We conducted an experiment to determine whether a conservation film increased support for conservation and whether transportation and emotion were correlated with shifts in conservation support. Viewers of short and feature-length versions of the conservation film exhibited greater alignment with story-centric beliefs and conservation behavior interest than individuals who viewed a control film. Transportation was correlated with conservation belief alignment and behavior interest; emotion was correlated with behavior interest. This study indicates that even short conservation films can be engaging and persuasive and are potentially powerful tools for generating conservation support among audiences not previously aligned with this topic.
AjzenI. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211.
2.
AlamN.SoJ. (2020). Contributions of emotional flow in narrative persuasion: An empirical test of the emotional flow framework. Communication Quarterly, 68(2), 161–182.
AvraamidouL.OsborneJ. (2009). The role of narrative in communicating science. International Journal of Science Education, 31(12), 1683–1707.
5.
BambergS.MöserG. (2007). Twenty years after Hines, Hungerford, and Tomera: A new meta-analysis of psycho-social determinants of pro-environmental behaviour. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 27(1), 14–25.
6.
BarrS. (2006). Environmental action in the home: Investigating the “value-action” gap. Geography, 91(1), 43–54.
7.
BeattieG.SaleL.McGuireL. (2011). An inconvenient truth? Can a film really affect psychological mood and our explicit attitudes towards climate change?Semiotica, 2011(187), 105–125. https://doi.org/10.1515/semi.2011.066
8.
BezdekM. A.GerrigR. J. (2017). When narrative transportation narrows attention: Changes in attentional focus during suspenseful film viewing. Media Psychology, 20(1), 60–89.
9.
BickfordD.PosaM. R. C.QieL.Campos-ArceizA.KudavidanageE. P. (2012). Science communication for biodiversity conservation. Biological Conservation, 151(1), 74–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2011.12.016
10.
Bieniek-TobascoA.McCormickS.RimalR. N.HarringtonC. B.ShaferM.ShaikhH. (2019). Communicating climate change through documentary film: Imagery, emotion, and efficacy. Climatic Change, 154(1–2), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-019-02408-7
11.
BilandzicH.SukallaF. (2019). The role of fictional film exposure and narrative engagement for personal norms, guilt and intentions to protect the climate. Environmental Communication, 13(8), 1069–1086. https://doi.org/10.1080/17524032.2019.1575259
CeballosG.EhrlichP. R.BarnoskyA. D.GarciaA.PringleR. M.PalmerT. M. (2015). Accelerated modern human-induced species losses: Entering the sixth mass extinction. Science Advances, 1(5), e1400253. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.1400253
14.
ChenT.ChangH.-C. (2017). The effect of narrative transportation in mini-film advertising on reducing counterarguing. International Journal of Electronic Commerce Studies, 8(1), 25–46.
15.
ChenT.LinJ.-S. (2014). Entertainment-education of altruistic behaviors: An empirical study of the effects of the narrative persuasion of a nature conservation film. Chinese Journal of Communication, 7(4), 373–388. https://doi.org/10.1080/17544750.2014.946430
16.
CohenJ. (2001). Defining identification: A theoretical look at the identification of audiences with media characters. Mass Communication and Society, 4(3), 245–264. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327825mcs0403_01
DasE.NobbeT.OliverM. B. (2017). Moved to act: Examining the role of mixed affect and cognitive elaboration in “accidental” narrative persuasion. International Journal of Communication, 11, 4907–4923.
19.
de GraafA.HoekenH.SandersJ.BeentjesH. (2009). The role of dimensions of narrative engagement in narrative persuasion. Communications, 34(4), 385–405. https://doi.org/10.1515/COMM.2009.024
20.
EscalasJ. E. (2004). IMAGINE YOURSELF IN THE PRODUCT: Mental simulation, narrative transportation, and persuasion. Journal of Advertising, 33(2), 37–48. https://doi.org/10.1080/00913367.2004.10639163
21.
GerrigR. J. (1993). Experiencing narrative worlds. Yale University Press.
22.
GreenM. C. (2008). Research challenges: Research challenges in narrative persuasion. Information Design Journal, 16(1), 47–52. https://doi.org/10.1075/idj.16.1.07gre
23.
GreenM. C.BrockT. C. (2000, November). The role of transportation in the persuasiveness of public narratives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79(5), 701–721. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.79.5.701
24.
GreenM. C.BrockT. C. (2002). In the mind’s eye: Transportation-imagery model of narrative persuasion. In GreenM. C.StrangeJ. J.BrockT. C. (Eds.), Narrative impact: Social and cognitive foundations (pp. 315–341). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
25.
