The relative persuasiveness of narrative versus non-narrative health messages in public health emergency communication: Evidence from a field experiment

Abstract

Previous studies indicated that narrative health messages are more effective than non-narrative messages in influencing health outcomes. However, this body of evidence does not account for differences in health domain, and little is known about the effectiveness of this message execution strategy during public health emergencies. In this study, we examined the relative effectiveness of the two formats in influencing knowledge and perceived response efficacy related to prevention of pandemic influenza, and determined whether effects of message format vary across population sub-groups. Data for the study come from an experiment fielded in 2013 that involved a nationally representative sample of 627 American adults. Participants were randomly assigned to view either a narrative (n=322) or a non-narrative (n=305) video clip containing closely matched information about knowledge and preventive actions related to pandemic influenza, and completed pre- and post-viewing questions assessing knowledge and perceived response efficacy related to the prevention of pandemic influenza. Results indicated that participants in the non-narrative condition reported greater knowledge and rated pandemic influenza prevention measures as more effective compared with those in the narrative condition. Message format effects did not vary across population sub-groups; post-viewing scores of knowledge and perceptions related to pandemic influenza were consistently higher in the non-narrative condition compared with the narrative condition across five socio-demographic groups: age, gender, education, race/ethnicity and income. We concluded that didactic, non-narrative messages may be more effective than narrative messages to influence knowledge and perceptions during public health emergencies.

Strategic Storytelling: When Narratives Help Versus Hurt the Persuasive Power of Facts

“…In contrast to these findings, some evidence exists that suggests facts might be more persuasive alone than embedded in stories (Allen & Preiss, 1997; Baesler & Burgoon, 1994; Bekalu, Bigman, McCloud, Lin, & Viswanath, 2018). For example, Baesler and Burgoon (1994) found that facts in the form of statistical information were more effective than stories at changing beliefs about juvenile delinquency.…”

“…Although both hypotheses seemed plausible at the initiation of this research, conceptually, we favored the reduction in message processing account because only this account can explain both prior work that has found a persuasive advantage of stories over facts alone (de Wit et al, 2008; Dickson, 1982; F. Shen, Sheer, & Li, 2015) and a persuasive advantage of facts alone over stories (Allen & Preiss, 1997; Baesler & Burgoon, 1994; Bekalu et al, 2018; Wojcieszak, Azrout, Boomgaarden, Alencar, & Sheets, 2017). Of course, it is also possible that biased processing generally operates in the situations where stories have been found to be superior and some alternative explanation exists for the persuasive power of facts alone over stories.…”

“…For example, Baesler and Burgoon (1994) found that facts in the form of statistical information were more effective than stories at changing beliefs about juvenile delinquency. Similarly, Bekalu et al (2018) found that facts presented in a question/answer format were more effective than stories at persuading people to endorse preventive actions during an influenza-related public health emergency. These findings suggest that the persuasive power of facts might be hindered by integrating them into a story.…”

In Search of Entertainment-Education’s Effects on Attitudes and Behaviors

“…Moran, Frank, Chatterjee, Murphy, and Baezconde-Garbanati (2016) found that 11-minute videos more effectively communicated information about cervical cancer when they contained a narrative component, and Murphy et al (2015) found that narrative content was more effective at inducing women to schedule a PAP test in the six-month period since exposure to the video. On the other hand, Bekalu et al (2018) tested competing four-minute video clips on pandemic influenza and found the nonnarrative version to be better at imparting knowledge. The mixed findings about health knowledge and behaviors suggest that narratives are not necessarily more informative or compelling, at least given an experiment in which participants are expected to look at whatever message is put in front of them.…”

Communicating with the Public About Marauding Terrorist Firearms Attacks: Results from a Survey Experiment on Factors Influencing Intention to “Run, Hide, Tell” in the United Kingdom and Denmark

“…Health communication research on the impact of message format on persuasive communications tends to focus on different ways of presenting information within the same media (e.g., the use of text vs. visual images in printed materials) (Carnaghi, Cadinu, Castelli, Kiesner, & Bragantini, ; Silk, Nazione, Neuberger, Smith, & Atkin, ) or narrative vs. nonnarrative messages in videos) (Bekalu, Bigman, McCloud, Lin, & Viswanath, ; Geary et al., ). However, a recent study that directly compared the impact of a film and leaflet in the context of preventing Lyme disease found that both interventions were effective in increasing knowledge, self‐efficacy, and intention to adopt protective behaviors (Beaujean et al., ).…”