These studies explore the impact of stories and use of different perspectives.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Keywords: story, framing, statistics, persuasion

 

Source: ‘Effects of message framing, vividness congruency and statistical framing on responses to charity advertising’, by C. Chang and Y. Lee, International Journal of Advertising (2010) vol. 29.2, pp.195-220

 

Conclusions: In this experiment:                                            

1. Presenting negative situations or negative outcomes of not acting was more effective than presenting positive situations or positive outcomes of acting.

2. The effectiveness of a negative message was enhanced by use of a negative case story, but reduced by use of a positive case story. Likewise, the effectiveness of a positive message was enhanced by the use of a positive case story, but reduced by the use of a negative case story. Consistency (e.g. positive message + positive case story, or negative message + negative case story) was most effective.                                                            

3. With respect to different combinations of negative/positive message, negative/positive case story and statistics using larger numbers (e.g. 1686 in 20000) or smaller numbers (e.g. 2 in 20), negative message + negative case story + small numbers was the most effective combination, followed by positive message + positive case story + large numbers. A complex relationship between perceived severity and the likelihood of any impact is at work here.

 

Key caveats: The experiment took place in Taiwan.

 

URL/DOI: 10.2501/S0265048710201129

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Keywords: story, persuasion

 

Source: ‘The role of transportation in persuasiveness of public narratives’, by M. C. Green and T. C. Brock, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (2000) 79.5, pp.701–721

 

Conclusions: This study found that

1. The more engaged readers were by a story’s imagery, affect and attentional focus, the more their beliefs were affected by the story and the more favourably they evaluated the protagonists

2. Readers’ engagement with a story’s imagery, affect and attentional focus was generally unaffected by whether the story was labelled as fact or fiction.  

 

Key caveats: This experiment was conducted in laboratory conditions. All participants were American undergraduates.    

 

URL/DOI: 10.1037//0022-3514.79.5.701

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

Keywords: story, persuasion

 

Source: 'Self-referencing and persuasion: Narrative transportation versus analytical elaboration’, by J. E. Escalas, Journal of Consumer Research (2007) vol.33, pp.421-429

 

Conclusions: This experiment found that:

1. The process of cognitive comparing incoming information with information relevant to the self stored in the memory is activated by highly engaging narratives.

2. The process described in conclusion 1 serves as a distraction from message evaluation, resulting in more positive evaluations of the message source (e.g. the charity) even when advert arguments are weak.

 

Key caveats: This experiment was conducted in laboratory conditions. All participants were American undergraduates.              

 

URL/DOI: 10.1086/510216

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Keywords: story, pronouns, perspective

 

Source: ‘When you and I share perspectives. Pronouns modulate perspective taking during narrative comprehension’, by T. T. Brunyé, T. Ditman, C. R. Mahoney, J. S. Augustyn and H. A. Taylor, Psychological Science (2009) vol. 20. 1, pp. 27-32

 

Conclusions: This study found that

1. In all cases, when reading narratives, readers mentally simulate (i.e. imaginatively conceptualise) the objects and events in that narrative.

2. When reading narratives and mentally simulating objects and events in that narrative, readers embody an actor’s (e.g. protagonist’s) perspective (as opposed to an ‘onlooker’ perspective), and are therefore more’ immersed’ / ‘transported’, when the pronoun ‘I’ or ‘you’ is used.

3. When reading narratives and mentally simulating objects and events in that narrative, readers take an onlooker perspective when ‘he’ or ‘she’ is used.

 

Key caveats: this experiment was conducted in laboratory conditions. All participants were American undergraduates.   

                           

URL/DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02249.x

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Keywords: story, pronouns, perspective


Source: ‘Better You than I: Perspectives and Emotion Simulation During Narrative Comprehension’, by T. T. Brunyé, T. Ditman, C. R. Mahoney and H. A. Taylor, Journal of Cognitive Psychology 23 (No. 5), pp. 659- 666.
 

Conclusions: This study found that
1. Readers created richer imaginative representations of narratives, indicated stronger immersion, when the narrative was written from a perspective using ‘you’ than a perspective using ‘I’. 
2. Readers has stronger emotional reactions to narratives written from a perspective using ‘you’ than a perspective using ‘I’.


Key caveats: This experiment was conducted in laboratory conditions. All participants were American undergraduates.         

                             
URL/DOI: 
10.1080/20445911.2011.559160

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Keywords: story, pronouns, perspective

 

Source: ‘You and I, past and present: Cognitive processing of perspective’, by A. Macrae, Diegesis (2016) vol. 5.1, pp.64-80

 

Conclusions: This study found that there was no statistically significant difference in readers’ immersion in a story whether that story was in the first person (i.e. from a perspective designated by ‘I’) or second person (i.e. from a perspective designated by ‘you’), by measure of how readers imagined the scene described.  

 

Key caveats: This experiment was conducted in laboratory conditions. Most of the participants were undergraduates.        

 

URL/DOI: https://www.diegesis.uni-wuppertal.de/index.php/diegesis/article/download/214/305

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________