What is narrative journalism? A systematic review and an empirical agenda

Abstract

This article reviews scientific research on narrative journalism, aiming to (1) demystify the nature of narrative journalism by specifying its core characteristics, resulting in a sustainable definition of the genre; (2) characterize the current state of the scientific field; and (3) identify gaps in our knowledge about narrative journalism. A systematic search of the scientific literature between 1998 and 2017 resulted in a set of 103 journal articles about narrative journalism. Their analysis reveals that the scientific field is dominated by essayistic and qualitative studies on printed forms of narrative journalism, with a focus on the history and style of narrative journalism, whereas systematic research on the function and impact of the genre is scarce. A framework is presented that synthesizes the hitherto isolated strands of research on narrative journalism and offers anchors for an empirical turn in narrative journalism studies.

Podcasting the Pandemic: Exploring Storytelling Formats and Shifting Journalistic Norms in News Podcasts Related to the Coronavirus

“…Specifically, this research explored narrative storytelling elements (Jacobson, Marino, and Gutsche 2016;Van Krieken and Sanders 2019) and other characteristics unique to news podcasts (Spinelli and Dann 2019) among a sample of episodes (N = 40) related to the coronavirus pandemic, published by news organizations during the spring of 2020. The analysis was conducted through the lens of journalistic norms, such as objectivity and professional routines (Schudson 2001;Shoemaker and Reese 1996).…”

“…In the late 1960s and 70s, popular non-fiction authors such as Tom Wolfe (1973) began arguing for a "New Journalism," which would incorporate storytelling elements of dialogue and scene setting in daily news articles, borrowing a practice used in long-form magazine articles (Beasley 1998). The role of the journalist as an objective figure has been central to the debate about the place of chronological narrative styles versus non-narrative storytelling in daily news stories (Shim 2014;Van Krieken and Sanders 2019). Critics of New Journalism asserted that narrative stories would allow reporters to substitute emotions for facts and tarnish the authority of journalists as providers of entertainment instead of information (Balz 1974;MacDonald 1965).…”

“…The researchers developed the following codebook, combining literary and storytelling techniques identified in the literature review (Kleemans, Schaap, and Suijkerbuijk 2018;Roberts and Giles 2014;Jacobson, Marino, and Gutsche 2016;Van Krieken and Sanders 2019). Characteristics unique to podcasts, such as the incorporation of self-reflection and the use of dramatization elements commonly found in fictional podcasts, that may conflict with journalistic norms (Berry 2015; Spinelli and Dann 2019) were also included.…”

You don’t have to tell a story! A registered report testing the effectiveness of narrative versus non-narrative misinformation corrections

“…Despite some fragmentation in defining what constitutes a story, researchers generally agree that stories are defined by their chronology and causality: they depict characters pursuing goals over time, and may feature access to characters’ thoughts and emotions (Brewer and Lichtenstein 1982 ; Bruner 1986 ; Pennington and Hastie 1988 ; Shen et al 2014 ; van Krieken and Sanders 2019 ). Research on narrative processing often contrasts narrative messages with non-narrative formats (such as those that feature statistics or facts, descriptive passages, or texts that use a list-based, informative format; sometimes these are also called “expository” or “informational” texts; Ratcliff and Sun 2020 ; Reinhart 2006 ; Shen et al 2014 ; Zebregs et al 2015b ).…”

“…In three experiments, we contrasted corrections that focus on factual evidence with corrections designed to present the same amount of relevant corrective information, but in a narrative format. In designing these corrections, we took inspiration from the broader literature on narrative persuasion reviewed above (in particular, Shen et al 2014 ; van Krieken and Sanders 2019 ) to ensure narrative and non-narrative corrections differed on relevant dimensions. Narrative corrections featured characters’ experiences and points of view, quotes, chronological structure, and/or some form of complication or climax, whereas non-narrative corrections focused more on the specific facts and pieces of evidence, had a less engaging and emotive writing style, and adhered more closely to an inverted-pyramid format (essential facts followed by supportive evidence and more general background information).…”