Data from: Characters matter: how narratives shape affective responses to risk communication

Introduction Whereas scientists depend on the language of probability to
relay information about hazards, risk communication may be more effective
when embedding scientific information in narratives. The persuasive power
of narratives is theorized to reside, in part, in narrative
transportation. Purpose This study seeks to advance the science of stories
in risk communication by measuring real-time affective responses as a
proxy indicator for narrative transportation during science messages that
present scientific information in the context of narrative. Methods This
study employed a within-subjects design in which participants (n = 90)
were exposed to eight science messages regarding flood risk. Conventional
science messages using probability and certainty language represented two
conditions. The remaining six conditions were narrative science messages
that embedded the two conventional science messages within three story
forms that manipulated the narrative mechanism of character selection.
Informed by the Narrative Policy Framework, the characters portrayed in
the narrative science messages were hero, victim, and victim-to-hero.
Natural language processing techniques were applied to identify and rank
hero and victim vocabularies from 45 resident interviews conducted in the
study area; the resulting classified vocabulary was used to build each of
the three story types. Affective response data were collected over 12
group sessions across three flood-prone communities in Montana. Dial
response technology was used to capture continuous, second-by-second
recording of participants’ affective responses while listening to each of
the eight science messages. Message order was randomized across sessions.
ANOVA and three linear mixed-effects models were estimated to test our
predictions. Results First, both probabilistic and certainty science
language evoked negative affective responses with no statistical
differences between them. Second, narrative science messages were
associated with greater variance in affective responses than conventional
science messages. Third, when characters are in action, variation in the
narrative mechanism of character selection leads to significantly
different affective responses. Hero and victim-to-hero characters elicit
positive affective responses, while victim characters produce a slightly
negative response. Conclusions In risk communication, characters matter in
audience experience of narrative transportation as measured by affective
responses.