphors were merged to create
superordinate moral metaphors (middle grey boxes). White boxes show identified moral conceptions
based on their superordinate moral metaphors. The empty column stands for possible further cat-
egories which have not yet been covered.
14 N. TRAMOWSKY ET AL.
used by the students when assessing forms of attitude. The metaphors and analogies of
freedom and the right to freedom they voiced are related to each other in terms of
content, and are summarised in the further course of this work with the metaphor
of moral boundaries to form the overarching Freedom Metaphor.
.The Be-Good Metaphor pertains to the value and character of a being with all its
virtues and vices in its perfection, and forms a roof for the metaphors of moral
purity and health. The metaphors of moral purity and health concern human behav-
iour towards animals, which is to be respected on the basis of one’s own experience.
Two out of three metaphors were used by three students to speak about human behav-
iour towards animals. Because of the similarities and connections, the three metaphors
will be combined into one overarching Be-Good Metaphor in the remainder of this
paper. The Be-Good metaphor has rarely been used to judge animal ethics issues to
date, therefore, this has not been elaborated on here.
For anchor models see Figure 5, where anchor examples are assigned to each super-
ordinate moral metaphor.
The metaphors were used in different contexts. The analysis of our data revealed that
the superordinate moral metaphors ‘Ruler Metaphor’and ‘Empathy Metaphor’were
identified above average in comparison to all the others. The empathy and ruler meta-
phors seem to have had an overarching meaning in our context, as they were usually
also linked to the freedom and accounting metaphors. Consequently, we concluded
that they play a predominant role when it comes to conceptualising moral reasoning
in our study. Moreover, both may play an important role for fostering decision-
making competences (RQ3). Hereinafter, the results in respect to these two superordi-
nate moral metaphors will be explained in greater detail.
Ruler metaphor
The analysis of the statements of Eva, Milan and Paul (see Table 1), leads to evidence that
different moral metaphors can be found in all of our students’statements (see Figure 4).
Figure 5. The Educational System of Moral Metaphors: Moral conceptions rely on superordinate moral
metaphors, which are based on embodied conceptions. White boxes show anchor examples for each
identified moral metaphor. The empty column stands for possible further metaphors which have not
yet been covered.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE EDUCATION 15
The Metaphors of Moral Strength, Moral Order and Moral Authority represent a com-
bination that cannot be divided. We were able to identify this connection, which was
theoretically presented by Lakoffand Johnson (1999) from our own data. In this connec-
tion, the Metaphor of Moral Strength is the foundation for the Metaphor of Moral Order
and this in turn, can be regarded as the foundation for the Metaphor of Moral Authority.
The following example illustrates this:
Humans are on TOP here on earth, because there is also God, but He’s not directly on earth.
Humans are on TOP of this world, and they CAN DECIDE ABOUT EVERYTHING and man have
continuously evolved in that way. I think that puts humans ABOVE animals. […] Humans
keeps animals in order to eat them and then he is, so to speak, the RULEROVERTHE
ANIMALS. (Eva, Ln. 31–45)
Eva uses terms such as ‘can decide about everything’, which indicate the use of the Meta-
phor of Moral Strength, ‘top’and ‘above’, the use of the Metaphor of Moral Order, and
‘ruler over the animals’, the Metaphor of Moral Authority. Due to the interdependencies,
all three moral metaphors were combined in the further course of this work to form the
superordinate moral metaphor Ruler Metaphor. Thus, the Ruler Metaphor is based on
experiences with regimes and authorities: God is for Eva ‘naturally’more powerful
than humans, humans are more powerful than animals, adults are more powerful than
children, and men are more powerful than women. This ‘natural’order can become a
corresponding moral order (see Lakoff& Johnson, 1999, pp. 298–304). Based on this
order, humans therefore have moral authority over animals. Eva feels that this power
imbalance is metaphorically similar to parental authority, where farmers (like parents)
have the welfare of animals (like children) in mind and know what is best for them.
Even though she derives ethical problems from husbandry conditions by using the meta-
phor of moral strength, it emerges from her statement that humans must have the auth-
ority to do this.
