All Stories Are Not Alike: A Purpose-, Content-, and Valence-Based Taxonomy of Patient Narratives in Decision Aids
Abstract
The use of patient stories in decision aids is a highly controversial practice. However, the resulting debates and research have yielded little consensus about the impact of patient stories due to vague operational definitions of narratives. In this article, we argue that narratives are not homogeneous in either content or effect and hence should not be considered a single construct in research. The purpose of this article is to provide a taxonomy that guides both the development of decision aids and future research on this topic. We define three dimensions of narratives that are likely to moderate their impact on decision making: 1) the purpose of the narrative, 2) the content of the message, and 3) the evaluative valence, or overall tone, of the message. In addition, we describe predicted effects of different types of narratives on decision making and discuss their potential interactions. Our taxonomy provides a framework that will allow for the precise documentation of different narrative types, the use of appropriate outcome measures, and a systematic evaluation of narratives in all types of decision aids. Failures to recognize the complex structure of narratives will result both in research that does little to inform our understanding of the impact of patient stories and in the use of narratives in patient education materials that have unintended consequences on both decision processes and behavior.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
The purpose of patient narratives (e.g., inform, engage, model behavior) may overlap considerably with the purpose for using Personas.
“Thus, the purpose of patient narratives (e.g., inform, engage, model behavior) (Shaffer and Zikmund-Fisher, 2013) may overlap considerably with the purpose for using Personas.”
From Using Personas in the development of eHealth interventions for chronic pain: A scoping review and narrative synthesis (2023) · cites this paper as Shaffer and Zikmund-Fisher, 2013
Cites
A perspective on judgment and choice: mapping bounded rationality.
Kahneman, D. (2003) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.58.9.697 · Cited by 5,540 · see citing works
The role of transportation in the persuasiveness of public narratives.
Green, M. C., & Brock, T. C. (2000) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.79.5.701 · Cited by 4,861 · see citing works
Positive affect facilitates creative problem solving.
Isen, A. M., Daubman, K. A., & Nowicki, G. P. (1987) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.52.6.1122 · Cited by 2,986 · see citing works
Stalking the elusive “vividness” effect
Taylor, S. E., & Thompson, S. C. (1982) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.89.2.155 · Cited by 913 · see citing works
Narratives and cancer communication
Green, M. C. (2006) · Journal of Communication · doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00288.x · Cited by 682 · see citing works
Web-Based Smoking-Cessation Programs
Strecher, V. J., McClure, J. B., Alexander, G. L., Chakraborty, B., Nair, V. N., Konkel, J. M., Greene, S. M., Collins, L. M., Carlier, C. C., Wiese, C. J., et al. (2008) · American Journal of Preventive Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2007.12.024 · Cited by 266 · see citing works
The Functions of Affect in Health Communications and in the Construction of Health Preferences
Peters, E., Lipkus, I., & Diefenbach, M. A. (2006) · Journal of Communication · doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00287.x · Cited by 251 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Using narratives and storytelling to communicate science with nonexpert audiences
Dahlstrom, M. F. (2014) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1320645111 · Cited by 1,159 · see citing works
Risks and benefits of web-based patient narratives: systematic review
Drewniak, D., Glässel, A., Hodel, M., & Biller-Andorno, N. (2020) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/15772 · Cited by 70 · see citing works
Bartels, S. L., Taygar, A. S., Johnsson, S. I., Petersson, S., Flink, I., Boersma, K., McCracken, L. M., & Wicksell, R. K. (2023) · Internet Interventions · doi:10.1016/j.invent.2023.100619 · Cited by 46 · see citing works
Healey, B. J., Griffiths, K. M., & Bennett, K. (2017) · DIGITAL HEALTH · doi:10.1177/2055207617729937 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
- Authors
- Shaffer, V. A., & Zikmund-Fisher, B. J.
- Affiliations
- University of Michigan (US)
- Department of Health Sciences, School of Health Professions, and Department of Psychological Sciences, College of Arts and Science, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri (VAS)
- ORCID
- Shaffer, Victoria A.
- Venue
- Medical Decision Making
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2012-10-11
- Volume
- 33
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 4-13
- ISSN
- 0272-989X (ISSN-L)
- 1552-681X
- OpenAlex
- W2025581057
- Cited by
- 167
- References
- 7
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 24 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 8
- FWCI
- 142.25
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Medical Decision Making (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Literature and Literary Theory › Media Influence and Health
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
- Keywords
- patient narratives, decision aids, narrative, narrative purpose, message content, decision-making, patient education materials, shared decision-making
- MeSH terms
- Decision Support Techniques, Humans, Patients, Narration
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