IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/policy/v57y2024i3d10.1007_s11077-024-09538-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

COVID-19 memorable messages as internal narratives: stability and change over time

Author

Listed:
  • Rob A. DeLeo

    (Bentley University)

  • Elizabeth A. Shanahan

    (Montana State University)

  • Kristin Taylor

    (Wayne State University)

  • Nathan Jeschke

    (University of Colorado, Denver)

  • Deserai Crow

    (University of Colorado, Denver)

  • Thomas A. Birkland

    (North Carolina State University)

  • Elizabeth Koebele

    (University of Nevada Reno)

  • Danielle Blanch-Hartigan

    (Bentley University)

  • Courtney Welton-Mitchell

    (Colorado School of Public Health)

  • Sandhya Sangappa

    (Bentley University)

  • Elizabeth Albright

    (Duke University)

  • Honey Minkowitz

    (North Carolina State University
    University of Nebraska Omaha)

Abstract

A robust body of research using the Narrative Policy Framework (NPF) has explored the effect of external messages on individual affective responses and behavior, typically at a single point in time. Missing from this micro-level analysis is a careful assessment of the ways in which individuals process information, whether their internal cognitions are communicated in narrative structure, and what the durability of any narrative structure is over time. We address this gap by examining (1) the extent to which individuals recall “memorable messages” in narrative form (e.g., the use of characters and morals) and with what content (e.g., who is cast in these character roles) and (2) whether individuals’ narrative form and content change across time. Memorable messages are pieces of information that are remembered for an extended period of time. We draw on data derived from a multi-wave panel survey of residents in six U.S. states (Colorado, Iowa, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, and Washington) during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. Respondents were asked to recall a memorable message, anything they heard or read that has shaped how they think about the risk of COVID-19. We find that participants articulate recalled memorable messages in narrative form about two-thirds of the time, consistent with how the NPF expects homo narrans to make sense of complex information. However, narratives containing morals are articulated less frequently than those using characters alone. Additionally, individuals’ narrative content changes over time to include new information such as new policy solutions (e.g., mask wearing). Notably, recalled messages lose their narrative form over time.