Empathy metaphor
The analysis of statements from Nora, Peter or Lisa (see Table 1) reveals a different case
of using moral metaphors interdependently (see Figure 4). Here, the moral metaphors of
Moral Empathy and Moral Nurturance were expressed by these students during the
interview und group discussions. The following example illustrates this:
The animal feels bad because I WOULD ALSO FEEL BAD if I had to be locked up in such a SMALL
SPACE with lots of others. That is NOT FAIR to animals because we would not TREAT OUR-
SELVES like that. (Nora, Ln. 98–111)
In general, both moral metaphors were used regularly by our students, such as Nora to
assess livestock farming. Nora uses terms such as ‘I would also feel bad’, which indicates
the use of the Metaphor of Empathy and ‘would not TREAT OURSELVES like that’indicat-
ing the use of the Metaphor of Nurturance. The two moral metaphors also form a men-
tally coherent framework of conceptions: The Metaphor of Moral Empathy provides the
basis for Moral Nurturing. This means a community is understood metaphorically as a
family, its moral agents as nurturing parents. Residents needing help are conceptualised
as children, moral actions as nurturing acts and the well-being of others as one’sown
well-being (see Lakoff& Johnson, 1999, pp. 309–310). With these theoretical and
16 N. TRAMOWSKY ET AL.
empirical considerations, both moral metaphors were combined to form the superordi-
nate moral metaphor called Empathy Metaphor.
The process of merging moral metaphors with the help of identified moral con-
ceptions in order to derive superordinate moral metaphors was carried out similarly
for the development of the Accounting Metaphor, the Freedom Metaphor and the Be-
Good Metaphor.
Discussion
Genesis of moral conceptions
Our assumptions that students’conceptions in moral evaluations are metaphorically struc-
tured and the CMT is suitable for a deeper analysis were affirmed. In this study on students’
perspectives, pupils’conceptions were comprehensively analysed using the framework of the
MER. From the respective findings, we can state that students often use metaphorical con-
ceptions when they make decisions about animal ethics. As the results show, identified
moral conceptions are likely to derive from embodied experience combined with our individ-
ual sense of well-being (RQ1). Thus, they are often based on the Ruler Metaphor and the
Empathy Metaphor, structured by the Up–Down Schema (Lakoff,1987), the Person
Schema (Lakoff&Johnson,2003) and the Part-Whole Schema (Lakoff,1987). This leads
to the observed fact that animal-human relationships and livestock farming are conceptual-
ised on the basis of associated embodied conceptions. Based on theoretical conclusions and
empirical results, the Educational Moral Metaphors System was developed (RQ2). We can
therefore conclude that Lakoffand Johnson’stheoryisalsosuitableforeducationalpurposes,
to facilitate the development of strategies for teaching scientificissuesmoreeffectively and
evolving theory-based learning environments.
The results from RQ1 and RQ2 indicate that the transfer of embodied conceptions
to questions of morality is widespread among students. But which implications for
fostering decision-making competences in science education can be derived from
this observation?
Moral metaphors as a precondition: environments and implications for
fostering decision-making competences (RQ3)
In order to give students the opportunity to reflect on their own moral conceptions and
to expand them for the benefit of other perspectives, one should understand their think-
ing patterns and get to know alternative metaphors for judging SSI issues. A critical
reflection of one’s own perception could be suitable to form multi-perspective con-
ceptions and, thereby enhance decision-making competences (Gropengießer & Groß,
2019). Below, three learning environments based on the Ruler and Empathy Metaphor
to foster decision-making competences will be discussed.
Enhancing decision-making competences in respect to expanding existing image
schemas on hierarchical orders
The identified conceptions on the human-animal relationship indicate that many stu-
dents regard humans as superior and more valuable than other organisms. Thus, a
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE EDUCATION 17
change in perspective can be beneficial: Instead of regarding the animal-human relation-
ship as a hierarchical order, a different perspective based on the equality conception (pro-
gressive value orientation) can be constructed. In order to critically reflect on hierarchical
orders between humans and other animals, students should reflect upon and get to know
their own thought structures, in order to expand them in favour of different and alterna-
tive conceptions. At this point, the Up–Down Schema (Lakoff,1987) can be integrated in
the following learning environment: Students receive images of people and animals with
the task of arranging them according to their metaphorical conceptions (predominantly
in hierarchical order). Subsequently, they are asked to explain their decisions and discuss
alternative arrangements (e.g. equivalent order). In this way, different manifestations of
the Ruler Metaphor can be explicitly addressed, thereby achieving the enhancement of
decision-making competences in form of a multiperspective approach.