GreenM. C.ChathamC.SestirM. A. (2012). Emotion and transportation into fact and fiction. Scientific Study of Literature, 2(1), 37–59. https://doi.org/10.1075/ssol.2.1.03gre
26.
GreenM. C.KassS.CarreyJ.HerzigB.FeeneyR.SabiniJ. (2008). Transportation across media: Repeated exposure to print and film. Media Psychology, 11(4), 512–539.
27.
HoltD. (2016). Branding in the age of social media. Harvard Business Review, 94(3), 40–50.
28.
HowellR. A. (2011). Lights, camera . . . action? Altered attitudes and behaviour in response to the climate change film the age of stupid. Global Environmental Change, 21(1), 177–187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2010.09.004
29.
HowellR. A. (2014). Investigating the long-term impacts of climate change communications on individuals’ attitudes and behavior. Environment and Behavior, 46(1), 70–101. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916512452428
30.
IPCC. (2021). Climate change 2021: The physical science basis. Contribution of working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press.
31.
JacobsenG. D. (2011). The Al Gore effect: An inconvenient truth and voluntary carbon offsets. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 61(1), 67–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeem.2010.08.002
32.
JenkinsC. N.Van HoutanK. S.PimmS. L.SextonJ. O. (2015, April21). US protected lands mismatch biodiversity priorities. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 112(16), 5081–5086. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1418034112
33.
JohnsonB. T.EaglyA. H. (1989). Effects of involvement on persuasion: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 106(2), 290–314.
34.
JonesJ. P. G.Thomas-WaltersL.RustN. A.VeríssimoD. (2019). Nature documentaries and saving nature: Reflections on the new Netflix series Our Planet. People and Nature, 1(4), 420–425. https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10052
35.
KantolaS. J.SymeG. J.NesdaleA. R. (1983). The effects of appraised severity and efficacy in promoting water conservation: An informational analysis. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 13(2), 164–182.
36.
KimH. S.BigmanC. A.LeaderA. E.LermanC.CappellaJ. N. (2012, June1). Narrative health communication and behavior change: The influence of exemplars in the news on intention to quit smoking. Journal of Communication, 62(3), 473–492. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2012.01644.x
37.
KohL. P.DunnR. R.SodhiN. S.ColwellR. K.ProctorH. C.SmithV. S. (2004). Species coextinctions and the biodiversity crisis. Science, 305(5690), 1632–1634.
38.
KreuterM. W.GreenM. C.CappellaJ. N.SlaterM. D.WiseM. E.StoreyD.ClarkE. M.O’KeefeD. J.ErwinD. O.HolmesK.HinyardL. J.HoustonT.WoolleyS. (2007). Narrative communication in cancer prevention and control: A framework to guide research and application. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 33, 221–235. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02879904
39.
LeiserowitzA. A. (2004). Day after tomorrow: Study of climate change risk perception. Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development, 46(9), 22–39. https://doi.org/10.1080/00139150409603663
40.
LoweT.BrownK.DessaiS.de França DoriaM.HaynesK.VincentK. (2006). Does tomorrow ever come? Disaster narrative and public perceptions of climate change. Public Understanding of Science, 15(4), 435–457. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662506063796
MazzoccoP. J.GreenM. C.SasotaJ. A.JonesN. W. (2010). This story is not for everyone: Transportability and narrative persuasion. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 1(4), 361–368. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550610376600
43.
McKinleyC. J. (2013). Reexamining the link between cultivation factors and viewer involvement: Investigating viewing amount as a catalyst for the transportation process. Communication Studies, 64(1), 66–85.
44.
Moyer-GuséE. (2008). Toward a theory of entertainment persuasion: Explaining the persuasive effects of entertainment-education messages. Communication Theory, 18(3), 407–425. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2008.00328.x
45.
Moyer-GuséE.NabiR. L. (2010). Explaining the effects of narrative in an entertainment television program: Overcoming resistance to persuasion. Human Communication Research, 36(1), 26–52. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.2009.01367.x
46.
Moyer-GuséE.TchernevJ. M.Walther-MartinW. (2019). The persuasiveness of a humorous environmental narrative combined with an explicit persuasive appeal. Science Communication, 41(4), 422–441. https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547019862553
47.
NabiR. L. (2002). Discrete emotions and persuasion. In DillardJ. P.PfauM. (Eds.), The persuasion handbook: Developments in theory and practice (pp. 289–308). https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412976046.n15
NabiR. L.GreenM. C. (2015). The role of a narrative’s emotional flow in promoting persuasive outcomes. Media Psychology, 18(2), 137–162.
