514414

research-article2014
JMQXXX10.1177/1077699013514414Journalism & Mass Communication QuarterlyShen et al.

Shaping Perspectives on News

Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly
2014, Vol. 91(1) 98­–117
Stories that Count: © 2014 AEJMC
Reprints and permissions:
Influence of News sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/1077699013514414
Narratives on Issue jmcq.sagepub.com

Attitudes

Fuyuan Shen1, Lee Ahern1, and Michelle Baker1

Abstract
This paper examines the impact of using narratives to frame a political issue on
individuals’ attitudes. In an experiment, we asked participants to read either narrative
or informational news articles that emphasized the potential economic benefits or
environmental consequences associated with shale gas drilling. Results indicated
both news formats (narrative vs. informational) and frames (environmental vs.
economic) had significant immediate effects on issue attitudes and other responses;
narrative environmental news had a significantly greater impact than informational
environmental news. Cognitive responses and empathy were significant partial
mediators of narrative impact. Environmental narratives also had a more significant
impact on individuals’ delayed issue attitudes.

Keywords
news narratives, narrative transportation, framing, communication, theory

In recent years, scholars in mass communication have consistently found that news
framing can have a profound impact on individuals’ opinions and attitudes toward
social and political issues.1 By highlighting certain attributes of issues, news frames
elevate the accessibility of these elements in individuals’ deliberations and decision-
making.2 Researchers have explored news framing effects for a variety of issues using
both experiments and surveys.3 Most of the studies employed emphasis framing

1The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA

Corresponding Author:
Fuyuan Shen, College of Communications, The Pennsylvania State University, 22 Carnegie Building,
University Park, PA 16802, USA.
Email: fshen@psu.edu

Downloaded from jmq.sagepub.com by eman hosny on May 31, 2015

Shen et al. 99

whereby the media highlighted selected attributes of issues while de-emphasizing oth-
ers. Less explored, however, is how the use of narratives might change news framing
effects.
Narratives are the stories people tell. The use of narratives is everywhere—in the
news, in entertainment, in advertising, and in popular culture. The study of narratives
has intrigued scholars in communication, psychology, and other disciplines in recent
years. From character profiles to investigative reports, the use of narratives in journal-
istic reporting has been with us for a long time. Journalists routinely frame issues
through the use of narratives. In fact, news narratives have long been considered effec-
tive journalistic tools that can appeal to readers.4 As Mark Kramer noted,5 narrative
techniques can enhance the quality of news reporting and thereby engage readers.
However, news narratives and their impacts on attitudes toward social and political
issues have remained under-explored in research.
The present study is designed to explore the psychological effects of news narra-
tives on individuals. More specifically, it examines how the use of narrative news in
framing a political issue influences individuals’ attitudes and related affective and
cognitive responses. To do that, we conducted an experiment whereby newspaper
articles about gas drilling in the Marcellus Shale were created to frame the issue in
terms of the potential environmental or economic consequences—using either narra-
tive or informational news reports. After participants read the articles, they were asked
to complete measures of cognitive responses, empathy, transportation, and issue
attitudes.
Our study contributes to the existing research by examining narratives’ effects
within the context of news framing of social and political issues, and by identifying the
mechanisms or mediating variables underlying their effects on issue attitudes. In addi-
tion, this study examines not only the immediate impact of news narratives, but also
their delayed influences on issue attitudes—measured after a twenty-four-hour delay.
With the exception of one study,6 findings regarding narratives’ influences in several
related disciplines are typically based on immediate measures of individual responses.
By measuring the delayed impact of news narratives, we seek to understand the extent
to which narratives’ influences persist over time.

Conceptual Background
According to Gamson,7 framing is the process by which the mass media define and
construct issues by emphasizing certain dimensions to the exclusion of others. News
frames can exert profound influences on how individuals understand and interpret
issues. Studies have found, for example, that the media’s emphasis on a subset of
potentially relevant considerations may cause individuals to focus on these consider-
ations when formulating their opinions.8 This is mainly because information made
available in the media remains highly accessible in decision-making. Furthermore,
individuals’ limited cognitive capacities will likely prevent them from engaging in
deliberate and thorough information seeking.9 As a result, how the media frame issues
can have profound implications for how individuals think about them.

Downloaded from jmq.sagepub.com by eman hosny on May 31, 2015

100 Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 91(1)

Scholars have previously explored the impact of a variety of frames, including

those associated with responsibilities, consequences, values, and personalization.10
For example, Shen and Edwards11 found that framing the issue of welfare reform in
terms of humanitarian or individualistic values had a significant impact on issue atti-
tudes. Iyengar12 studied the impact of news frames—episodic versus thematic—on
individuals’ attribution of responsibility for social problems. He defined episodic
frames as specific instances for illustrative purposes, and thematic frames as those that
focused on the broad and abstract contexts of the issues.13 Iyengar14 found that televi-
sion’s use of episodic, as opposed to thematic, depictions of issues could elicit indi-
vidualistic attributions of responsibility for issues such as poverty and terrorism.
Subsequently, scholars have also identified individual characteristics as variables that
could moderate framing effects.15
While news frames are the central organizing ideas that serve to provide meanings
on issues and events, narratives in the news can be viewed as the rhetorical structures
or stylistic devices that allow newsmakers to effectively communicate the frames.16
However, to our knowledge, the use of narrative as a framing device has not been
explored in prior research. As we mentioned earlier, narratives rely on the use of sto-
ries. A narrative account “requires a story that raises unanswered questions, presents
unresolved conflicts, or depicts not yet completed activity; characters may encounter
and then resolve a crisis or crises.”17 While some past studies have explored the use of
exemplars, episodic frames, or human interest frames in communication research, nar-
ratives are unique in that they are stories complete with characters, plots, and causal
relationships. Exemplars, by contrast, are generally considered as case descriptions or
specifications of single incidents in a social phenomenon.18 Although they are similar
to narratives in several aspects, exemplars are often treated as evidence types, in direct
contrast to base-rate information that forms the general descriptions of people or
things involved in a social phenomenon.
Social psychologists have found in recent years that narratives exert both cognitive
and affective influences on individuals.19 Narratives differ from nonnarratives, such as
rhetorical arguments in both structure and content, and as such they have different
impacts on individuals.20 Structurally, narratives are stories with plots and sequences
of events. The intent is often not to persuade, but to inform and entertain. As a result,
they have the unique ability to mentally involve readers by transporting them into the
narrative world, and to elicit emotional reactions. Transportation into a narrative world
is defined as a natural convergence of one’s “attention, imagery, and feelings focused
on story events.”21 It is similar to absorption or immersion in the narrative world.
Furthermore, the content of narratives is often more difficult to discount.22 Narratives
often relay the real or plausible life experiences of others that are hard to disagree with
or to dispute. They typically do not contain explicit arguments for readers to refute.23
This means that narratives can often diminish individuals’ motivation or need to
engage in message counterarguing and increase the positive thoughts associated with
story themes.
Given these unique attributes of narratives and their frequent use in news reporting,
it is important that we understand their impact in the framing of issues. The present