At this point it should be mentioned that neither do we raise questions on something
being morally good or bad, nor do we wish to evaluate the participants’statements and
moral standpoints as ideal or less ideal. Instead, we are concerned with enhancing
decision-making competencies more precisely with the ability to think and judge from
multiple perspectives. For this purpose it is important for us to take the genesis of
moral conceptions into account for our analysis. Thus, identified metaphors can lead
to conclusions about advantages and disadvantages in the context of evaluation compe-
tencies. For example: The relationship between humans and animals is something
abstract and conceived as metaphorical. We recognise that a power imbalance between
animals and humans exists and make statements in a sense of ‘animals are subordinate
to humans’to illustrate this phenomenon. This is justified. However, students should be
aware that humans and animals can also be thought of on the same level. These con-
ceptions are partly responsible for our moral judgement. For Charles Darwin, the
founder of the scientific theory of evolution, no species stands ‘higher’than another
(Reiss & Harms, 2019). Biologically, all living organisms are equal because they have
all equally undergone evolution until the present day. Through hierarchical metaphors,
we tend to understand only one side of the human-animal relationship. We should not
simply accept the hierarchical view and therefore constantly question our thoughts, state-
ments and actions (Tramowsky & Groß, 2018). Unreflective or abusive use of metaphors
can also reinforce discrimination between humans (e.g. slavery, racism, sexism). Multi-
perspective thinking means, in the sense of evaluation competence, to recognise these
different perspectives and to be able to reflect on them.
Enhancing decision-making competences by means of creating new experiences
with animal well-being
Also, the conception that ANIMALS ARE PERSONS is common within the mindsets of pupils
and is particularly evident in statements on the assessment of animal well-being. Anthro-
pomorphic conceptions constitute a learning opportunity because students can thereby
empathise with animals and feel compassion. Nevertheless, a different perspective must
be considered to evoke a more reflected opinion: Instead of conceiving animals as human
beings, the conception of animal well-being should also be developed. Based on this idea,
students should understand that animals have individual and species-specific require-
ments that may differ from human needs. At this stage, the Person Schema (Lakoff&
Johnson, 2003) can be used to create experiences during a particular teaching unit.
18 N. TRAMOWSKY ET AL.
Furthermore, visiting livestock farms may also help to gain experiences about the well-
being of individual animals. With these experiences in addition to existing metaphorical
thinking patterns, scientific conceptions about the needs and behaviour of animals can be
used to initiate evaluation processes.
Enhancing decision-making competences with a view to modifying an existing
image schema about animal well-being with respect to creating new experiences
The conception: ANIMALS ARE PRODUCTS /INDUSTRIAL MERCHANDISE differs from the
conception: ANIMALS ARE PERSONS in the respect that the focus does not lie on a
single individual, but rather on a group of animals. In this sense, our analysis has
shown that the participants’comments on animal well-being were less associated with
such objectifications. Thus, the Part-Whole Schema should have a significant function
(Lakoff,1987) for designing fruitful learning environments. The reason for this can be
seen, once again, in underlying embodied conceptions: Students conceive groups of
animals as a singular entity, and as a result, the animals’individuality fades and even dis-
appears. For the evaluation of animal well-being, it is important to focus on individuals
being a part of the entire group. With a schematic representation of a whole group, which
in turn consists of many individual animals, the schema can be visualised and thus
reflected upon.
Enhancing decision-making competences for teachers by using moral metaphors
and image schemas for conceptual change
The examples I-III indicate that SSIs and their moral conceptions are often evaluated
from just a single perspective. However, open-minded and thoroughly-reflected moral
reasoning as well as multi-perspective conceptions are important attributes of
decision-making competence and SSIs (Höttecke et al., 2010; Lombardi et al., 2016).
