Summary all readings Storytelling
Session 2: What is a story?
Meta-analytic evidence for the persuasive effect of narratives on beliefs,
attitudes, intentions, and behaviors
Braddock, K., & Dillard, J. (2016).
1. What is the topic?
The persuasive effect of narratives on beliefs, attitudes, intentions and behaviors
2. What is the research question?
RQ1: To what extent, if any, are narrative effects moderated by conceptual variations within
categories of persuasive outcomes?
(Do narratives have the capacity to change opinions, attitudes, intentions and behaviors?)
3. What are the predictions and the rationale for these predictions (hypotheses)?
Reviews of the narrative literature describe several theoretically grounded reasons to
expect:
Narrative to exert an effect on persuasion (Bilandzic & Busselle, 2013).
The theoretical paper by Moyer-Gusé (2008) may be the most comprehensive in this regard.
She suggests that:
Narrative may persuade by reducing reactance, counter arguing, or selective
avoidance; increasing perceived vulnerability or self-efficacy; and/or changing
perceived norms or outcome expectancies.
Despite the differences associated with these mechanisms of narrative persuasion, each
mechanism suggests that:
Narratives induce change in several cognitive and behavioral outcomes.
This leads to the follow ing hypotheses:
H1: Exposure to a narrative produces story-consistent change in beliefs, attitudes, intentions,
and behaviors.
H2: The effect of a narrative on persuasion is not moderated by the perceived fictionality of
the narrative.
H3a: The effect of narrative on persuasion is not moderated by medium of presentation.
H3b: The persuasive effect of narratives presented via visual media is weaker than the
persuasive effect of narratives presented via nonvisual media.
4. What methods were used (participants, sampling, materials, procedure)? What
were the variables and controls?
Independent variable: exposure to narrative
Dependent variables: beliefs, attitudes, intentions, behaviors
Moderator: fictionality
Medium: visual and nonvisual media
,Method: Meta-analysis of 74 studies. After retrieving the sample of 74 studies, they
converted the reported effect sizes to Pearson’s r in all cases for which transformation was
necessary.
5. What were the main results?
Results suggested positive relationships between exposure to a narrative and narrative-
consistent beliefs (k = 37; N = 7,376; r = .17), attitudes (k = 40; N = 7,132; r = .19), intentions
(k = 28; N = 5,211; r = .17), and behaviors (k = 5; N = 978; r = .23). Moderator analyses on the
effect of fictionality yielded mixed results. Neither medium of presentation nor research
design influenced the magnitude of the narrative-persuasion relationship. However, results
suggested the presence of unidentified moderators.
Taken together, the results of the main and moderator analyses reveal several notable
findings. First, none of the credibility intervals associated with narrative’s main effect on
beliefs, attitudes, intentions, or behaviors included zero. This suggests that although the r w ′
associated with each of these analyses was relatively small, exposure to narrative stimuli
does have a significant and positive effect on these outcomes. These results provide
empirical support for Hypothesis 1. Second, our tests of theoretically relevant moderators
showed that narrative’s effect on beliefs, attitudes, intentions, and behaviors was not
influenced by the narrative’s fictionality (supporting Hypothesis 2), the medium through
which the narratives are presented (supporting Hypothesis 3a and refuting Hypothesis 3b),
or other outcome-specific factors (in response to Research Question 1).
6. What are the implications or applications of the findings?
This study makes three key contributions to our knowledge of narrative effects.
First, it demonstrates that exposure to narratives can affect message recipients’
beliefs, attitudes, intentions, and behaviors such that they move into closer
alignment with viewpoints espoused in those narratives. More work is needed to
isolate message features that enhance or inhibit narrative potency, but the basic
relationship is not in doubt.
Second, the data were ambiguous with regard to the question of fictionality. Thus,
there is a need to examine more closely the idea the narratives are fully accepted at
the time of processing. Third, the results support the position that narrative form is
uninfluenced by medium of presentation. Unless researchers anticipate interactions
between medium and some other variable, it appears unlikely that additional
research on medium will produce a desirable return on investment. Although much
remains to be done, this trio of results extends our basic understanding of whether,
how, and the degree to which narratives persuade.
, Session 3: Getting lost in a story
The extended transportation-imagery model: A meta-analysis of the
antecedents and consequences of consumers’ narrative transportation
Van Laer, T., De Ruiyter, K., Visconti, L. M., & Wetzels, M. (2014).
1. What is the topic?
The antecedents and consequences of consumers’ narrative transportation
Narrative transportation refers to the phenomenon in which consumers mentally enter a
world that a story evokes.
2. What is the research question?
3. What are the predictions and the rationale for these predictions (hypotheses)?
H1: The more stories have (a) characters with whom story receivers can identify, (b) a plot
that story receivers can imagine, and (c) verisimilitude, the more narrative transportation
increases.
H2: The more story receivers (a) are familiar with a story topic, (b) pay attention to a story,
(c) possess transportability, (d) are young, (e) are educated, and (f) are female, the more
narrative transportation increases.
H3: The more narrative transportation increases, the more (a) story-consistent affective
responses increase, (b) critical thoughts decrease, (c) narrative thoughts increase, (d) story-
consistent beliefs increase, (e) story-consistent attitudes increase
4. What methods were used (participants, sampling, materials, procedure)? What
were the variables and controls?
H1:
IV: characters (with whom people can identify), plot (that people can imagine), verisimilitude
DV: narrative transportation
H2:
IV: familiarity with topic, attention to story, transportability, age, education, sex
DV: narrative transportation
H3:
IV: narrative transportation
DV: story-consistent affective responses, critical thoughts, narrative thoughts, story-
consistent beliefs, story-consistent attitudes
MOD: measurement scale
Session 2: What is a story?
