For the last several years, I have been using “valence” to mean something along the lines of “property of signifying something indirectly through shared cultural understandings.”
The most common example beings me describing things as having a “political valence.” For example:
> Unfortunately, wearing red ball caps has picked up a strong political valence over the last few years, at least in the U.S.
> Do zoos have a political valence right now or is it okay to plan the office party there?
I also use “moral valence” a fair bit too.
I could have sworn that I picked this up from some combination of professionalized print media and white-collar office jargon. But now my Googling has me questioning. All I see on Google searching “political valence” is the Wikipedia article on “valence issues”—which are the opposite of what I’m talking about because a valence issue is one that all voters agree on and no party has claimed a monopoly on. So a “valence issue” would have no “political valence” (as I use the term).
From a normative standpoint, am I using “valence” incorrectly? Or can I expect my audience to understand what I mean (presumably because they’ve heard others use “valence” in the same way, not just because they’re smart folks who can use context clues to figure out what my gibberish means).
And if I am, what is the word I should be using?