Based on the CMT and the Educational Moral Metaphors System, this study aims at
the development of fruitful teaching environments. However, embodied conceptions stu-
dents have about morals cannot easily be erased or changed. We rather hope to expand
and evaluate moral conceptions and trigger learning processes towards developing ade-
quate scientific conceptions. Therefore, we focus on the implementation of multi-per-
spective learning environments in science education classes in order to give students
the opportunity to occupy themselves with alternative perspectives. Based on our
results, we were able to derive school-related implications for fostering decision-
making competences from the reflection on metaphoric conceptions and multi-perspec-
tive assessments and evaluations (RQ3).
Limitations of the study
Using a content-based analytical approach, it seems possible to turn implicit, into explicit
moral conceptions. The challenge is to reflect and expand the student’s individual per-
spective and to take embodied conceptions into account. This paper does not clarify
whether and how the learning environments will function in accordance with our
assumptions. For the subsequent research work, room exists for further detailed specifi-
cation of the cases investigated (e.g. which concrete ways of thinking and learning result
from the learning environments?). By using qualitative teaching experiments (Komorek
& Duit, 2004), it would be possible to create concept maps illustrating the conceptions,
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE EDUCATION 19
metaphors and assigned image schemas students have before and during being con-
fronted with with the learning environments. Thus, it would be possible to reconstruct
learning pathways by linking identified conceptions according to the conceptual
changes the students underwent (Duit & Treagust, 2003). Quantitative studies could
also be used to determine whether an effect correlates with the learning programme,
the discussion, the initial question or with a combination of several factors. However,
based on this study’s methodology, no evidence can be provided with regard to the dis-
tribution of the conceptions among the students. Therefore, further research using quan-
titative methods would be desirable.
Qualitative content analysis always builds on a high level of expertise in respect to
interpreting the data collected. To meet high quality standards the recorded data was
analysed by independent researchers. This method of interpersonal consensus-building
was conducted by researchers and members of the Department of Science Education
as well professors of the Department of Systematic Theology and Ethics and of the
Department of Philosophy at the University of Bamberg, and can be seen as one
measure towards an appropriate level of argumentative validation. This procedure was
complemented by internal triangulation. Content-oriented repetitions by means of ques-
tions, tasks and other assignments led to the possibility of reviewing the collected data in
form of reliability and validity. In addition, internal validation measures for the entire
data set took place in form of lectures and discussions within the Department of
Science Education as well as in international discourse. However, qualitative content
analysis remains a method of subjective interpretation. By applying the aforementioned
rules and theoretical principles, which have been approved and refined by a broad variety
of former qualitative studies, we have tried to interpret our data in the most transparent
and comprehensible manner possible.
In our study, we have described individual cases. The identified moral conceptions are
subjective phenomena, since it is always individuals who develop subjective conceptions
in social contexts and express them verbally. This limits the generalisation of the results.
The present research results are of educational interest insofar as they go beyond individ-
ual cases, since they deal with typical and exemplary generalisable aspects of moral con-
ceptions. For this purpose, individual moral conceptions were bundled into
superordinate moral metaphors, which can be generalised to the extent that they can
be regarded as typical representatives of a class of similar cases and in this respect, can
represent usable recurring learning presuppositions. For example, hierarchical con-
ceptions that we identified in the context of human-animal relationships may also be
found in similar ethical contexts. Unreflective or abusive use of metaphors can also
reinforce discrimination between humans.
Conclusion
As a consequence of our studies, educational recommendations for biology lessons can
be derived. In principle, teachers can make three offers to their students:
.Firstly, they can create new experiences. For example, one can open up a whole new
world by visiting livestock farms.
20 N. TRAMOWSKY ET AL.
.Secondly, it can be helpful to characterise the conceptions that scientists contribute to
these experiences. This can be done with the aid of interviews but also by interpreting
the scientific content (Gropengießer & Groß, 2019).
