Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 202

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Power of Narratives: The Effect of Entertainment Television Organ Donation Storylines on the Attitudes, Knowledge, and Behaviors of Donors and Nondonors

Morgan, Susan E., Movius, Lauren, Cody, Michael J.·2009·Journal of Communication
DOI 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2008.01408.x
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Drawing on theories of social learning, social representations and the organ donation model, online surveys were used to examine the impact of organ donation storylines of 4 U.S. television dramas (CSI: NY, Numb3rs, House, and Grey’s Anatomy) on viewers’ attitudes, knowledge, and behaviors. Results revealed that viewers acquired knowledge from the content of each drama, despite the fact that some content was inaccurate. Viewers who were not organ donors prior to exposure to the dramas were more likely to decide to donate organs if the drama explicitly encouraged donation, portrayed characters revealing how they had become donors and discussed the merits of donating. Viewers were also more likely to become an organ donor if they were emotionally involved in the narrative. Implications for using dramas to educate and motivate the public were discussed.

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 · 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2008.01408.x

Cites

4 of 4 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 4 references

Research works printed but not linked: 28

  1. Akers, 1998, Social learning and social structure: A general theory of crime and deviance
  2. Bandura, 1971, Social learning theory
  3. Braun, 1997, Death and dying in four Asian American cultures: A descriptive study, Death Studies, 21, 327, 10.1080/074811897201877 · DOI
  4. Brodie, 2001, Communicating health information through the entertainment media: A study of the television drama ER lends support to the notion that Americans pick up information while being entertained, Health Affairs, 20, 192, 10.1377/hlthaff.20.1.192 · DOI · Paper page
  5. Bushman, 2001, Media violence and the American public: Scientific facts versus media misinformation, American Psychologist, 56, 477, 10.1037/0003-066X.56.6-7.477 · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.56.6-7.477 · Paper page
  6. Charlesworth, 2005, Smoking in the movies increases adolescent smoking: A review, Pediatrics, 166, 1516, 10.1542/peds.2005-0141 · DOI · Paper page
  7. Feeley, 2007, College students’ knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors regarding organ donation, Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 37, 243, 10.1111/j.0021-9029.2007.00159.x · DOI
  8. Flick, 1998, The psychology of the social, 1
  9. Green, 2004, Transportation into narrative worlds: The role of prior knowledge and perceived realism, Discourse Processes, 38, 247, 10.1207/s15326950dp3802_5 · DOI · Paper page
  10. Green, 2002, Narrative impact: Social and cognitive foundations, 315
  11. Horton, 1990, Knowledge regarding organ donation: Identifying and overcoming barriers to organ donation, Social Science and Medicine, 31, 791, 10.1016/0277-9536(90)90174-Q · DOI · Paper page
  12. Kennedy, 2004, Increases in calls to the CDC National STD and AIDS Hotline following AIDS-related episodes in a soap opera, Journal of Communication, 54, 287, 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2004.tb02629.x · doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2004.tb02629.x
  13. Maloney, 2000, Messiahs, pariahs, and donors: The development of social representations of organ transplants, Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 30, 203, 10.1111/1468-5914.00126 · doi:10.1111/1468-5914.00126
  14. Maloney, 2002, Talking about transplants: Social representations and the dialectical, dilemmatic nature of organ donation and transplantation, British Journal of Social Psychology, 41, 299, 10.1348/014466602760060264 · DOI
  15. Morgan, 2003, African Americans’ knowledge about organ donation: Closing the gap with more effective persuasive message strategies, Journal of the National Medical Association, 95, 1066
  16. Morgan, 2005, Family discussions about organ donation: How the media is used to justify opinions and influence others about donation decisions, Clinical Transplantation, 19, 674, 10.1111/j.1399-0012.2005.00407.x · DOI
  17. Morgan, 2007, Entertainment (mis)education: The framing of organ donation in entertainment television, Health Communication, 22, 143, 10.1080/10410230701454114 · DOI
  18. Morgan, 2003, Similarities and differences between African Americans’ and European Americans’ attitudes, knowledge, and willingness to communicate about organ donation, Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 33, 693, 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2003.tb01920.x · doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2003.tb01920.x
  19. Moscovici, 1998, The psychology of the social, 209
  20. Parisi, 1986, Attitudes toward posthumous organ donation and commitment to donate, Health Psychology, 5, 565, 10.1037/0278-6133.5.6.565 · doi:10.1037/0278-6133.5.6.565 · Paper page
  21. Potter, 1986, Perceived reality and the cultivation hypothesis, Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 30, 159, 10.1080/08838158609386617 · DOI · Paper page
  22. Rubens, 1998, Knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors of college students regarding organ/tissue donation and implications for increasing organ/tissue donors, College Student Journal, 32, 167
  23. Sargent, 2006, The media’s representation of the ideal male body: A cause for muscle dysmorphia?, International Journal of Eating Disorders, 31, 334
  24. Singhal, A., Cody, M. J., Rogers, E. M., & Sabido, M. (Eds.), (2004). Entertainment-education and social change: History, research and practice. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
  25. Singhal, 1999, Entertainment-education: A communication strategy for social change
  26. Slater, 2006, Television dramas and support for controversial public policies: Effects and mechanisms, Journal of Communication, 56, 235, 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00017.x · DOI · Paper page
  27. Spigner, 1999, Race/ethnic-based opinions on organ donation and transplantation among teens: Preliminary results, Transplantation Proceedings, 31, 1347, 10.1016/S0041-1345(98)02022-3 · DOI
  28. Wilkin, 2007, Does entertainment-education work with Latinos in the United States? Identification and the effects of a telenovela breast cancer storyline, Journal of Health Communication, 12, 455, 10.1080/10810730701438690 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

See all 202

Metadata

Authors
Morgan, S. E., Movius, L., & Cody, M. J.
Venue
Journal of Communication
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Published
2009-03
Volume
59
Issue
1
Pages
135-151
ISSN
  • 0021-9916 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-2466
DOI
10.1111/j.1460-2466.2008.01408.x
OpenAlex
W2096822489
Cited by
202
References
4
FWCI
194.10
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
doi.wiley.com/10.1002/tdm_license_1.1 (tdm, 2375 d)

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: The Power of Narratives: The Effect of Entertainment Television Organ Donation Storylines on the Attitudes, Knowledge, and Behaviors of Donors and Nondonors. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2008.01408.x
The paper
Morgan, S. E., Movius, L., & Cody, M. J. (2009). The Power of Narratives: The Effect of Entertainment Television Organ Donation Storylines on the Attitudes, Knowledge, and Behaviors of Donors and Nondonors. Journal of Communication. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2008.01408.x

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.