Downloaded from jmq.sagepub.com by eman hosny on May 31, 2015

Shen et al. 101

study examines the impact of framing and narratives by focusing on drilling for gas in
the Marcellus Shale, a controversial issue that pits the interest of the gas-drilling
industry against environmental advocates and some citizens’ groups. A quick analysis
of the local media’s coverage suggested that news reports of the issue converge on two
major themes: one focusing on the potential job creation and economic benefits of
shale gas drilling, and the other on the potential environmental consequences associ-
ated with drilling. The issue of gas drilling is appropriate for this study for two addi-
tional reasons. First, at the time of the study, it was a relatively new and unfamiliar
issue that did not have any deeply entrenched core values associated with it (individual
attitudes toward drilling are even less likely to be deep-seated among college stu-
dents). Second, the pros and cons of drilling for shale gas were continuing to be played
out in the media at the time of the study. Surveys suggested that citizens’ opinions and
attitudes regarding the economic gains and environmental costs of drilling for gas
remained divided and volatile.24

Hypotheses and Research Questions

As mentioned earlier, narratives are distinct from nonnarratives in enabling readers to
immerse themselves in the storylines.25 Consequently, readers are likely to change
attitudes via two means: they are likely to identify and develop emotional connections
with the characters, and they are likely to increase positive thoughts and reduce coun-
terarguments.26 Entertainment-education narratives have been found to lead to trans-
portation, reduced counterarguing, and character identification.27 Slater28 reported that
subjects made no counterarguments after reading a short story about the consequences
of underage drinking. More recently, Mazzocco, Green, Sasota, and Jones29 used nar-
ratives and rhetorical articles to describe two issues—tolerance for gays, and the suc-
cess of affirmative action. They found that for transportable individuals, narratives had
a significant impact on their attitudes toward both issues.30
Based on prior research on narrative transportation, we therefore expect that for the
issue of gas drilling in the Marcellus Shale, using narratives to describe the potential
environmental consequences or the economic benefits would likely transport the read-
ers into the narrative story, and generate more favorable cognitive responses, as well
as empathy. As a result, those exposed to narratives will more likely develop frame-
consistent issue attitudes. In other words, those exposed to the narrative environmental
news reports would be more likely to oppose drilling. Conversely, those who read the
narrative economic news would be more likely to support drilling. Therefore,

H1: Narrative news will have a stronger impact on individuals than informational
news reports, such that those exposed to narrative reports are (a) more likely to
change issue attitudes and report more favorable cognitive responses and (b) more
likely to report a higher level of transportation and empathy.

Are narratives more likely to have an enduring effect on attitudes than nonnarra-
tives? Although no prior studies have examined the endurance of attitude change after

Downloaded from jmq.sagepub.com by eman hosny on May 31, 2015

102 Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 91(1)

being exposed to news narratives, scholars have suggested that narratives could result
in stronger attitudes than nonnarrative messages.31 This is because by transporting the
audience into stories, narratives have the unique ability to engage the audience both
affectively and cognitively. As a result, narrative evidence and associated information
are often easier to imagine and recall, and less susceptible to “discounting and
diminution.”32
Studies in related areas have presented evidence confirming the long-term effects
of vivid information that characterizes narratives. Appel and Richter,33 for example,
found that information in a fictional narrative had a long-term impact on persuasion
even after a two-week delay. Furthermore, Zillman, Gibson, Sundar, and Perkins34
showed that the effects of vivid information contained in exemplars were stronger than
pallid information, and remained so over a two-week period. One of the objectives of
the present study is to, therefore, measure individuals’ attitudes toward the issue of gas
drilling twenty-four hours after subjects read the news stories. Based on the above
discussion, we hypothesize here that compared to informational reports, narratives
news will likely result in more persisting attitude change.

H2: Compared to informational reports, narratives will result in stronger impacts

on attitudes after a twenty-four-hour delay.

Researchers in the past have also examined the mechanisms underlying the impact
of narratives on individuals. Generally speaking, scholars recognized that the narra-
tives would lead not only to transportation but also to character identification and
cognitive responses. According to Cohen,35 identification occurs when readers take on
the thoughts and feelings of the characters in the narrative and that a significant part of
identification is empathy. Research by Mazzocco et al.,36 for example, found that nar-
ratives’ impact on attitudes was mediated by empathy toward the characters, but not
by cognitive responses. Others found that transportation into a narrative world led to a
reduction in counterarguing or an increase in favorable cognitive responses.37 Further
evidence was provided by Escalas,38 who found that affective and cognitive responses
mediated transportation’s impact on attitudes. Therefore, part of the purpose of this
paper is to test if narrative news’ impact on individuals’ attitudes will be mediated by
transportation, empathy, and cognitive responses.

RQ1: Do empathy, transportation and cognitive responses mediate the relationship

between news narrative and issue attitude?

Research Method
Design and Participants
The experiment used a 2 × 2 between-subjects factorial design. The two factors were
frames (economic benefits vs. environmental consequences) and news formats (narra-
tive vs. informational). A total of 179 undergraduate students from a major public

Downloaded from jmq.sagepub.com by eman hosny on May 31, 2015

Shen et al. 103

university were recruited to participate in the study in exchange for a small amount of
course credit. Participants were randomly assigned to one of the conditions in small
groups of 20 to 30 participants at a time. Three turned in incomplete surveys, and were
excluded in data analyses.

Procedures
Upon arrival in study sessions, participants were informed that they were to participate
in a news reading study. They were told that they had been randomly assigned to read
a newspaper article purportedly written for a major newspaper in the state and that
they should read it at their normal pace. After reading the article, they were asked to
complete a questionnaire measuring their responses to the article and the issue of gas
drilling. Each session took about twenty minutes. About twenty-four hours after the
initial study, we sent all the participants an email link asking them to complete a brief
follow-up questionnaire containing our delayed issue attitude measure. Of those who
participated in the initial experiment, 90% (N = 162) of subjects completed the delayed
questionnaire.