.Thirdly, it can be particularly helpful for understanding biological phenomenon when
the used metaphors are dissociated from their unquestioned familiarity and con-
sidered consciously (Niebert & Gropengießer, 2013). For this purpose, the metaphori-
cally used image schemas are drawn-up and processed physically.
In particular, the third offer –the reflected handling of metaphors and their image
schemata –presents a challenge for science education. In order to explore the
relationship between experiences, language and thinking for biology lessons, selected
topics of biology education must be systematically examined in respect to the meta-
phors and utilised image schemas. In the framework of the conceptual metaphor
theory, the understanding processes can be made accessible with the method of meta-
phor analysis. The search for the source region leads the metaphor analysis to the
respective embodied image schema, and its structures are transferred to the target
domain. This applies to both the analysis of the student’s conceptions and the scien-
tific conceptions.
The comparison of the initial learning situation with the objective of a correct presen-
tation provides information about the learning needs. There appear to be four possibili-
ties (based on Gropengießer & Groß, 2019):
.keep an existing image schema, and modify it in respect to creating new experiences;
.let students reflect on existing image schemas and conceptions in order to achieve a
meta-understanding;
.expand existing image schemas, or
.sometimes even discard these, when they clearly constitute an obstacle for learning.
Even if learning needs can be clearly specified and named, learning offers are depen-
dent on creative ideas. We have developed empirical evidence for such ideas, which can
now be piloted in a methodologically controlled approach with respect to their benefits
for fostering decision making competence.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
ORCID
Nadine Tramowsky http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1174-506X
Denis Messig http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6508-7504
Jorge Groß http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3525-9448
References
Baumeister, R., & Exline, J. (2000). Self-control, morality, and human strength. Journal of Social
and Clinical Psychology,19(1), 29–42. https://doi.org/10.1521/jscp.2000.19.1.29
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE EDUCATION 21
Bialostok, S. M. (2014). Metaphors that teachers live by: A cultural model of literacy in the era of
new literacies. Language and Education,28(6), 501–520. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500782.2014.
905591
Binngießer, J., Wilhelm, C., & Randler, C. (2013). Attitudes toward animals among German chil-
dren and adolescents. Anthrozoös,26(3), 325–339. https://doi.org/10.2752/175303713X136
97429463475
Boerwinkel, D. J., & Waarlo, A. J. (2010). Genomics education for decision-making: Proceedings of
the second invitational workshop on genomics education. In D. J. Boerwinkel & A. J. Waarlo
(Eds.), Genomics education for decision-making: Proceedings of the second invitational workshop
on genomics education (pp. 15–27). CD-βPress.
Bögeholz, S., Eggert, S., Ziese, C., & Hasselhorn, M. (2017). Modeling and fostering decision-
making competencies regarding challenging issues of sustainable development. In D.
Leutner, J. Fleischer, J. Grünkorn, & E. Klieme (Eds.), Methodology of educational measurement
and assessment. Competence assessment in education: Research, models and instruments (pp.
263–284). Springer.
Bortz, J., & Döring, N. (2006). Forschungsmethoden und Evaluation für Human- und
Sozialwissenschaftler [Research methods and evaluation for human and social scientists].
Springer.
Brugman, B., Burgers, C., & Vis, B. (2019). Metaphorical framing in political discourse through
words vs. concepts: A meta-analysis. Language and Cognition,11(1), 41–65. https://doi.org/
10.1017/langcog.2019.5
Ceyhan, G., Lombardi, D., & Saribas, D. (2021). Probing into pre-service science teachers’prac-
tices of scientific evaluation and decision-making on socio-scientific issues. Journal of Science
Teacher Education,32(8), 865–889. https://doi.org/10.1080/1046560X.2021.1894762
Chang Rundgren, S. N., & Rundgren, C. J. (2010). SEE-SEP: From a separate to a holistic view of
socioscientific issues. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching,11(1), 1–24.
Churchland, P. M. (1995). The engine of reason, the seat of the soul: A philosophical journey into the
brain. MIT Press.
Driver, R. (1989). Changing conceptions. In P. Aidey (Ed.), Adolescent development and school
science (pp. 79–99). Falmer Press.