Meta-analytic evidence for the persuasive effect of narratives on beliefs,
attitudes, intentions, and behaviors
Braddock, K., & Dillard, J. (2016).
1. What is the topic?
The persuasive effect of narratives on beliefs, attitudes, intentions and behaviors
2. What is the research question?
RQ1: To what extent, if any, are narrative effects moderated by conceptual variations within
categories of persuasive outcomes?
(Do narratives have the capacity to change opinions, attitudes, intentions and behaviors?)
3. What are the predictions and the rationale for these predictions (hypotheses)?
Reviews of the narrative literature describe several theoretically grounded reasons to
expect:
Narrative to exert an effect on persuasion (Bilandzic & Busselle, 2013).
The theoretical paper by Moyer-Gusé (2008) may be the most comprehensive in this regard.
She suggests that:
Narrative may persuade by reducing reactance, counter arguing, or selective
avoidance; increasing perceived vulnerability or self-efficacy; and/or changing
perceived norms or outcome expectancies.
Despite the differences associated with these mechanisms of narrative persuasion, each
mechanism suggests that:
Narratives induce change in several cognitive and behavioral outcomes.
This leads to the follow ing hypotheses:
H1: Exposure to a narrative produces story-consistent change in beliefs, attitudes, intentions,
and behaviors.
H2: The effect of a narrative on persuasion is not moderated by the perceived fictionality of
the narrative.
H3a: The effect of narrative on persuasion is not moderated by medium of presentation.
H3b: The persuasive effect of narratives presented via visual media is weaker than the
persuasive effect of narratives presented via nonvisual media.
4. What methods were used (participants, sampling, materials, procedure)? What
were the variables and controls?
Independent variable: exposure to narrative
Dependent variables: beliefs, attitudes, intentions, behaviors
Moderator: fictionality
Medium: visual and nonvisual media
,Method: Meta-analysis of 74 studies. After retrieving the sample of 74 studies, they
converted the reported effect sizes to Pearson’s r in all cases for which transformation was
necessary.
5. What were the main results?
Results suggested positive relationships between exposure to a narrative and narrative-
consistent beliefs (k = 37; N = 7,376; r = .17), attitudes (k = 40; N = 7,132; r = .19), intentions
(k = 28; N = 5,211; r = .17), and behaviors (k = 5; N = 978; r = .23). Moderator analyses on the
effect of fictionality yielded mixed results. Neither medium of presentation nor research
design influenced the magnitude of the narrative-persuasion relationship. However, results
suggested the presence of unidentified moderators.
Taken together, the results of the main and moderator analyses reveal several notable
findings. First, none of the credibility intervals associated with narrative’s main effect on
beliefs, attitudes, intentions, or behaviors included zero. This suggests that although the r w ′
associated with each of these analyses was relatively small, exposure to narrative stimuli
does have a significant and positive effect on these outcomes. These results provide
empirical support for Hypothesis 1. Second, our tests of theoretically relevant moderators
showed that narrative’s effect on beliefs, attitudes, intentions, and behaviors was not
influenced by the narrative’s fictionality (supporting Hypothesis 2), the medium through
which the narratives are presented (supporting Hypothesis 3a and refuting Hypothesis 3b),
or other outcome-specific factors (in response to Research Question 1).
6. What are the implications or applications of the findings?
This study makes three key contributions to our knowledge of narrative effects.
First, it demonstrates that exposure to narratives can affect message recipients’
beliefs, attitudes, intentions, and behaviors such that they move into closer
alignment with viewpoints espoused in those narratives. More work is needed to
isolate message features that enhance or inhibit narrative potency, but the basic
relationship is not in doubt.
Second, the data were ambiguous with regard to the question of fictionality. Thus,
there is a need to examine more closely the idea the narratives are fully accepted at
the time of processing. Third, the results support the position that narrative form is
uninfluenced by medium of presentation. Unless researchers anticipate interactions
between medium and some other variable, it appears unlikely that additional
research on medium will produce a desirable return on investment. Although much
remains to be done, this trio of results extends our basic understanding of whether,
how, and the degree to which narratives persuade.
, Session 3: Getting lost in a story
The extended transportation-imagery model: A meta-analysis of the
antecedents and consequences of consumers’ narrative transportation
Van Laer, T., De Ruiyter, K., Visconti, L. M., & Wetzels, M. (2014).
1. What is the topic?
The antecedents and consequences of consumers’ narrative transportation
Narrative transportation refers to the phenomenon in which consumers mentally enter a
world that a story evokes.
2. What is the research question?
3. What are the predictions and the rationale for these predictions (hypotheses)?
H1: The more stories have (a) characters with whom story receivers can identify, (b) a plot
that story receivers can imagine, and (c) verisimilitude, the more narrative transportation
increases.
H2: The more story receivers (a) are familiar with a story topic, (b) pay attention to a story,
(c) possess transportability, (d) are young, (e) are educated, and (f) are female, the more
narrative transportation increases.
H3: The more narrative transportation increases, the more (a) story-consistent affective
responses increase, (b) critical thoughts decrease, (c) narrative thoughts increase, (d) story-
consistent beliefs increase, (e) story-consistent attitudes increase
4. What methods were used (participants, sampling, materials, procedure)? What
were the variables and controls?
H1:
IV: characters (with whom people can identify), plot (that people can imagine), verisimilitude
DV: narrative transportation
H2:
IV: familiarity with topic, attention to story, transportability, age, education, sex
DV: narrative transportation
H3:
IV: narrative transportation
DV: story-consistent affective responses, critical thoughts, narrative thoughts, story-
consistent beliefs, story-consistent attitudes
MOD: measurement scale
