The psychological mechanisms of persuasive impact from narrative communication

Abstract

This paper develops and tests a comprehensive psychological model of how narrative messages persuade. In this model, perceived realism and perceived similarity are considered as the antecedents of narrative engagement variables. There are three forms of narrative engagement, transportation, identification, and parasocial interaction, which are conceptualized as the primary mediating mechanisms. Message elaboration and psychological reactance are proposed as the secondary mediating mechanisms. A web-based study (N = 374) was conducted to test this complex model. Four video clips on sexual health topics from wellknown television series were used as the stimuli. Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) analyses showed that perceived realism and perceived similarity were antecedents of narrative engagement. There was conceptual overlap between the narrative engagement variables, but they remained distinct from each other. There was no unique effect on persuasion from parasocial interaction. There was evidence for direct effects on persuasion from transportation and identification, as well as their indirect effects through reducing psychological reactance. However, message elaboration was found to be negatively associated with message perception. Implications for narrative communication in general and future studies were discussed.

Characterizing Reactance in Communication Research: A Review of Conceptual and Operational Approaches

“…For instance, many reactance studies that do not measure freedom threat are situated in narrative persuasion (e.g., Niederdeppe et al, 2011; Rhodes et al, 2016). It is also common for narrative studies to focus on cognitive responses only (e.g., Keer et al, 2013; Moyer-Gusé & Nabi, 2010; Rhodes et al, 2016; for counterexamples, see Quick et al, 2015, and Shen et al, 2017). One explanation offered is that it can be difficult to separate anger toward the underlying appeal from anger toward (or in sympathy with) characters in a story (Moyer-Gusé & Nabi, 2010).…”

“…Meanwhile, some researchers use separate measures for counterarguing and negative cognitions but consider both to capture reactance (e.g., Miller et al, 2013; Wong et al, 2015). Criteria for coding negative thoughts also typically extend beyond counterarguing (e.g., to include intentions; Dillard & Shen, 2005; Shen, Seung, Andersen, & McNeal, 2017).…”

A Longitudinal Study on the Effects of Parasocial Relationships and Breakups With Characters of a Health-Related TV Show on Self-Efficacy and Exercise Behavior: The Case of The Biggest Loser

“…Such persuasive messages may motivate recipients to reject the advice given in a health-related message because they feel as if their autonomy is threatened. In order to reduce the risk of adverse effects, health communication can be designed in a way that health and educational information is embedded in story plots, with implicit intent to persuade (L. Shen et al, 2017). Media producers and researchers, thus, develop E-E messages that promote healthy behaviors (Tukachinsky & Tokunaga, 2013) in order to influence and reinforce various health outcomes (Moyer-Gusé, 2008).…”

Seeing is Believing: The Impacts of Visual Exemplars on American Young Adults’ Reactions to Anti-Prescription Opioid Campaigns

“…Visual exemplars, however, may reduce psychological reactance by lowering perceived persuasion intent and increasing campaign believability (Klepacz et al, 2016) because images invite people to construct meanings based upon contextual cues (Klepacz et al, 2016; Messaris & Abraham, 2001). As a result, people are less conscious about being presented with a set of claims when exposed to visual exemplars, more likely to accept the implicit messages conveyed and, therefore, less likely to experience psychological reactance (Shen et al, 2017). With all this in mind, we propose the hypothesis that including visual exemplars in anti-prescription opioid campaigns reduces psychological reactance (H3a) by affecting campaign believability (H3b).…”