CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 135Media Influence and HealthNarrative Theory and AnalysisSocial and Intergroup Psychology

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 81 of the 83 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

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

Dahlstrom, Michael F.·2010·Communication Research
DOI 10.1177/0093650210362683
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

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.

Overview

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.

Verification

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?

Citations

Cites

Show all 83 references

Research works printed but not linked: 7

  1. Appel, M., 2007, Media Psychology, 10, 113
  2. 10.1037/0278-7393.16.2.233 · DOI
  3. Schank, R.C. & Berman, T.B. ( 2002). The persuasive role of stories in knowledge and action . In M. C. Green, J. J. Strange, & T. C. Brock (Eds.), Narrative impact: Social and cognitive foundations (pp. 287-313). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  4. Singhal, A., 2002, Communication Theory, 12, 117
  5. Slater, M.D., 2002, Communication Theory, 12, 173
  6. Strange, J.J. ( 2002). How fictional tales wag real-world beliefs. In M. C. Green, J. J. Strange , & T. C. Brock (Eds.), Narrative impact: Social and cognitive foundations (pp. 263-286). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  7. 10.2307/1131764 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–134 of 134

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Dahlstrom, M. F.
Affiliations
Iowa State University (US)
Corresponding author
Dahlstrom, Michael F.
ORCID
Dahlstrom, Michael F.
Venue
Communication Research
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2010-06-16
Volume
37
Issue
6
Pages
857-875
ISSN
  • 0093-6502 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-3810
DOI
10.1177/0093650210362683
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
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
Locations
Communication Research (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Communication › 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