Suggested Citation

  • Rob A. DeLeo & Elizabeth A. Shanahan & Kristin Taylor & Nathan Jeschke & Deserai Crow & Thomas A. Birkland & Elizabeth Koebele & Danielle Blanch-Hartigan & Courtney Welton-Mitchell & Sandhya Sangappa , 2024. "COVID-19 memorable messages as internal narratives: stability and change over time," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 57(3), pages 519-538, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:kap:policy:v:57:y:2024:i:3:d:10.1007_s11077-024-09538-5
    DOI: 10.1007/s11077-024-09538-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11077-024-09538-5
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11077-024-09538-5?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Adam M. Brewer, 2019. "A Bridge in Flux: Narratives and the Policy Process in the Pacific Northwest," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 36(4), pages 497-522, July.
    2. Deserai A. Crow & Andrea Lawlor, 2016. "Media in the Policy Process: Using Framing and Narratives to Understand Policy Influences," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 33(5), pages 472-491, September.
    3. Roger E. Kasperson & Ortwin Renn & Paul Slovic & Halina S. Brown & Jacque Emel & Robert Goble & Jeanne X. Kasperson & Samuel Ratick, 1988. "The Social Amplification of Risk: A Conceptual Framework," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(2), pages 177-187, June.
    4. Thomas A Birkland & Kristin Taylor & Deserai A Crow & Rob DeLeo, 2021. "Governing in a Polarized Era: Federalism and the Response of U.S. State and Federal Governments to the COVID-19 Pandemic," Publius: The Journal of Federalism, CSF Associates Inc., vol. 51(4), pages 650-672.
    5. Gaspar Mairal, 2008. "Narratives of risk," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(1-2), pages 41-54, January.
    6. Sara K Guenther & Elizabeth A Shanahan, 2020. "Communicating risk in human-wildlife interactions: How stories and images move minds," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(12), pages 1-17, December.
    7. Michael D. Jones, 2014. "Cultural Characters and Climate Change: How Heroes Shape Our Perception of Climate Science," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 95(1), pages 1-39, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hannes R. Stephan, 2020. "Shaping the Scope of Conflict in Scotland’s Fracking Debate: Conflict Management and the Narrative Policy Framework," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 37(1), pages 64-91, January.
    2. Roxanne E. Lewis & Michael G. Tyshenko, 2009. "The Impact of Social Amplification and Attenuation of Risk and the Public Reaction to Mad Cow Disease in Canada," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(5), pages 714-728, May.
    3. Loredana Antronico & Roberto Coscarelli & Francesco De Pascale & Giovanni Gull?, 2018. "La comunicazione del rischio e la percezione pubblica dei disastri: il caso studio della frana di Maierato (Calabria, Italia)," PRISMA Economia - Societ? - Lavoro, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2018(3), pages 9-29.
    4. Dean Neu & Gregory D. Saxton & Abu S. Rahaman, 2022. "Social Accountability, Ethics, and the Occupy Wall Street Protests," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 180(1), pages 17-31, September.
    5. Hung‐Chih Hung & Tzu‐Wen Wang, 2011. "Determinants and Mapping of Collective Perceptions of Technological Risk: The Case of the Second Nuclear Power Plant in Taiwan," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(4), pages 668-683, April.
    6. Robert D. Jagiello & Thomas T. Hills, 2018. "Bad News Has Wings: Dread Risk Mediates Social Amplification in Risk Communication," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(10), pages 2193-2207, October.
    7. Emmanuel Songsore & Michael Buzzelli, 2016. "Ontario’s Experience of Wind Energy Development as Seen through the Lens of Human Health and Environmental Justice," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-18, July.
    8. Sara E. Kuhar & Kate Nierenberg & Barbara Kirkpatrick & Graham A. Tobin, 2009. "Public Perceptions of Florida Red Tide Risks," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(7), pages 963-969, July.
    9. Li Zhao & Shumin Liu & Haiying Gu & David Ahlstrom, 2023. "Risk Amplification, Risk Preference and Acceptance of Transgenic Technology," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-22, September.
    10. Matteo Iacopini & Carlo R.M.A. Santagiustina, 2021. "Filtering the intensity of public concern from social media count data with jumps," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 184(4), pages 1283-1302, October.
    11. Katherine L. Dickinson & Hannah Brenkert-Smith & Greg Madonia & Nicholas E. Flores, 2020. "Risk interdependency, social norms, and wildfire mitigation: a choice experiment," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 103(1), pages 1327-1354, August.
    12. Ruth E Alcock & Jerry Busby, 2006. "Risk Migration and Scientific Advance: The Case of Flame‐Retardant Compounds," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(2), pages 369-381, April.
    13. Vivianne H. M. Visschers & Ree M. Meertens & Wim F. Passchier & Nanne K. DeVries, 2007. "How Does the General Public Evaluate Risk Information? The Impact of Associations with Other Risks," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(3), pages 715-727, June.
    14. Agustin Robles Morua & Kathleen E. Halvorsen & Alex S. Mayer, 2011. "Waterborne Disease‐Related Risk Perceptions in the Sonora River Basin, Mexico," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(5), pages 866-878, May.
    15. Rob Goble, 2021. "Through a Glass Darkly: How Natural Science and Technical Communities Looked at Social Science Advances in Understanding Risk," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 41(3), pages 414-428, March.
    16. Evangelia Karasmanaki & Evangelos Grigoroudis & Spyridon Galatsidas & Georgios Tsantopoulos, 2023. "Satisfaction with Media Information about Renewable Energy Investments," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-15, July.
    17. Yang, Ya Ling, 2020. "Comparison of public perception and risk management decisions of aircraft noise near Taoyuan and Kaohsiung International Airports," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    18. Kévin Nadarajah & Laurent Brun & Stéphanie Bordel & Emeline Ah-Tchine & Anissa Dumesnil & Antoine Marques Mourato & Jacques Py & Laurent Jammes & Xavier Arnauld De Sartre & Alain Somat, 2024. "A Three-Stage Psychosocial Engineering-Based Method to Support Controversy and Promote Mutual Understanding between Stakeholders: The Case of CO 2 Geological Storage," Energies, MDPI, vol. 17(5), pages 1-15, February.
    19. Paul Slovic & James Flynn & Robin Gregory, 1994. "Stigma Happens: Social Problems in the Siting of Nuclear Waste Facilities," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(5), pages 773-777, October.
    20. Harry Otway & Brian Wynne, 1989. "Risk Communication: Paradigm and Paradox," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 9(2), pages 141-145, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:policy:v:57:y:2024:i:3:d:10.1007_s11077-024-09538-5. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.