Cited by 135Media Influence and HealthNarrative Theory and AnalysisSocial and Intergroup Psychology

The Role of Causality in Information Acceptance in Narratives: An Example From Science Communication

Dahlstrom, Michael F.·2010·Communication Research

Abstract

Narratives represent a powerful and ubiquitous form of communication that influence what individuals believe about the world. While the field of narrative persuasion investigates how narratives affect attitudes and behaviors, it rarely considers structural variables discussed in the field of discourse psychology. This study examines the utility of bridging these fields by testing the persuasive influence of novel science information relative to the internal causal structure of a narrative. Results suggest that information placed at causal locations of a narrative result in greater acceptance of information than the same information placed at noncausal locations within the same narrative. These findings suggest that the within-narrative variable of causality can influence the persuasive impact of information inserted into a narrative. In response, this study identifies a significant source of variance that has thus far been overlooked in studies of narrative persuasion.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0093650210362683

Cites

81 of 81 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Causal junctures aid meaning making because they leverage the causal logic of the story to convey which information is valuable and show possible ways to make sense of the story world.

    “Causal junctures aid meaning making because they leverage the causal logic of the story to convey which information is valuable and show possible ways to make sense of the story world (Dahlstrom, 2010).”

    From Stories in Action. (2022) · cites this paper as Dahlstrom, 2010

  • In Dahlstrom (2010), scientific assertions placed at causal locations of a narrative resulted in greater levels of acceptance of information than the same assertions placed at noncausal locations within the same narrative.

    “In one study (Dahlstrom, 2010), scientific assertions placed at causal locations of a narrative resulted in greater levels of acceptance of information than the same assertions placed at noncausal locations within the same narrative.”

    From Stories in Action. (2022) · cites this paper as Dahlstrom, 2010

  • Information at causal locations was perceived as more truthful in the real world than the same information placed at noncausal locations.

    “Specifically, the information at causal locations was perceived as more truthful in the real world than the same information placed at noncausal locations.”

    From Stories in Action. (2022) · cites this paper as Dahlstrom, 2010

  • Stories represent causal relations that people then use to make sense of the world.

    “Second, stories represent causal relations that people then use to make sense of the world (Dahlstrom, 2010; Eliaz & Spiegler, 2020; Kendall & Charles, 2022).”

    From Stories in Action. (2022) · cites this paper as Dahlstrom, 2010

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 83 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Dahlstrom, M. F.
Affiliations
Iowa State University (US)
Corresponding author
Dahlstrom, Michael F.
Venue
Communication Research
Published
2010-06-16
Volume
37
Issue
6
Pages
857-875
ISSN
  • 0093-6502 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-3810
OpenAlex
W2055350541
Cited by
135
References
83
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 24 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 7
FWCI
111.54
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Communication Research (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Literature and Literary Theory › Media Influence and Health
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Literature and Literary Theory › Narrative Theory and Analysis
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
Keywords
narrative persuasion, causality, information acceptance, science communication, discursive psychology, persuasive influence

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