50.
NabiR. L.GustafsonA.JensenR. (2018). Framing climate change: Exploring the role of emotion in generating advocacy behavior. Science Communication, 40(4), 442–468. https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547018776019
51.
NellV. (1988). Lost in a book: The psychology of reading for pleasure. Yale University Press.
52.
NisbetM. C.ScheufeleD. A. (2009, October). What’s next for science communication? Promising directions and lingering distractions. American Journal of Botany, 96(10), 1767–1778. https://doi.org/10.3732/ajb.0900041
53.
NolanJ. M. (2010). “An inconvenient truth” increases knowledge, concern, and willingness to reduce greenhouse gases. Environment and Behavior, 42(5), 643–658. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0013916509357696
54.
OjalaM. (2012). Hope and climate change: The importance of hope for environmental engagement among young people. Environmental Education Research, 18(5), 625–642. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2011.637157
55.
PetrocikJ. R. (2009). Measuring party support: Leaners are not independents. Electoral Studies, 28(4), 562–572.
56.
PettyR. E.CacioppoJ. T. (1984). The effects of involvement on responses to argument quantity and quality: Central and peripheral routes to persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46(1), 69–81.
57.
PhillipsB. J.McQuarrieE. F. (2010). Narrative and persuasion in fashion advertising. Journal of Consumer Research, 37(3), 368–392.
58.
R Core Team. (2020). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org/
RhodesN.TooleJ.ArpanL. M. (2016). Persuasion as reinforcement: Strengthening the pro-environmental attitude-behavior relationship through ecotainment programming. Media Psychology, 19(3), 455–478. https://doi.org/10.1080/15213269.2015.1106322
61.
RickardL. N.YangJ. Z.LiuS.BozeT. (2021). Fish tales: How narrative modality, emotion, and transportation influence support for sustainable aquaculture. Science Communication, 43(2), 252–275. https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547020987555
62.
SchäferM. S.SchlichtingI. (2014). Media representations of climate change: A meta-analysis of the research field. Environmental Communication, 8(2), 142–160. https://doi.org/10.1080/17524032.2014.914050
63.
ShenF.SheerV. C.LiR. (2015). Impact of narratives on persuasion in health communication: A meta-analysis. Journal of Advertising, 44(2), 105–113.
64.
SilkM. J.CrowleyS. L.WoodheadA. J.NunoA. (2018, June). Considering connections between Hollywood and biodiversity conservation. Conservation Biology, 32(3), 597–606. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13030
65.
SinghalA.RogersE. (2012). Entertainment-education: A communication strategy for social change. Routledge.
66.
SlaterM. D.RounerD. (2002). Entertainment-education and elaboration likelihood: Understanding the processing of narrative persuasion. Communication Theory, 12(2), 173–191.
67.
Tal-OrN.CohenJ. (2010). Understanding audience involvement: Conceptualizing and manipulating identification and transportation. Poetics, 38(4), 402–418. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.poetic.2010.05.004
68.
van LaerT.de RuyterK.ViscontiL. M.WetzelsM. (2014). The extended transportation-imagery model: A meta-analysis of the antecedents and consequences of consumers’ narrative transportation. Journal of Consumer Research, 40(5), 797–817. https://doi.org/10.1086/673383
69.
Van LaerT.FeiereisenS.ViscontiL. M. (2019). Storytelling in the digital era: A meta-analysis of relevant moderators of the narrative transportation effect. Journal of Business Research, 96, 135–146.
70.
VasiI. B.WalkerE. T.JohnsonJ. S.TanH. F. (2015). “No fracking way!” Documentary film, discursive opportunity, and local opposition against hydraulic fracturing in the United States, 2010 to 2013. American Sociological Review, 80(5), 934–959. https://doi.org/10.1177/0003122415598534
71.
VaskeJ. J.KobrinK. C. (2001). Place attachment and environmentally responsible behavior. The Journal of Environmental Education, 32(4), 16–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/00958960109598658
72.
WarrenS. (2020). Binge-watching as a predictor of narrative transportation using HLM. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 64(2), 89–110.
73.
WeberE. U. (2006). Experience-based and description-based perceptions of long-term risk: Why global warming does not scare us (yet). Climatic Change, 77(1), 103–120.
74.
WilliamsJ. H.GreenM. C.KohlerC.AllisonJ. J.HoustonT. K. (2010). Stories to communicate risks about tobacco. Health Education Journal, 70(2), 184–191. https://doi.org/10.1177/0017896910373171
