Dissertation Defence: Why are narratives persuasive? An experimental test of a fundamental claim of narrative transportation theory

Zakary Draper, supervised by Dr. Elena Nicoladis, will defend their dissertation titled “Why are narratives persuasive? An experimental test of a fundamental claim of narrative transportation theory” in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Psychological Science.

An abstract for Zakary Draper’s dissertation is included below.

Examinations are open to all members of the campus community as well as the general public. Registration is not required for in-person exams.

Abstract

Canada’s Indian Residential School (IRS) program took Indigenous children away from their families and communities for the explicit purpose of eliminating Indigenous culture. Because of the IRS program and other past and present policies of the Canadian government and other institutions, Indigenous Peoples in Canada suffer disproportionate harm. There is a need for Canadians to engage in reconciliation to repair the harm the IRS system and other policies have caused.

Reconciliation begins with learning about the past. History can be conveyed through narrative and expository messages. Narrative messages share history by representing stories. Expository messages primarily use arguments and rhetoric to convey their ideas. These two message types may both change beliefs and inspire action, but according to narrative transportation theory, they do so for different reasons. Narrative transportation theory posits that narratives engage readers’ imaginations, attention, and emotions in a convergent cognitive process referred to as transportation, and that transportation is what makes narratives persuasive.

Prior research has concluded support for the basic claim of narrative transportation theory that narratives are persuasive because they are transporting. These studies, however, have methodological flaws that preclude strong conclusions. The claim that narratives are persuasive because they are transporting is a claim of causal mediation (narratives cause transportation and then transportation causes persuasion). Testing causal mediation requires controlling for confounding between independent variable and mediator and between mediator and dependent variable. Existing studies do not control for confounding between mediator (transportation) and outcome (persuasion), meaning that estimates of mediation are likely inflated.

This dissertation conducted a direct test of mediation that controlled for this confounding by experimentally manipulating both narrative and transportation. Results indicated that narrative causes transportation; however, findings did not suggest that narratives were persuasive because of transportation. These findings challenge the basic claim of narrative transportation theory. This dissertation conducted a direct test of mediation that controlled for this confounding by experimentally manipulating both narrative and transportation. Results indicated that narrative causes transportation; however, findings did not suggest that narratives were persuasive because of transportation. These findings challenge the basic claim of narrative transportation theory.