MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410584030 · doi:10.1515/iral-2024-0174

Exploring the dynamic metaphor patterns in describing English public speaking anxiety among Chinese learners

2025· article· en· W4410584030 on OpenAlex
Fei Gao

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueIRAL - International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLanguage, Metaphor, and Cognition
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetaphorAnxietyLinguisticsPsychologyPublic speakingPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This study aims to explore the dynamic metaphor patterns in describing English public speaking (EPS) anxiety among Chinese learners. Metaphor is frequently used to describe complex emotional states, mental processes, and difficult experiences (Kövecses, Zoltán. 2003. Metaphor and emotion: Language, culture, and body in human feeling . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press). This investigation is based on the discourse dynamics approach (Cameron, Lynne & Robert Maslen (eds.). 2010. Metaphor analysis: Research practice in applied linguistics, social sciences and the humanities . Toronto: University of Toronto Press). Fifteen Chinese learners were interviewed to present their EPS anxiety experiences in three speech types. A blended approach (combining naturalistic and elicited metaphors) was employed in the interviews. A total of 2006 metaphor vehicle terms were identified from the transcripts of interviews. The fitted log-linear model did not retain the highest level of the three-way interaction between VEHICLE GROUPING, TOPIC TERM and SPEECH TYPE. However, two possible bivariate associations (i.e., VEHICLE GROUPING * TOPIC TERM, and SPEECH TYPE * TOPIC TERM) were retained and discussed as metaphor patterns. In terms of the topics, metaphors of ANXIETY and OTHER (classroom environment, task demands, teacher feedback, peer pressure, emotional states of other people) were used more to describe EPS anxiety in the first informative speech but less in the third persuasive speech.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.417
Threshold uncertainty score0.893

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.040
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.295 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it