Narratives may outperform argument-based messages in certain situations, notably because they are thought to exert unique influence via particular mediational pathways. The present study tested three sets of potential mediators (believability, counterarguing, emotional reaction) of the relationship between message modality (narrativevs. argument-based) and the outcome of purchase intentions. Participants (N = 214) were randomly assigned to view one of four advertisements from two brands featuring narrativeor argument-based messages and completed measures of purchase intentions, believability, counterarguing, and emotional reactions to the ad. As hypothesized, narratives increased intentions compared to non narratives. Single moderated mediation models supported the mediating contribution of the completeness dimension of believability, counterarguing, negative and positive affective reaction. A combined moderated mediation model provided further support for positive affect as a mediator. Results provide evidence for several theorized mechanisms of narrative persuasion and illustrate an approach to evaluating multiple mediators in comparative message research.

中文翻译：

---

比较基于叙事和论据的信息的中介途径：可信度，反议论和情感反应†

在某些情况下，叙事可能会胜过基于论点的消息，尤其是因为它们被认为通过特定的中介途径发挥了独特的影响。本研究测试了三组潜在的中介体（可信度，反驳，情绪反应），这些中介体是消息语态（叙述与论据的基础）与购买意图的结果之间的关系。随机分配参与者（N = 214），以查看来自两个品牌的四个广告之一，这些广告具有叙述性或基于争论的信息，并能完整衡量购买意向，可信度，反驳和对广告的情感反应。如假设的那样，与非叙事相比，叙事增加了意图。单一主持的调解模型支持可信度完整性维度的调解作用，正面，负面和正面的情感反应。组合式调解模型为作为调解人的积极影响提供了进一步的支持。结果为叙事说服的几种理论化机制提供了证据，并说明了在比较性信息研究中评估多个中介者的方法。