[zannaxy]

This is a very interesting point, "removal" instead of "removing" but if you are only stringing nouns together you are speaking babyspeak. Country Protection President Military Borders -- what is this babble? It sounds like the researchers stumbled onto a different idea, which I don't have a name for, but it's the one where you try to avoid vocalizing what you don't want and only express what you do want. If you have to change verbs into nouns, you have to either remove the negation from the verb, or choose the opposite-meaning noun. Like "stop killing" would be "life saving" and then noun'ing that. But the operation of going from verb-> noun necessarily means you have to frame it in a positive way. Plus, how are you going to know what someone's associations with a particular word are? You might trigger them with the word ice or fed when you're just talking about lunch.

[jonahbenton]

I don't have an Economist sub so can't read the whole piece and didn't bother reading the paper but the strategy of using nouns rather than verbs seems very familiar.

When writing this is called passive writing. In verbal communications when trying to effect something is colloquially known as passive aggressiveness.

Defining new nouns as abstractions is also key to the practice of dehumanization. None of this seems remotely novel.

I would be interested in studies that correlate brain activity with receiving predominantly verb/active vs predominantly noun/passive communications. Maybe the piece gets into work in that area, I don't know.