Manipulations
We manipulated the key variables of news frames and news format by constructing
newspaper articles focusing on the issue of drilling for gas in the Marcellus Shale.
News formats were manipulated by using either a narrative story or informational
news report to describe the issue of drilling. The two frames were the environmental
and economic consequences of drilling. After an informal analysis of recent coverage
of the issue in newspapers and online media, key issue elements, evidence, and exam-
ples were collected for story construction. For both the informational and narrative
formats, the environmental-consequence stories focused on the negative impacts of
fracking in terms of groundwater pollution. Economic-benefit stories focused on the
positive employment outcomes that result from shale development, also for both story
formats (see the appendix for stimuli).
For the informational news report, we used the standard inverted pyramid format
that began with an introductory paragraph that established the issue as a point of con-
flict between opposing social forces (traditional conflict journalism). The next para-
graph summarized a “new study” that provided supporting evidence for one side in the
conflict. Subsequent paragraphs listed specific results and quoted the study author
about the implications for public understanding of the issue. Paragraphs toward the
end of the story reviewed what fracking is and how it relates to the domestic energy
situation (inverted pyramid background information, which by convention is pre-
sented at the end of the story).
Narrative news stories were developed based on the structure outlined by Knobloch
et al.39 and were designed to reflect common narrative elements.40 This structure
begins with an initiating event, followed by exposition, some kind of complication,
and a climax or culmination of events. This structure is well suited to include the com-
mon narrative elements of raising unanswered question(s) or presenting unresolved

Downloaded from jmq.sagepub.com by eman hosny on May 31, 2015

104 Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 91(1)

conflict(s) that are confronted by the character(s), with some sort of outcome or
resolution.
Narrative stories focused on families from the region impacted by shale gas drilling
and began with an initiating event that marked a “major change” for the main charac-
ters. This major change was a positive economic benefit in one framing condition and
a negative environmental consequence in the other. This initiating event presented an
unresolved conflict (what is going to happen next?). The next paragraph began to tell
the backstory of how the family had gotten to that point in their lives, providing per-
sonalizing details and character development (exposition). The complication in the
story was represented by contact with the shale gas developers, and the climax/out-
come was the result of this contact (in one frame, a “house made worthless,” and in the
other, a “new home”).
Factual equivalence was established presenting all four stories as published in the
same newspaper with the same reporter byline.41 All stories were written by two for-
mer journalists. The articles were also of similar length (between 608 and 616 words).

Measurements
Transportation was measured with a twelve-item self-report scale.42 Participants
answered each item on a scale of 1 (not at all) to 7 (very much) (α = .81). Example
items include “I was emotionally involved in the story while viewing it” and “I could
picture myself in the scene of the events described in the article.”
Respondents’ immediate and delayed issue attitudes were measured with two ques-
tions (α = .67). Respondents were asked to indicate, on a scale ranging from 1 (agree
strongly) to 7 (disagree strongly), the extent to which the drilling “brings economic
benefits” and “should be promoted.”
Empathy was measured using a three-term scale (α = .87) about the extent to which
respondents were concerned, compassionate, and sympathetic for the individuals
affected by gas drilling, ranging from 1 (not at all) to 7 (very much).
To measure cognitive responses, we asked respondents to list up to eight thoughts
and code them by indicating whether they were favorable or unfavorable to the major
themes or arguments in the articles. Following Mazzocco et al.,43 we computed a cog-
nitive response index by subtracting negative thoughts from positive thoughts. This
resulted in a cognitive response index that ranges from −8 to +8.
In addition, we measured the perceived credibility of the articles, and participants’
prior exposure to news coverage of the issues. Credibility was measured by a three-
item, seven-point scale that was anchored by not credible/very credible, not believ-
able/very believable, and not truthful/very truthful (α = .80). Exposure to news
coverage was measured by asking participants how often they have “read about the
issue of Marcellus Shale gas drilling recently,” ranging from 1 (never) and 5 (always).

Results
To check our manipulation of frames and news formats, we first asked participants, as
part of the posttest, to evaluate on a seven-point scale, how much the articles

Downloaded from jmq.sagepub.com by eman hosny on May 31, 2015

Shen et al. 105

Table 1.  Means and Standard Deviations of Dependent Variables by Conditions.

Economic frame Environmental frame

Narrative news, Informational Narrative news, Informational
Dependent variables N = 47 news, N = 43 N = 43 news, N = 43
Cognitive response index 0.89 (2.52) 0.47 (2.04) 3.37 (3.25) 2.0 (2.56)
  Immediate issue attitudes 4.78 (0.84) 5.13 (0.90) 3.69 (1.07) 4.42 (1.42)
 Transportation 4.24 (0.83) 3.62 (0.73) 4.54 (0.84) 3.82 (1.02)
 Empathy 0.37 (1.37) 3.96 (1.05) 5.65 (1.00) 4.79 (1.10)

Note. Standard deviations in parentheses.

Table 2.  MANOVA Analysis of Main and Interaction Effects.

Cognitive
Issue attitudes responses Empathy Transportation
  df F F F F
Main effects
  News format 1 11.13*** 5.17* 13.36*** 26.46***
 Frame 1 30.69*** 25.67*** 37.23*** 3.79
  News format × Frame interaction 1 1.38 1.42 1.78 0.17
 Error 172  

Note. MANOVA = Multivariate analysis of variance.

