A Meta-Analysis Examining the Role of Character-Recipient Similarity in Narrative Persuasion

IF 4.9 1区 文学 Q1 COMMUNICATION Communication Research Pub Date : 2023-10-16 DOI:10.1177/00936502231204834
Meng Chen, Yujie Dong, Jilong Wang
{"title":"A Meta-Analysis Examining the Role of Character-Recipient Similarity in Narrative Persuasion","authors":"Meng Chen, Yujie Dong, Jilong Wang","doi":"10.1177/00936502231204834","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This meta-analysis synthesized 19 empirical articles reporting 123 effect sizes of character-recipient similarity on narrative processing and persuasion outcomes across different contexts, including health, environmental, and social issues. We also aimed to investigate whether the effect magnitude varies depending on how the similarity is operationalized, which perspective is adopted, and what context the narrative persuasion is placed in. The results indicated that, compared to a dissimilar counterpart, a similar character leads to stronger identification ( k = 34, d = 0.14, p < .01) and self-referencing ( k = 12, d = 0.16, p < .01). The effects on transportation ( k = 22, d = 0.13, p = .05) and resistance ( k = 12, d = −0.16, p = .05) were marginally significant. It was also found that the similarity manipulated on chosen demographic and biographic variables like occupation and living place yields the strongest impact among other variables (i.e., innate demographic and biographic variables like age and sex, psychological and behavioral variables like beliefs and behaviors). Furthermore, the similarity effect in narrative persuasion becomes intensified when combined with a first-person perspective and placed in a social issue context. By presenting a synthesis of the existing research, this meta-analytical study sought to identify areas in need of further refinement and outline future investigation directions for narrative persuasion.","PeriodicalId":48323,"journal":{"name":"Communication Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Communication Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00936502231204834","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This meta-analysis synthesized 19 empirical articles reporting 123 effect sizes of character-recipient similarity on narrative processing and persuasion outcomes across different contexts, including health, environmental, and social issues. We also aimed to investigate whether the effect magnitude varies depending on how the similarity is operationalized, which perspective is adopted, and what context the narrative persuasion is placed in. The results indicated that, compared to a dissimilar counterpart, a similar character leads to stronger identification ( k = 34, d = 0.14, p < .01) and self-referencing ( k = 12, d = 0.16, p < .01). The effects on transportation ( k = 22, d = 0.13, p = .05) and resistance ( k = 12, d = −0.16, p = .05) were marginally significant. It was also found that the similarity manipulated on chosen demographic and biographic variables like occupation and living place yields the strongest impact among other variables (i.e., innate demographic and biographic variables like age and sex, psychological and behavioral variables like beliefs and behaviors). Furthermore, the similarity effect in narrative persuasion becomes intensified when combined with a first-person perspective and placed in a social issue context. By presenting a synthesis of the existing research, this meta-analytical study sought to identify areas in need of further refinement and outline future investigation directions for narrative persuasion.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
叙事说服中人物-接受者相似性作用的元分析
本荟萃分析综合了19篇实证文章,报告了在不同背景下,角色-接受者相似性对叙事处理和说服结果的123个效应大小,包括健康、环境和社会问题。我们还旨在探讨影响大小是否取决于相似性的操作方式,采用哪种视角,以及叙事说服所处的背景。结果表明,与不同性状的对照品相比,相似性状的对照品具有更强的识别性(k = 34, d = 0.14, p <.01)和自我参考(k = 12, d = 0.16, p <. 01)。对移栽(k = 22, d = 0.13, p = 0.05)和抗性(k = 12, d = - 0.16, p = 0.05)的影响具有统计学意义。研究还发现,在选定的人口统计学和传记变量(如职业和居住地)上操纵的相似性在其他变量(即年龄和性别等先天人口统计学和传记变量,信仰和行为等心理和行为变量)中产生的影响最大。此外,与第一人称视角相结合并置于社会问题语境中,叙事说服中的相似性效应会得到强化。通过对现有研究的综合,本荟萃分析研究试图确定需要进一步完善的领域,并概述叙事说服的未来调查方向。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Communication Research
Communication Research COMMUNICATION-
CiteScore
17.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
20
期刊介绍: Empirical research in communication began in the 20th century, and there are more researchers pursuing answers to communication questions today than at any other time. The editorial goal of Communication Research is to offer a special opportunity for reflection and change in the new millennium. To qualify for publication, research should, first, be explicitly tied to some form of communication; second, be theoretically driven with results that inform theory; third, use the most rigorous empirical methods; and fourth, be directly linked to the most important problems and issues facing humankind. Critieria do not privilege any particular context; indeed, we believe that the key problems facing humankind occur in close relationships, groups, organiations, and cultures.
期刊最新文献
The Impacts of Code-Mixing in a Cross-Cultural Narrative: How Processing Fluency Impacts Narrative Engagement and Attitudes Toward Out-Groups Developing and Validating a 15-Item True/False Measure of News Literacy Knowledge Examining How Sex Appeal Cues and Strength Cues Influence Impressions of Female Video Game Characters The Effects of Social Approval Signals on the Production of Online Hate: A Theoretical Explication Living in a (Mediated) Political World: Mindfulness, Problematic News Consumption, and Political Hostility
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1