The fact that “We live by metaphors†has now been widely accepted by the scholarly community of linguists around the world after the seminal work of Lakoff and Johnson (1980). Metaphors are not only figures of speech serving mere rhetorical purposes but also and above all powerful conceptual tools to depict abstract and complex realities through familiar domains. Metaphors can thus be found in our daily life, including our political life. Yet in this domain, the political impact of metaphors is often taken for granted. Therefore a more global understanding of what this political impact could consist of is needed to further the current research agenda. As Koller (2009, 121) puts it: “metaphor helps construct particular aspects of reality and reproduce (or subvert) dominant schemas.†To be able to account for how metaphors, through discourses, actively shape the political reality, it is important to look at the relationships between metaphorical discourses and their environment. Based on the idea that metaphors do not only reflect the perceived reality, but also function as cues through which citizens come to understand complex political processes and through which they shape political behaviours, the aim of this study is precisely to look at how specific metaphors might impact on the citizens. Too often such political impact is assumed. Yet the identification of metaphors in political discourses does not necessarily implies that these metaphors matter and matter politically. While on the production side the use of the metaphors is probably meaningful – should it be deliberate, and this is a hotly debated issue (see works by Steen and by Gibbs) – on the reception side the question remains open whether a given metaphor has an impact on individuals and how. Comparing the various experimental conditions will make it possible (i) to measure the impact of the Tetris metaphor on the citizens’ perceptions and representations of Belgian federalism, (ii) to assess to what extent the different metaphorical media ...