*p <.05. **p <.01. *** p < .001

emphasized “environmental impact” or “economic benefits” of gas drilling. Results

indicated that the economic articles were perceived to have more emphasis on eco-
nomic benefits than the environmental articles, M = 2.49 versus 5.98, t = 15.89, p <
.01. We then asked respondents to indicate on a seven-point scale (1 = story-based,
7 = factual information) the extent to which the news articles were based on a story or
factual information. An independent samples t-test indicated that the narrative news
reports were perceived to be more story-based than the informational report condi-
tions, M = 3.54 versus 5.83, t = 9.12, p < .01. These results confirmed our manipula-
tions of the stimuli were successful.
Means and standard deviations of the dependent variables across the experimental
conditions are listed in Table 1. H1 posits that compared to the informational news
report, the narrative news reports will have a significant impact on transportation,
empathy, and participants’ cognitive responses, as well as their issue attitudes. To test
the hypothesis, we conducted a MANOVA analysis with issue attitude, cognitive
responses, transportation, and empathy as dependent variables, and frames and news
formats as the independent variables. Results indicated that both news formats, Wilks’s
Λ = .80, F(4, 169) = 10.35, p < .001, partial η2 = .20, and frames, Wilks’s Λ = .71, F(4,
169) = 18.66, p < .001, partial η2 = .31, had significant main effects on the dependent
variables (see Table 2). The interaction between news formats and frames was not

Downloaded from jmq.sagepub.com by eman hosny on May 31, 2015

106 Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 91(1)

significant. Analysis of the simple effects indicated that reading the narrative news
reports led to more empathy, M = 4.98 versus 4.38, p < .001; less favorable attitudes
to drilling, M = 4.26 versus 4.78, p < .01; more favorable cognitive responses, M =
2.08 versus 1.23, p < .01; and more transportation, M = 4.38 versus 3.72, p < .001, than
reading the informational news reports. Framing the issue of drilling in terms of envi-
ronmental consequences, as opposed to economic benefits, led to more empathy, M =
5.22 versus 4.18, p < .001; more negative drilling attitude, M = 4.05 versus 4.94, p <
.01; more favorable cognitive responses, M = 2.67 versus 0.69, p < .01; but no signifi-
cant impact on transportation, M = 4.18 versus 3.94, p > .05.
Further analysis indicated that narrative environmental news had a more signifi-
cant effect on issue attitude than the informational environmental news, M = 3.69
versus 4.42, p < .01. However, narrative and informational economic news did not
result in significant differences in issue attitudes, M = 4.78 versus 5.13, p > .05. These
findings provide some support for H1. They suggest that narrative environmental
news had significant effects on issue attitudes, cognitive responses, empathy, and
transportation.
Can narrative news have a stronger effect on the persistence of attitudes than infor-
mational news? To test H2, we conducted a univariate ANOVA with the delayed issue
attitude as the dependent variable, and news frames and formats as the independent
variables. Results indicated that both frames, F(3, 158) = 15.42, p < .001, partial η2 =
.09, and formats, F(3, 158) = 8.73, p < .01, partial η2 = .05, had significant impact on
the delayed issue attitude measure. The interaction between the two was also signifi-
cant, F(3, 158) = 7.81, p < .01, partial η2 = .05. This is because those exposed to the
environmental narrative had significantly more negative delayed attitude toward drill-
ing than those exposed to the environmental informational news, M = 3.85 versus
4.75. Narrative and informational news on economic benefits did not differ from each
other on delayed attitudes, M = 4.91 versus 4.93. These results provided partial sup-
port for H2. They indicated that the narrative story had a more enduring effect on issue
attitudes, but only when it covered the environmental consequences of drilling.
Is narrative impact mediated by empathy, cognitive responses, or transportation?
To answer RQ1, we conducted path analysis to examine the extent to which cognitive
responses, transportation, and empathy mediated narrative news’ impact. We used
structural equation modeling with maximum likelihood estimation to evaluate the
paths in our conceptual model (see Figure 1). Because narrative news focusing on the
environmental consequences of shale drilling had significant effects on the immediate
issue attitudes, we decided to test its direct effect on issue attitudes as well as its indi-
rect effects as mediated by empathy, transportation, and cognitive responses. We
coded the independent variable as a +1 for the environmental narrative condition and
as −1 for all other conditions. We assessed model fit by using these goodness-of-fit
statistics: the chi-square statistic (χ2), comparative fit index (CFI), and root mean
square error of approximation (RMSEA).
Our initial model testing suggested the conceptual model did not fit the data well,
χ2(3) = 23.28, p <. 001, CFI = .84, RMSEA = .20. An inspection of the paths in the
model suggested that the path between transportation to issue attitude was negligent
and insignificant, β = −.03, p = .67. We then modified our model by dropping

Downloaded from jmq.sagepub.com by eman hosny on May 31, 2015

Shen et al. 107

Empathy

Narrative Cognitive Issue

News responses Attitudes

Transportation

Figure 1.  Conceptual path model.

.43** Empathy -.19*

Narrative Cognitive Issue

News responses Attitudes
.31*** -.21**

-.24**

Figure 2.  Final path model.

Note. News reports were coded 1 for narrative environmental news, and −1 for all other conditions.
*p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

transportation as a mediator. The re-specified model (see Figure 2) resulted in a good

fit with the data, χ2(1) = 1.01, p = .32, CFI = 1.0, RMSEA = .01.
The revised model thus suggested that narrative environmental news had a significant
direct effect on issue attitude, β = −.27, p < .01. Narrative environmental news had a
significant direct path to more favorable cognitive responses, β = .43, p < .01, and empa-
thy, β = .21, p < .001, suggesting the exposure to such environmental narrative news led
to more empathetic feelings and increased favorable thoughts. Cognitive responses, β =
−.21, p < .01 and empathy, β = −.19, p < .05, in turn had significant effects on issue
attitudes. To test the significance of the mediating variables, we ran bootstrapping pro-
cedures using 2,000 samples and bias-corrected confidence intervals. Results indicated

Downloaded from jmq.sagepub.com by eman hosny on May 31, 2015

108 Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 91(1)

that the indirect effect of narrative news via empathy and cognitive response was signifi-
cant, β = −.15, 90% confidence interval (CI) = [−.23, −.09], p < .001.
We ran additional analyses to see if transportation would partially mediate the
impact of narratives on empathy or cognitive responses, which then would affect issue
attitudes. Results showed that transportation significantly predicted only empathy, β =
.42, p < .001, but not cognitive responses. A subsequent two-step path model with
transportation and empathy as the partial mediating variables did not turn out to be a
good fit for the data, χ2(2) = 23.57, p < .001; CFI = .78; RMSEA = .25.
These results showed that exposure to the environmental narrative reports had a
direct effect on respondents’ opposition to shale gas drilling, and an indirect effect via
favorable cognitive responses and empathy. In other words, part of the reason that nar-
rative environmental news was effective was that it increased readers’ empathy with
the characters in the story and increased their favorable cognitive responses. Empathy
and frame-consistent thoughts in turn led to decreased support for shale gas drilling.
Given the above results, readers may wonder if prior exposure to news coverage of
the issue or the perceived credibility of the articles may account for the differences in
attitudes toward drilling. We thus conducted further analyses to explore these alterna-
tive explanations. Results suggested that prior exposure to related news did not have a
significant impact on issue attitudes, F = 2.89, p > .05. Nor did it affect the impact of
news formats and frames on the dependent variables as discussed earlier. We then
explored if narrative news was perceived to be more credible than informational news
or vice versa. Follow-up ANOVAs indicated that neither frames, F = 3.45, p > .05, nor
news formats, F = 0.26, p > .05, had any significant main effects or interaction effects,
F = 1.42, p > .05, on the perceived credibility of the articles. These additional results
revealed that the impact of narrative news found in the study was unrelated to either
prior exposure or perceived credibility of the articles.

