Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 245

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Understanding narrative effects: The impact of breast cancer survivor stories on message processing, attitudes, and beliefs among African American women.

Open access
McQueen, Amy, Kreuter, Matthew W., Kalesan, Bindu, Alcaraz, Kassandra I.·2011·Health Psychology

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Examine the longitudinal effects of personal narratives about mammography and breast cancer compared with a traditional informational approach. METHODS: African American women (n = 489) ages 40 and older were recruited from low-income neighborhoods in St. Louis, Missouri, and randomized to watch a narrative video comprised of stories from African American breast cancer survivors or a content-equivalent informational video. Effects were measured immediately postexposure (T2) and at 3- (T3) and 6-month (T4) follow-up. T2 measures of initial reaction included positive and negative affect, trust, identification, and engagement. T3 message-processing variables included arguing against the messages (counterarguing) and talking to family members about the information (cognitive rehearsal). T4 behavioral correlates included perceived breast cancer risk, cancer fear, cancer fatalism, perceived barriers to mammography, and recall of core messages. Structural equation modeling examined interrelations among constructs. RESULTS: Women who watched the narrative video (n = 244) compared to the informational video (n = 245) experienced more positive and negative affect, identified more with the message source, and were more engaged with the video. Narratives, negative affect, identification, and engagement influenced counterarguing, which, in turn, influenced perceived barriers and cancer fatalism. More engaged women talked with family members more, which increased message recall. Narratives also increased risk perceptions and fear via increased negative affect. CONCLUSIONS: Narratives produced stronger cognitive and affective responses immediately, which, in turn, influenced message processing and behavioral correlates. Narratives reduced counterarguing and increased cognitive rehearsal, which may increase acceptance and motivation to act on health information in populations most adversely affected by cancer disparities.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/a0025395

Cites

8 of 8 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 8 references

Cited by

See all 245

Metadata

Authors
McQueen, A., Kreuter, M. W., Kalesan, B., & Alcaraz, K. I.
Venue
Health Psychology
Published
2011-11
Volume
30
Issue
6
Pages
674-682
ISSN
  • 0278-6133 (ISSN-L)
  • 1930-7810
OpenAlex
W2162467158
Cited by
245
References
8
FWCI
209.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Understanding narrative effects: The impact of breast cancer survivor stories on message processing, attitudes, and beliefs among African American women. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1037/a0025395
The paper
McQueen, A., Kreuter, M. W., Kalesan, B., & Alcaraz, K. I. (2011). Understanding narrative effects: The impact of breast cancer survivor stories on message processing, attitudes, and beliefs among African American women. Health Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025395

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.