A Model of Competing Narratives
Abstract
We formalize the argument that political disagreements can be traced to a “clash of narratives.” Drawing on the “Bayesian Networks” literature, we represent a narrative by a causal model that maps actions into consequences, weaving a selection of other random variables into the story. Narratives generate beliefs by interpreting long-run correlations between these variables. An equilibrium is defined as a probability distribution over narrative-policy pairs that maximize a representative agent's anticipatory utility, capturing the idea that people are drawn to hopeful narratives. Our equilibrium analysis sheds light on the structure of prevailing narratives, the variables they involve, the policies they sustain, and their contribution to political polarization. (JEL D72, D83, D85, F52)
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?
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 Eliaz & Spiegler, 2020
Cites
Causality: Models, Reasoning, and Inference
Pearl, J. (2009) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511803161 · Cited by 11,653 · see citing works
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
Shiller, R. J. (2017) · American Economic Review · doi:10.1257/aer.107.4.967 · Cited by 1,004 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Walsh, J., Vaida, N., Coman, A., & Fiske, S. T. (2022) · Psychological Science in the Public Interest · doi:10.1177/15291006231161337 · Cited by 26 · see citing works
“Second, stories represent causal relations that people then use to make sense of the world (Dahlstrom, 2010; Eliaz & Spiegler, 2020; Kendall & Charles, 2022).”
Background
- Authors
- Eliaz, K., & Spiegler, R.
- Affiliations
- Tel Aviv University (IL)
- School of Economics, Tel-Aviv University, Economics Department, University College London and CFM (email: )
- ORCID
- Eliaz, Kfir
- Venue
- American Economic Review
- Publisher
- American Economic Association
- Published
- 2020-12-01
- Volume
- 110
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 3786-3816
- ISSN
- 0002-8282 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2899774819
- Cited by
- 176
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2026: 37 · 2025: 38 · 2024: 35 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 21 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 1
- FWCI
- 10.50
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- American Economic Review (publishedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Game Theory and Applications
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Game Theory and Voting Systems
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
- Keywords
- competing narratives, political conflict, Bayesian networks, causal models, political polarization, equilibrium selection, policy beliefs, representative agent
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