Duit, R., Gropengießer, H., Kattmann, U., Komorek, M., & Parchmann, I. (2012). The model of
educational reconstruction –A framework for improving teaching and learning science. In
D. Jorde , J. Dillon (Eds.) Science education research and practice in Europe. Cultural
Perpectives in Science Education, SensePublishers (pp. 13–37). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-
6091-900-8_2
Duit, R., & Treagust, D. F. (1998). Learning in science—From behaviourism towards social con-
structivism and beyond. In In: Fraser, B.J. and Tobin, K. G. (Eds.). International handbook of
science education, Kluwer Academic Publishers (pp. 3–25). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-
011-4940-2_1
Duit, R., & Treagust, D. F. (2003). Conceptual change: A powerful framework for improving
science teaching and learning. International Journal of Science Education,25(6), 671–688.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690305016
Flanagan, O. J. (1991). Varieties of moral personality: Ethics and psychological realism. Harvard
University Press.
Gallese, V., & Lakoff,G.(2005). The brain’s concepts: The role of the sensory-motor system in
conceptual knowledge. Cognitive Neuropsychology,22(3-4), 455–479. https://doi.org/10.1080/
02643290442000310
Gebhard, U. (2013). Kind und Natur: Die Bedeutung der Natur für die psychische Entwicklung [The
child and nature: The significance of nature for psychological development]. Springer VS.
Gropengießer, H. (1998). What language reveals about our conceptions: A case study on seeing. In
M. Komorek, Behrendt, H. , Dahncke, H. , Duit, R. , Graeber, W. , Kross, A. (Eds.), Research in
Science Education - Past, Present, and Future. (Vol. 1, pp. 140–142)
Gropengießer, H., & Groß, J. (2019). Lernstrategien für das Verstehen biologischer Phänomene:
Die Rolle der verkörperten Schemata und Metaphern in der Vermittlung [Learning strategies
22 N. TRAMOWSKY ET AL.
for the understanding of biological phenomena: The role of embodied schemata and metaphors
in mediation]. In J. Groß, M. Hammann, P. Schmiemann, & J. Zabel (Eds.), Biologiedidaktische
Forschung: Erträge für die Praxis [Biology education research: Profits for the practice] (pp. 59–
76). Springer Spektrum.
Haidt, J. (2012). The righteous mind. Pantheon.
Höttecke, D., Hössle, C., Eilks, I., Menthe, J., Mrochen, M., Oelgeklaus, H., & Feierabend, T.
(2010). Judgment and decision-making about socio-scientific issues: One basis for a cross-
faculty approach for learning about climate change. In I. Eilks & B. Ralle (Eds.),
Contemporary science education: Implications from science education research about orien-
tations, strategies and assessment (pp. 179–192). Shaker.
Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P., & Brocos, P. (2017). Processes of negotiation in socio-scientific argu-
mentation about vegetarianism in teacher education. In Arcidiacono F., Bova A. (Eds)
Interpersonal Argumentation in Educational and Professional Contexts. Springer (pp. 117–
139). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-59084-4_6
Johnson, M. (2008). Philosophy’s debt to metaphor. In R. Gibbs, Jr. (Eds.),The cambridge handbook
of metaphor and thought. Cambridge University Press (pp. 39–52). https://doi.org/10.1017/
cbo9780511816802.004
Kohlberg, L. (1976). Moral stages and moralization: The cognitive-developmental approach. In T.
Lickona (Ed.), Moral development and behavior: Theory, research, and social issues (pp. 31–53).
Holt, Rienhart, & Winston.
Komorek, M., & Duit, R. (2004). The teaching experiment as a powerful method to develop and
evaluate teaching and learning sequences in the domain of non-linear systems. International
Journal of Science Education,26(5), 619–633. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690310001614717
Lakoff,G.(1987). Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind.
University of Chicago Press.
Lakoff,G.(2002). Moral politics: How liberals and conservatives think. Chicago University Press.
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. University of Chicago Press.
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to
western thought.Basic Books.
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (2003). Metaphors we live by. University of Chicago Press.
Lee, Y. C., & Grace, M. (2012). Students’reasoning and decision making about a socioscientific
issue: A cross-context comparison. Science Education,96(5), 787–807. https://doi.org/10.
