Freeman Alexandra L J, Tanase Lisa-Maria, Schneider Claudia R, Kerr John
Winton Centre for Risk & Evidence Communication, DPMMS, University of Cambridge, Wilberforce Road, Cambridge CB3 0WA, UK.
Department of Psychology, University of Cambridge, Downing Street, Cambridge CB2 3EB, UK.
R Soc Open Sci. 2024 Jul 10;11(7):231708. doi: 10.1098/rsos.231708. eCollection 2024 Jul.
Stories have been shown to be engaging and aid the comprehension and retention of information. However, the persuasive power of storytelling is well-recognized. Is this an inherent property? Can a narrative be constructed that helps people engage with information but does not persuade them? We presented participants (= 1309) with information about a fictional new drug and asked them whether they would license it on the basis of this. All saw the same information, in either a bullet-pointed list or as a 'process narrative'-a journalist's 'journey of discovery', designed to avoid persuasive language. Participants rated the narrative format a little more engaging than the non-narrative ( = 0.033, = 0.12) and remembered the information in it slightly better ( = 0.040, = 0.11). They did not rate the narrative version as more persuasive, but those reading it were on average more opposed to licensing the drug than those reading the non-narrative ( < 0.001, = 0.18). Based on participants' responses to other questions, we speculate this may be owing to the increased salience of risks of the drug, arising from subtle differences in wording. Thus, while narratives may have useful properties, they must be carefully constructed to avoid unintentional effects.
研究表明，故事具有吸引力，有助于信息的理解和记忆。然而，讲故事的说服力也得到了广泛认可。这是一种固有属性吗？能否构建一个有助于人们理解信息但不会说服他们的叙述？我们向1309名参与者提供了一种虚构新药的信息，并询问他们是否会据此批准该药物。所有人看到的信息相同，要么是要点列表形式，要么是“过程叙述”——一种记者的“发现之旅”，旨在避免使用有说服力的语言。参与者认为叙述形式比非叙述形式更具吸引力（= 0.033，= 0.12），对其中信息的记忆也稍好一些（= 0.040，= 0.11）。他们并没有认为叙述版本更具说服力，但阅读叙述版本的人平均比阅读非叙述版本的人更反对批准该药物（< 0.001，= 0.18）。根据参与者对其他问题回答，我们推测这可能是由于措辞上的细微差异导致药物风险的显著性增加。因此，虽然叙述可能具有有用的属性，但必须精心构建以避免产生无意的影响。