Conclusion
This study examines the impact of news formats and frames on individuals’ issue
attitudes and other responses. It contributes to the existing literature in several ways.
First, it examines how the use of narrative as a framing device in news reporting might
affect issue attitudes. Second, we explore the cognitive and affective mechanisms
mediating such news framing effects. As such, it goes beyond the cognitive processes
that prior research has relied on to account for news framing effects. Finally, our study
contributes to the understanding of narrative news effects by exploring the extent to
which narrative impact on attitudes would persist over time.
Results from our experiment indicated that although news frames and formats had
some significant main effects on issue attitudes, cognitive responses, empathy, and
transportation, the impact was particularly significant only for those in the environ-
mental narrative news condition. This suggests that narrative news focusing on nega-
tive consequences of issues is particularly effective in evoking empathetic feelings and
generating supportive responses. Furthermore, we found that the impact of narrative
news on issue attitudes was partially mediated by empathy toward the individuals
affected, as well as participants’ favorable cognitive responses.

Downloaded from jmq.sagepub.com by eman hosny on May 31, 2015

Shen et al. 109

The significance of the partial mediators suggests that the mechanisms under-
lying news framing effects can be not only cognitive, but also affective. Past
research has mostly regarded the meditational mechanisms of news frames as
cognitively based—with accessibility of considerations or belief importance as
the principal mediating variables.44 Our study revealed that, with the inclusion of
narratives as a framing device, news coverage of issues could also induce empa-
thetic feelings, which in turn contributed to the impact of media frames on
attitudes.
In addition to the immediate effects, we also found that narrative news and
frames had significant interaction effects on delayed issue attitudes. More specifi-
cally, narratives framing the issue in terms of environmental consequences had a
significant effect on issue attitudes after a twenty-four-hour delay. Narratives
focusing on the potential negative consequences of an issue position were found to
have significant long-term effects on individuals’ attitudes. Narratives on the ben-
eficial outcomes of drilling, however, had no significant impact on delayed issue
attitudes. It thus appears that the combined use of narratives and negative conse-
quences have the ability to generate relatively enduring effects on individuals’ atti-
tudes. While it is true that the use of narratives is important in news reporting as
suggested by Kramer,45 our study suggested that stories focusing on the negative
environmental consequences had a stronger and more enduring impact than posi-
tive stories.
The significant effect of narrative environmental news observed here might be
a result of the asymmetric influence of negative and positive information within
the stimuli. As research in psychology has indicated, negative information is gen-
erally more salient and more likely to be elaborated upon than positive informa-
tion.46 As a result, negative stimuli, such as the environmental narratives in our
study, tend to have more potent and longer lasting effects than their positive
counterparts.47
Although this study provided some important findings, it has limitations that
should be recognized. First, this study used one single issue to explore the effects
of frames and narratives in a lab experiment. As such, it is not known if the findings
can be extended to other issues. Second, the narrative and informational news
reports in the study contained slightly different information on the outcomes of oil
drilling. Such differences may lead to different responses by readers. Last, but not
least, some of the measures used in the study can be further improved. Our issue
attitude measure, for example, relied on only two items and thus may not be broad
enough to have captured all responses. Our manipulation check can also benefit
from the use of multiple items. Future research in this area can thus strengthen the
external and internal validity by focusing on other political issues, and exploring
alternative ways of measuring responses and manipulating the stimulus material.
This will provide important additional insights on the influence of news narratives
in issue framing.

Downloaded from jmq.sagepub.com by eman hosny on May 31, 2015

110 Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 91(1)

Appendix
Stimulus A (Environmental Consequence Frame/Narrative News
Format, 614 Words)
Gas Exploration Changes Lives in Western PA
Thursday, December 1, 2011
By Marc Schmit, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
PITTSBURGH—A year ago, Craig and Julie Sauer were preparing dinner in their
home in Dimock, PA, when something unusual happened. Craig was filling a pot of
water to boil potatoes when he detected a strange smell. Moments later, the water from
the tap began to turn brown. The Sauers looked at each other in shock. They had never
had a problem with their well-water before—but the water filling the pot was clearly
undrinkable.
According to Julie, that day marked the beginning of major changes for their family.
A week before their water supply began to go bad, the Sauers were working on reno-
vating their modest home on tree-canopied Carter Road, when a man knocked on their
door. He represented Houston-based Cabot Oil & Gas, a midsize player in the energy-
exploration industry. He wanted to talk to them about leasing the mineral rights to
their three and a half acres of land.
“He said most of the land-owners in the area had already signed, including our closest
neighbor,” Julie recalled. “Their property meets ours just beyond the creek behind the
barn. It is practically our back yard.”
The Sauers were offered $2,500 per acre for mineral development rights. It was well
more than most people in the county were getting, Craig discovered, but they still
refused to sign. “We moved here for the natural setting and pure environment,” Craig
explained. “We just couldn’t bring ourselves to sign away what we had come here to
experience.”
Just a few months ago, everything had seemed ideal with the Sauers’ new home. They
had taken their time looking for the perfect place in which to raise their two young
children and four dogs, and they felt they had finally found it.
But drilling operations near their property changed all that. On a site only 350 yards
from their property, old-growth forest was cleared and the ground leveled to make
room for 24-hour drilling operations.
“We could feel the earth beneath our home shake whenever the well was fracked,”
Craig said.
Over time, their water became so corrosive that it scarred dishes in their dishwasher
and stained laundry. “It was so bad sometimes that my daughter would have to get out
of the shower and lay on the floor because she was dizzy from the chemicals in the
water,” Craig said. She didn’t speak up about it for a while, because she wondered
whether she was imagining the problem. But she wasn’t the only one in the family
suffering.
“My son had sores up and down his legs from the water,” Craig said. Craig and Julie
also experienced frequent headaches and dizziness.

