How to cite the terminology that has different meanings in different contexts but with the same name?

Question

For example, I am conducting research in "human attention".

Two papers both use the terminology "attention maps". However, actually one paper refer "attention maps" as "gaze maps" and the other refer "attention maps" as "importance maps". They are both right as "gaze maps" and "importance maps" are just the sub-classes of "attention maps". The terms "gaze maps" and "importance maps" are just made up by me to clarify the two concepts.

Normally, when I cite other people's work, I just use their terminology directly. But now I have to cite them both with the same name. How to deal with this situation？ Is there a conventional way?

Answer 1

I'd suggest:

1. Introducing attention maps;
2. Discussing the specifics of sub-classes gaze maps and importance maps, without reference to their names; and
3. Mention that subclasses are known as attention maps by <> [X] and gaze maps [Y].

Depending on whether gaze maps and importance maps are the same sub-class, distinct sub-classes, or intersecting sub-classes determines some of the specifics of how I'd handle the final point. As written, I've assumed they are the same-sub-class.

Answer 2

I think the way you do this will depend on how the referenced material fits into the text. Probably indirect quoting will be better than direct. If the difference is too insignificant to bother with then skip over it. But if the difference is important to your point, explain the situation.

e.g.

[Ref1] and [Ref2] both studied attention maps, focusing on different types of attention map. Looking at 'gaze maps', [Ref1] found that (stuff), whereas in the context of 'importance maps' [Ref2] concluded (other stuff).