1002/sce.21021
Lombardi, D., Brandt, C. B., Bickel, E. S., & Burg, C. (2016). Students’evaluations about climate
change. International Journal of Science Education,38(8), 1392–1414. https://doi.org/10.1080/
09500693.2016.1193912
Mayring, P. (2004). Qualitative content analysis. In U. Flick, E. von Kardoff, & I. Steinke (Eds.), A
companion to qualitative research (pp. 266–269). Sage Publications.
Mazas, B., Fernández Manzanal, R., Zarza, F. J., & Adolfo María, G. (2013). Development and vali-
dation of a scale to assess students’attitude towards animal welfare. International Journal of
Science Education,35(11), 1775–1799. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2013.810354
Meier, D. P., Hauser, D. J., Robinson, M. D., Friesen, C. K., & Schjeldahl, K. (2007). What’s“up”
with God?: Vertical space as a representation of the divine. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology,93(5), 699–710. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.93.5.699
Morin, O., Simonneaux, L., Simonneaux, J., Tytler, R., & Barraza, L. (2014). Developing and using
an S3R model to analyse reasoning in web-based cross-national exchanges on sustainability.
Science Education,98(3), 517–542. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21113
Niebert, K., & Gropengießer, H. (2013). Understanding and communicating climate change in
metaphors. Environmental Education Research,19(3), 282–302. https://doi.org/10.1080/
13504622.2012.690855
Niebert, K., & Gropengiesser, H. (2015). Understanding Starts in the Mesocosm: Conceptual meta-
phor as a framework for external representations in science teaching. International Journal of
Science Education,37(5-6), 903–933. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2015.1025310
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE EDUCATION 23
Niebert, K., Marsch, S., & Treagust, D. (2012). Understanding needs embodiment: A theory-
guided reanalysis of the role of metaphors and analogies in understanding science. Science
Education,96(5), 849–877. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21026
Phillips, D. C. (2000). Constructivism in education: Opinions and second opinions on controversial
issues. University of Chicago Press.
Piaget, J. (1997). The moral judgement of the child. Simon and Schuster.
Reiss, M. (2017). A framework within which to determine how we should use animals in science
education. In M. P. Mueller, D. J. Tippins, & A. J. Stewart (Eds.), Animals and Science education
(pp. 243–259). Springer.
Reiss, M., & Harms, U. (Eds.). (2019). Evolution education Re-considered: Understanding what
works (pp. 285–306). Springer Nature.
Rohrer, T. (2005). Image schemata in the brain. In B. Grady & J. Hampe (Eds.), From perception to
meaning: Image schemas in cognitive linguistics (pp. 165–196). Mouton de Gruyter.
Tramowsky, N. (2019). Moralvorstellungen zum Umgang mit Tieren.Die Entwicklung didaktisch
rekonstruierter Lernangebote unter Anwendung der Metapherntheorie [Moral conceptions
about the handling of animals. The development of educationally reconstructed learning
approaches using the Conceptual Metaphor Theory]. Carl-Auer-Systeme.
Tramowsky, N., & Groß, J. (2018). Conceptions in the flesh: The educational moral metaphors
system, using the example of meat consumption. In N. Gericke & M. Grace (Eds.),
Challenges in biology education research (pp. 73–90). University Printing Office.
Wehling, E. (2013). Nation under joint custody: How conflicting family models divide US politics
[Doctoral dissertation, University of California at Berkeley]. University of California.
Retrieved June 22, 2020, from https://digitalassets.lib.berkeley.edu/etd/ucb/text/Wehling_
berkeley_0028E_13309.pdf
Zabel, J., & Gropengießer, H. (2015). What can narrative contribute to students’understanding of
scientific concepts, e.g. evolution theory? Journal of the European Teacher Education Network,
Vol.10, 136–146 URL: https://jeten-online.org/index.php/jeten/article/view/74 .
Zhong, C. B., & Liljenquist, K. (2006). Washing away your sins: Threatened morality and physical
cleansing. Science,313(8), 1451–1452.
24 N. TRAMOWSKY ET AL.