Downloaded from jmq.sagepub.com by eman hosny on May 31, 2015

Shen et al. 111

By October 2011, the Department of Environmental Protection had taken all the water
wells in the Sauers’ neighborhood offline. It acknowledged that a major contamination
of the aquifer had occurred. In addition to methane, dangerously high levels of iron
and aluminum were found in the Sauers’ water.
The Sauers now rely on water delivered to them every week by Cabot. The value of
their land has been decimated. Their children no longer take showers at home. They
desperately want to move but cannot afford to buy a new house on top of their current
mortgage.
“The drilling has made our land worthless,” Craig said. “Who is going to buy this
house?”
Pennsylvania remains divided over the pros and cons of drilling for natural gas in the
Marcellus Shale. While supporters argue that Shale drilling is an essential form of
energy development, critics are concerned that hydraulic fracturing—known as
fracking—damages the environment and contaminates groundwater. The Marcellus
shale formation stretches for 65 million acres across Ohio, West Virginia, western
Pennsylvania, and southern New York.

Stimulus B (Economic Benefit Frame/Narrative News Format,

616 Words)
Gas Exploration Changes Lives in Western PA Thursday, December 1, 2011
By Marc Schmit, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
PITTSBURGH—A year ago, Craig and Julie Sauer were sitting behind the counter of
their struggling diner in Carrollton, PA, when something unusual happened.
A motorcade of cars and trucks angled into the parking spots in front of their restau-
rant. Two dozen men emerged, and moments later, every table was filled. The Sauers
looked at each other in shock. They had never seen so many people in their diner
before—and they didn’t recognize a single one of them.
That day marked the beginning of major changes in clientele for the restaurant. At
first, Julie resented the men with their Southern drawls and thick mud on their boots.
“I hated mopping an extra three times a day,” Julie recalled. “But these guys brought
huge appetites and full wallets with them. I sure didn’t resent that.” She said they
would often order two meals each, and top them off with a slice of her momma’s
homemade pumpkin pie.
Other new customers wore business suits, Craig observed, and seemed just as out of
place. They would spread out maps on the tabletops between their coffee cups, work
their cell phones frantically, and hurry back and forth to the county courthouse across
the street.
“We had heard there would be an increase in business when the developers started to
move in, but this is more than we ever expected,” Craig said.
Before long, the Sauers hung a help-wanted sign in their window. They hired addi-
tional cooks and wait staff in the restaurant, and two new maids for the small hotel
they were trying to start. Louise, a single mother of two, who had been working part
time at the restaurant for the past five years, became a full-time employee.

Downloaded from jmq.sagepub.com by eman hosny on May 31, 2015

112 Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 91(1)

“This is a dream come true,” Louise said. “I even earn overtime when things get
crazy.”
Just a few months ago, Craig feared they would lose the businesses they had worked
so hard to make viable, and the small-town life they had come to love. Craig said they
had been losing money for years, with the persistent unemployment in Carroll County
taking its toll.
But the new regular customers—the rig workers, truckers, engineers, and surveyors
drawn to the region by the boom in natural gas exploration—changed all that. Julie
and Craig affectionately refer to these men as the “gas guys”: the men drilling for natu-
ral gas in the portion of the Marcellus Shale running through Western Pennsylvania—
one of biggest natural gas development opportunities in the world.
“They have been the nicest people,” Julie said. “Extremely courteous and hard-work-
ing. We’re happy they’re here, and they’re happy to be here.”
The Sauers’ hotel is the only one in Carrollton and their restaurant is just a few blocks
away. But good luck booking a room or getting a table. “This is a busy place because
of them,” Craig said, smiling. “We are packed every single day.”
This economic success has led to two exciting new renovations for Julie and Craig.
They have purchased an empty apartment building near their hotel and are modifying
the space into long-term rentals that will be perfect housing for the “gas guys.” And
they have purchased a new home, where they are busy changing the second bedroom
into a nursery.
Their first child is due in a few months.
Pennsylvanians remain divided over the pros and cons of drilling for natural gas in the
Marcellus Shale. While supporters argue that Shale drilling is an essential form of
energy development, critics are concerned that hydraulic fracturing—known as frack-
ing—damages the environment and contaminates groundwater. The Marcellus shale
formation stretches for 65 million acres across Ohio, West Virginia, western
Pennsylvania and southern New York.

Stimulus C (Environmental Consequence Frame/Informational News

Format, 610 Words)
Study Shows that Gas Exploration Contaminates Drinking Water
Thursday, December 1, 2011
By Marc Schmit, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
PITTSBURGH—In recent months, Pennsylvania politicians and residents have been
divided over the benefits and impact of drilling for oil in the Marcellus Shale. Some
argue the Shale drilling means more jobs and economic growth for the region. Others
are concerned that drilling techniques such as fracking can damage the environment
and contaminate the drilling water.
But a recent study indicates that methane leaks are contaminating drinking water near
shale gas drilling sites in the northeastern United States, placing a further question
mark over this fast-growing energy source.

