{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.015873015873015872, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.3052631578947365, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
On the use of metaphors in designing educational interfaces

Metaphors are present in a wide range of everyday activities. They usually work by understanding or explaining complex subjects by terms from more familiar domains. Metaphors in everyday context are often used unconsciously, as their sources are basic entities and perceptual experiences. They can, however, be used deliberately in educational discourse to explain difficult concepts and introduce new ideas in an intelligible manner. This approach falls under constructivism, which claims that an effective learning strategy is to scaffold on the previous knowledge and conceptual representations. However, there are some limitations of introducing a new concept indirectly via a metaphor. We consider these issues here in the domains of physics education, human-computer interfaces and human-robot interactions. We argue that metaphors are most effective for novices, when one needs to grasp a general idea about a concept and understand its functions without a detailed analysis. In this respect, metaphor can be a powerful tool for bridging gaps in understanding between familiar terms and abstract ideas that are yet to be learned.