Testing narrative integration and persuasion focus in prosocial health communication: an extended model of organ donation

Abstract

[EMBARGOED UNTIL 5/1/2023] This study explored how narratives can be used to address misperceptions and promote prosocial health behavior. In a 2 (narrative integration: high vs. low) x 2 (persuasion focus: egoistic vs. altruistic) plus one control condition with 2 (message repetitions: medical mistrust vs. bodily integrity) online between-subjects experiment (N = 438), this study examined how narrative integration and persuasion focus influence people's perceived barriers and benefits to organ donation registration, perceived closeness to narrative character, psychological reactance, and, in turn, influence people's attitudes, perceived subjective norms, behavioral intentions, and finally, actual organ donation registration behavior. Results revealed narrative (vs. non-narrative) correctives generated less psychological reactance and more favorable attitudes. High-integrated narrative correctives outperformed low-integrated narrative correctives in all above outcome variables. Altruistic- (vs. egoistic-) focused narratives produced more narrative engagement, greater perceived closeness to characters, and less psychological reactance. The model predicted significant actual registration behavior only within altruistic people. The findings from this study added to the literature on narrative persuasion by deepening the understanding of narrative integration and verifying the effectiveness of using narrative to overcome health misinformation and promote prosocial health behavior. I recommend that health professionals use high-integrated narratives to address misinformation and promote organ donor registration within altruistic people to maximize the campaign effects.