Downloaded from jmq.sagepub.com by eman hosny on May 31, 2015

Shen et al. 113

Scientists tested water samples taken from 68 private wells in five counties in
Pennsylvania and New York to explore accusations that “hydro-fracking”—a con-
tested technique to extract shale gas—has contaminated groundwater.
Methane was found in 85 percent of the samples, and at sites within a kilometer (0.6
mile) of active hydraulic-fracturing operations, levels were 17 times higher than in
wells far from such operations, said the study by researchers at Duke University in
North Carolina.
“In these rural areas, almost everybody has a well,” lead author Stephen Osborn said
in an interview. “They are using it for drinking, for their livestock, for agriculture. At
least some of the homeowners who claim that their wells were contaminated by shale
gas extraction appear to be right.”
While some residents have sounded the alarm about running faucets that ignite if a
flame is placed nearby, little is actually known about the health impacts of drinking
methane in the water.
“There is really no literature that addresses that particular issue—the physiological
response—is methane really non-reactive in the body? What are the effects of con-
suming high concentrations of methane?” said Osborne.
The paper found no evidence of contamination from the chemicals used to fracture the
rock or from “produced” water—the wastewater that emerges from the wells after the
shale has been fractured.
Shale gas is found in dense sedimentary rock which is fractured by large volumes of
water, sand, and chemicals that are piped in horizontally at very high pressure.
After the fracturing, large amounts of water return to the surface within a few days,
along with significant amounts of methane, which comprises the bulk of the shale gas.
North America and Europe have witnessed a natural gas boom since about 2007,
buoyed by high prices and fears over the political risks of imported fossil fuels.
Opponents say the technique is environmentally destructive because the methane can
contaminate groundwater and, if leaked to the air, add to the greenhouse effect.
The Duke study, titled “Methane contamination of drinking water accompanying gas-
well drilling and hydraulic fracturing,” was published last month in the peer-reviewed
journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS).
When they fingerprinted the methane—comparing the chemistry of the methane in the
wells with that from natural gas wells in the region—“the signatures matched,” said
Robert Jackson, a study coauthor.
As a gas, methane is flammable and can cause explosions. It can also suffocate
people.
The Duke team collected samples from counties overlying the Marcellus shale forma-
tion. Accelerated gas drilling and hydrofracking in the region in recent years has
fueled concerns about well-water contamination by methane, produced water and
fracking fluids, which contain a proprietary mix of chemicals that companies often
don’t disclose.
According to the U.S. Department of Energy, total domestic production of natural gas
will grow by 20 percent by 2035. Shale gas alone will increase its share of production
from 16 percent in 2009 to 45 percent in 2035.

Downloaded from jmq.sagepub.com by eman hosny on May 31, 2015

114 Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 91(1)

In a separate white paper, the researchers urged an independent medical review of the
effects of ingesting methane and stricter regulation of hydraulic fracturing.

Stimulus D (Economic Benefit Frame/Informational News Format, 608

Words)
Study Shows that Gas Exploration Creates Jobs, Boosts Economy
Thursday, December 1, 2011
By Marc Schmit, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
PITTSBURGH—In recent months, Pennsylvania politicians and residents have been
divided over the benefits and impact of drilling for oil in the Marcellus Shale. Some
argue the Shale drilling means more jobs and economic growth for the region. Others
are concerned that drilling techniques such as fracking can damage the environment
and contaminate the drilling water.
But a recent study indicates that the energy drilling industry is generating many jobs
in Pennsylvania.
The Pennsylvania Department of Labor & Industry said employment in core industries
related to the Marcellus Shale—oil and gas drilling, support and pipeline-related
jobs—more than doubled from the beginning of 2008 to the beginning of 2011, from
9,520 to 20,387.
The study, released earlier this month, said that core Marcellus jobs also pay a much
higher salary than other industries—an average of $76,000 compared to about $46,000.
Kathryn Klaber, president of the Marcellus Shale Coalition, an industry group, said
the Marcellus gas presents a wonderful opportunity.
“This new data further reinforces the undeniable fact that responsible American natu-
ral gas production is an unmatched private sector job creation machine,” Klaber said
in a statement Tuesday.
The Marcellus Shale formation is considered one of the nation’s largest-known natural
gas reservoirs and lies more than a mile underground, primarily beneath Pennsylvania,
New York, West Virginia, and Ohio. Pennsylvania is the center of activity, with more
than 3,000 wells drilled in the past three years and thousands more planned in the com-
ing years.
The study said there were about 214,000 total Marcellus-related jobs in the first quar-
ter, with about 194,000 of those in ancillary industries such as trucking, engineering,
and environmental consulting. However, the report notes that some of those related
companies aren’t involved with Marcellus Shale.
The study also said that areas with significant Marcellus drilling have seen notable
decreases in unemployment.
The study’s statistics surprised even Klaber, the most vocal proponent of Marcellus
Shale drilling as an economic boon to the commonwealth.
There’s been nearly a 1,300 percent increase in core Marcellus industry jobs in the
Northern Tier counties of Bradford, Sullivan, Susquehanna, Tioga and Wyoming
since 2008.The central counties including Lycoming, Clinton, Centre, Columbia and
Northumberland saw an increase of more than 660 percent.

Downloaded from jmq.sagepub.com by eman hosny on May 31, 2015

Shen et al. 115

Employment in the mining and logging sector, which includes Marcellus drilling, has
increased more than 57 percent in the last decade, with more than half that increase
occurring in the last 12 months.
The number of new hires in the first three months of 2011 is nearly double what it was
the same time last year.
With just the 9,000 new hires in the first three months of this year, Klaber said, “If
even a fraction of those were announced by some new company coming in, people
would be falling over themselves. This is happening in multiples of what would have
been done in the past with taxpayer dollars. Here the market economy is doing it
independently.”
By 2020, the Marcellus shale natural gas industry will have created or supported
212,000 Pennsylvania jobs, according to the study.
The study also projects that energy and utility companies will invest $8.8 billion this
year on Marcellus shale exploration, and more than $11 billion in Pennsylvania in
2011.
Overall, more than 70% of these new hires call Pennsylvania home—finding employ-
ment where they are living and raising families.
A recent survey of dozens of Marcellus Shale Company members—including engi-
neering and environmental consulting firms, water treatment experts, and energy pro-
ducers responsible for drilling more than 60 percent of all Marcellus wells in
2010—confirms the study’s data, showing that 74% of all new hires since 2008 have
hailed from Pennsylvania.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship,
and/or publication of this article.

Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of
this article.

Notes
  1. Dennis Chong and James N. Druckman, “Framing Theory,” Annual Review of Political
Science 10 (May 2007): 103-26.
 2. James N. Druckman, “The Implications of Framing Effects for Citizen Competence,”
Political Behavior 23 (September 2001): 225-56.
  3. Porismita Borah, “Conceptual Issues in Framing Theory: A Systematic Examination of a
Decade’s Literature,” Journal of Communication 61 (April 2011): 246-63.
  4. Silvia Knobloch, Grit Patzig, Anna-Maria Mende, and Matthias Hastall, “Affective News:
Effects of Discourse Structure in Narratives on Suspense, Curiosity, and Enjoyment While
Reading News and Novels,” Communication Research 31 (June 2004): 259-87.
  5. Mark Kramer, “Narrative Journalism Comes of Age,” Nieman Reports 54 (fall 2000): 5-8.
  6. Markus Appel and Tobias Richter, “Persuasive Effects of Fictional Narratives Increase
over Time,” Media Psychology 10 (June 2007): 113-34.

