The Role of Causality in Information Acceptance in Narratives: An Example From Science Communication

Dahlstrom, Michael F.

doi:10.1177/0093650210362683

Cited by 115 publications

(89 citation statements)

References 63 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Similar stories were used in a number of studies in the field (e.g., Appel & Richter, 2007; Dahlstrom, 2010; 2012; Fazio, Dolan, & Marsh, 2015; Gerrig & Prentice, 1991; Prentice et al, 1997). We deliberately followed this practice as our goal was an independent manipulation of argument strength and narrativity.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In some of these studies the stories as a whole or their main narrative arc suggested a particular stance toward a topic (e.g., a story about a psychiatric patient who murdered a child led recipients to have more negative beliefs about the group of psychiatric patients; Green & Brock, 2000). In other studies, the stories included assertions that were not a key element of the plot (e.g., Appel & Richter, 2007; Dahlstrom, 2010; 2012; Prentice et al, 1997). Prior research indicates that the persuasive influence of narratives can be quite durable, being strong even after two weeks (Appel & Richter, 2007).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Argument Strength and the Persuasiveness of Stories

Schreiner

Appel

Isberner

et al. 2017

Discourse Processes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Stories are a powerful means to change people’s attitudes and beliefs. The aim of the current work was to shed light on the role of argument strength (argument quality) in narrative persuasion. The present study examined the influence of strong versus weak arguments on attitudes in a low or high narrative context. Moreover, baseline attitudes, interindividual differences in working memory capacity, and recipients’ transportation were examined. Stories with strong arguments were more persuasive than stories with weak arguments. This main effect was qualified by a two-way interaction with baseline attitude, revealing that argument strength had a greater impact on individuals who initially were particularly doubtful toward the story claim. Furthermore, we identified a three-way interaction showing that argument strength mattered most for recipients who were deeply transported into the story world in stories that followed a typical narrative structure. These findings provide an important specification of narrative persuasion theory.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Argument Strength and the Persuasiveness of Stories

Schreiner

Appel

Isberner

et al. 2017

Discourse Processes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As such, these facts represent the meaningful unit of content and can be excised from a larger message and inserted into other messages, or even presented alone, with little loss of understanding. In contrast, narrative communication is context-dependent because it derives it meaning from the ongoing cause-and-effect structure of the temporal events of which it is comprised (11)(12)(13). As such, it is much harder to break a narrative into smaller units of meaningful content without either greatly altering the understanding of the smaller unit or rendering the original narrative incoherent (3).…”

Section: Narrativesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Using narratives and storytelling to communicate science with nonexpert audiences

Dahlstrom

2014

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

Self Cite

759

513

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although storytelling often has negative connotations within science, narrative formats of communication should not be disregarded when communicating science to nonexpert audiences. Narratives offer increased comprehension, interest, and engagement. Nonexperts get most of their science information from mass media content, which is itself already biased toward narrative formats. Narratives are also intrinsically persuasive, which offers science communicators tactics for persuading otherwise resistant audiences, although such use also raises ethical considerations. Future intersections of narrative research with ongoing discussions in science communication are introduced.persuasion | ethics S torytelling often has a bad reputation within science (1).Viewed as baseless or even manipulative, stories are often denigrated with statements such as, "the plural of anecdote is not data." Such a perspective is valuable within the context of scientific data collection to underscore the important difference between making informed generalizations from systematically sampled populations versus overgeneralizations from small and often biased samples.However, when the context moves from data collection to the communication of science to nonexpert audiences, stories, anecdotes, and narratives become not only more appropriate but potentially more important. Research suggests that narratives are easier to comprehend and audiences find them more engaging than traditional logical-scientific communication (3, 4). More pragmatically, the sources from which nonexperts receive most of their science information are already biased toward narrative formats of communication. Once out of formal schooling, nonexpert audiences get the majority of their scientific information from mass media content (5). Because media practitioners have to compete for the attention of their audiences, they routinely rely on stories, anecdotes, and other narrative formats to cut although the information clutter and resonate with their audiences. Although the plural of anecdote may not be data, the anecdote has a greater chance of reaching and engaging with a nonexpert audience. The challenge for science communicators, then, is to decide when and how narratives can effectively and appropriately help them communicate to nonexperts about science.The purpose of this article is to synthesize literature on narrative communication and place it within a science communication context. The article begins with a review of narrative literature, as well as the mass media context through which most nonexpert audiences get their information about science. The article then reviews the potential persuasive impacts of narrative communication and the ethical considerations of using narrative to communicate science. Finally, future intersections of narrative with ongoing questions in science communication are introduced. NarrativesMost individuals have an inherent understanding of what it means to tell a story. Communication scholars supplement this colloquial understanding of narr...

show abstract

“…It is not yet well understood what factors are most important in the development of narratives (13,14). Fiction and nonfiction narratives can engage audiences about equally (22), opening the possibility for creating content without needing to remain true to the details of a particular case study.…”

Section: Prescriptive Scientific Narrativesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Within this general structure, narratives may take many different forms, such as fact or fiction, case studies, or dramatic conversations and first-person or third-person perspectives. The relative benefits of these different forms have been examined to some degree (3,4,11), especially as they pertain to a narrative's persuasive power (5,(12)(13)(14), but this paper primarily focuses on the use of narrative to explain science so that a target audience can use concepts to make better decisions in their own lives.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Prescriptive scientific narratives for communicating usable science

Downs

2014

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper I describe how a narrative approach to science communication may help audiences to more fully understand how science is relevant to their own lives and behaviors. The use of prescriptive scientific narrative can help to overcome challenges specific to scientific concepts, especially the need to reconsider long-held beliefs in the face of new empirical findings. Narrative can captivate the audience, driving anticipation for plot resolution, thus becoming a self-motivating vehicle for information delivery. This quality gives narrative considerable power to explain complex phenomena and causal processes, and to create and reinforce memory traces for better recall and application over time. Because of the inherent properties of narrative communication, their creators have a special responsibility to ensure even-handedness in selection and presentation of the scientific evidence. The recent transformation in communication and information technology has brought about new platforms for delivering content, particularly through interactivity, which can use structured self-tailoring to help individuals most efficiently get exactly the content that they need. As with all educational efforts, prescriptive scientific narratives must be evaluated systematically to determine whether they have the desired effects in improving understanding and changing behavior.decision making | adolescents | interactive video

show abstract

The Role of Causality in Information Acceptance in Narratives: An Example From Science Communication

Cited by 115 publications

References 63 publications

Argument Strength and the Persuasiveness of Stories

Argument Strength and the Persuasiveness of Stories

Using narratives and storytelling to communicate science with nonexpert audiences

Prescriptive scientific narratives for communicating usable science

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About