Downloaded from jmq.sagepub.com by eman hosny on May 31, 2015

116 Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 91(1)

  7. William A. Gamson, Talking Politics (NY: Cambridge University Press, 1992).

  8. Vincent Price, David Tewksbury, and Elizabeth Powers, “Switching Trains of Thought:
The Impact of News Frames on Readers’ Cognitive Responses,” Communication Research
24 (October 1997): 481-506.
  9. Vincent Price and David Tewksbury, “News Values and Public Opinion: A Theoretical
Account of Media Priming and Framing,” in Progress in the Communication Sciences:
Advances in Persuasion, ed. George A. Barnett and Franklin J. Boster, vol. 13 (NY: Ablex,
1997), 173-212.
10. Patti M. Valkenburg, Holli A. Semetko, and Claes H. de Vreese, “The Effects of News
Frames on Readers’ Thoughts and Recall,” Communication Research 26 (October 1999):
550-69.
11. Fuyuan Shen and Heidi Hatfield Edwards, “Economic Individualism, Humanitarianism, and
Welfare Reform: A Value-Based Account of Framing Effects,” Journal of Communication
55 (December 2005): 795-809.
12. Shanto Iyengar, “Framing Responsibility for Political Issues,” Annals of the American
Academy of Political and Social Science 546 (July 1996): 59-70.
13. Iyengar, “Framing Responsibility for Political Issues.”
14. Iyengar, “Framing Responsibility for Political Issues.”
15. Borah, “Conceptual Issues in Framing Theory.”
16. William A. Gamson and Andre Modigliani, “Media Discourse and Public Opinion on
Nuclear Power: A Constructionist Approach,” American Journal of Sociology 95 (July
1989): 1-37; Zhongdang Pan and Gerald M. Kosicki, “Framing Analysis: An Approach to
News Discourse,” Political Communication 10 (January-March 1993): 55-75.
17. Melanie C. Green and Timothy C. Brock, “The Role of Transportation in the Persuasiveness
of Public Narratives,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 79 (November 2000):
701-21.
18. Dolf Zillmann, Rhonda Gibson, S. Shyam Sundar, and Joseph W. Perkins Jr., “Effects of
Exemplification in News Reports on the Perception of Social Issues,” Journalism & Mass
Communication Quarterly 73 (summer 1996): 427-44.
19. Green and Brock, “The Role of Transportation in the Persuasiveness of Public
Narratives.”
20. Sonya Dal Cin, Mark P. Zanna, and Geoffrey T. Fong, “Narrative Persuasion and
Overcoming Resistance,” in Resistance and Persuasion, ed. Eric S. Knowles and Jay A.
Linn (Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 2004), 175-91.
21. Melanie C. Green, “Narratives and Cancer Communication,” Journal of Communication
56 (August 2006): S163-S183, S164.
22. Cin, Zanna, and Fong, “Narrative Persuasion and Overcoming Resistance”; Michael D.
Slater, “Entertainment Education and the Persuasive Impact of Narratives,” in Narrative
Impact: Social and Cognitive Foundations, ed. Melanie C. Green, Jeffery J. Strange, and
Timothy C. Brock (Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 2002), 157-81.
23. Cin, Zanna, and Fong, “Narrative Persuasion and Overcoming Resistance.”
24. Maurice Carroll, “New York Voters Back Fracking, Despite Concerns,” Quinnipiac
University Poll, August 11, 2011, pp. 1-8.
25. Green, “Narratives and Cancer Communication”; Melanie C. Green and Timothy C. Brock,
“In the Mind’s Eye: Transportation Imagery Model of Narrative Persuasion,” in Narrative
Impact: Social and Cognitive Foundations, ed. Melanie C. Green, Jeffery J. Strange, and
Timothy C. Brock (Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 2002), 315-41.
26. Green, “Narratives and Cancer Communication.”

Downloaded from jmq.sagepub.com by eman hosny on May 31, 2015

Shen et al. 117

27. Emily Moyer-Gusé, “Toward a Theory of Entertainment Persuasion: Explaining the

Persuasive Effects of Entertainment-Education Messages,” Communication Theory 18
(August 2008): 407-25.
28. Slater, “Entertainment Education and the Persuasive Impact of Narratives.”
29. Philip J. Mazzocco, Melanie C. Green, Lo A. Sasota, and Norman W. Jones, “This Story
Is Not for Everyone: Transportability and Narrative Persuasion,” Social Psychological and
Personality Science 1 (October 2010): 361-68.
30. Mazzocco et al., “This Story Is Not for Everyone.”
31. Green, “Narratives and Cancer Communication”; Green and Brock, “In the Mind’s Eye.”
32. Green and Brock, “In the Mind’s Eye,” 337.
33. Appel and Richter, “Persuasive Effects of Fictional Narratives Increase over Time.”
34. Zillmann et al., “Effects of Exemplification in News Reports on the Perception of Social
Issues.”
35. Jonathan Cohen, “Defining Identification: A Theoretical Look at the Identification of
Audiences with Media Characters,” Mass Communication and Society 4 (August 2001):
245-64.
36. Mazzocco et al., “This Story Is Not for Everyone.”
37. John Deighton, Daniel Romer, and Josh McQueen, “Using Drama to Persuade,” Journal
of Consumer Research 16 (December 1989): 335-43; Green and Brock, “The Role of
Transportation in the Persuasiveness of Public Narratives.”
38. Jennifer Edson Escalas, “Imagine Yourself in the Product,” Journal of Advertising 33
(summer 2004): 37-48.
39. Knobloch et al., “Affective News.”
40. Green and Brock, “In the Mind’s Eye.”
41. Knobloch et al., “Affective News.”
42. Green and Brock, “The Role of Transportation in the Persuasiveness of Public Narratives.”
43. Mazzocco et al., “This Story Is Not for Everyone.”
44. Borah, “Conceptual Issues in Framing Theory”; Chong and Druckman, “Framing Theory.”
45. Kramer, “Narrative Journalism Comes of Age.”
46. Roy F. Baumeister, Ellen Bratslavsky, Catrin Finkenauer, and Kathleen D. Vohs, “Bad Is
Stronger than Good,” Review of General Psychology 5 (December 2001): 323-70.
47. Paul Rozin and Edward B. Royzman, “Negativity Bias, Negativity Dominance, and
Contagion,” Personality and Social Psychology Review 5 (November 2001): 296-320.

Downloaded from jmq.sagepub.com by eman hosny on May 31, 2015