The research reported here investigates how news story structure and emotional tone affect news story processing efficiency. Two theoretical frameworks employing the forced-choice paradigm and the free-choice paradigm are used to pose competing hypotheses about how news writing structure (inverted pyramid versus narrative) affects story reading time and memory. Participants browsed a website featuring target news stories. Time spent reading stories and story recall was measured. Participants spent less time reading stories with an inverted pyramid structure yet recalled these stories better than stories in a narrative structure, supporting the free-choice processing framework.
BasilM. D. (1994). Multiple resource theory I: Application to television viewing. Communication Research, 21, 177-207. doi:10.1177/009365094021002003
2.
BawdenD.RobinsonL. (2009). The dark side of information: Overload, anxiety and other paradoxes and pathologies. Journal of Information Science, 35, 180-191. doi:10.1177/0165551508095781
3.
BennettW. L. (2016). News: The politics of illusion. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
CacioppoJ. T.GardnerW. L. (1999). Emotion. Annual Review of Psychology, 50, 191-214. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.50.1.191
6.
CacioppoJ. T.GardnerW. L.BerntsonG. G. (1997). Beyond bipolar conceptualizations and measures: The case of attitudes and evaluative space. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 1, 3-25. doi:10.1207/s15327957pspr0101_2
7.
EmdeK.KlimmtC.SchluetzD. M. (2016). Does storytelling help adolescents to process the news? A comparison of narrative news and the inverted pyramid. Journalism Studies, 17, 608-627. doi:10.1080/1461670X.2015.1006900
8.
EvelandW. P.DunwoodyS. (2001). User control and structural isomorphism or disorientation and cognitive load? Learning from the Web versus print. Communication Research, 28, 48-78. doi:10.1177/009365001028001002
9.
EvelandW. P.DunwoodyS. (2002). An investigation of elaboration and selective scanning as mediators of learning from the Web versus print. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 46, 34-53. doi:10.1207/s15506878jobem4601_3
10.
FisherW. R. (1985). The narrative paradigm: In the beginning. Journal of Communication, 35, 74-89.
11.
GilliamF. D.IyengarS. (2000). Prime suspects: The influence of local television news on the viewing public. American Journal of Political Science, 44, 560-573.
12.
GrabeM. E.LangA.ZhaoX. (2003). News content and form: Implications for memory and audience evaluations. Communication Research, 30, 387-413. doi:10.1177/0093650203253368
13.
HoffmanC. R. (2010). Introduction. In HoffmanC. R. (Ed.), Narrative revisited: Telling a story in the age of new media (pp. 1-18). Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
14.
HoltonA. E.ChyiH. I. (2012). News and the overloaded consumer: Factors influencing information overload among news consumers. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 15, 619-624. doi:10.1089/cyber.2011.0610
15.
JohnsonR. N. (1996). Bad news revisited: The portrayal of violence, conflict, and suffering on television news. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 2, 201-216. doi:10.1207/s15327949pac0203_2
16.
JohnstonJ.GrahamC. (2012). The new, old journalism: Narrative writing in contemporary newspapers. Journalism Studies, 13, 517-533. doi:10.1080/1461670X.2011.629803
17.
KliteP.BardwellR. A.SalzmanJ. (1997). Local TV news getting away with murder. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 2, 102-112. doi:10.1177/1081180X97002002009
18.
KnoblochS.PatzigG.MendeA. M.HastallM. (2004). Affective news: Effects of discourse structure in narratives on suspense, curiosity, and enjoyment while reading news and novels. Communication Research, 31, 259-287. doi:10.1177/0093650203261517
19.
LabovW.WaletzkyJ. (1967). Narrative analysis. In HelmJ. (Ed.), Essays on the verbal and visual arts (pp. 12-44). Seattle: University of Washington Press.
20.
LangA. (1989). Effects of chronological presentation of information on processing and memory for broadcast news. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 33, 441-452. doi:10.1080/08838158909364093
21.
LangA. (2006). Using the limited capacity model of motivated mediated message processing to design effective cancer communication messages. Journal of Communication, 56(Suppl. 1), S57-S80. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00283.x
22.
LangA.NewhagenJ.ReevesB. (1996). Negative video as structure: Emotion, attention, capacity, and memory. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 40, 460-477. doi:10.1080/08838159609364369
23.
LangA.ParkB.Sanders-JacksonA. N.WilsonB. D.WangZ. (2007). Cognition and emotion in TV message processing: How valence, arousing content, structural complexity, and information density affect the availability of cognitive resources. Media Psychology, 10, 317-338. doi:10.1080/15213260701532880
24.
LiuZ. (2005). Reading behavior in the digital environment: Changes in reading behavior over the past ten years. Journal of Documentation, 61, 700-712. doi:10.1108/00220410510632040
25.
MachillM.KöhlerS.WaldhauserM. (2007). The use of narrative structures in television news. An experiment in innovative forms of journalistic presentation. European Journal of Communication, 22, 185-205. doi:10.1177/0267323107076769
26.
McCombsM.HolbertL.KiousisS.WantaW. (2011). The news and public opinion: Media effects on civic life. Malden, MA: Polity Press.
27.
MeffertM. F.ChungS.JoinerA. J.WaksL.GarstJ. (2006). The effects of negativity and motivated information processing during a political campaign. Journal of Communication, 56, 27-51. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00003.x
28.
MindichD. T. Z. (1998). Just the facts: How “objectivity” came to define American journalism. New York: New York University Press.
29.
MorrisonB.DainoffM. (1972). Advertisement complexity and looking time. Journal of Marketing Research, 9, 396-400. doi:10.2307/3149302
30.
NeveuE. (2014). Revisiting narrative journalism as one of the futures of journalism. Journalism Studies, 15, 533-542. doi:10.1080/1461670X.2014.885683
31.
NewhagenJ. E.ReevesB. (1992). The evening’s bad news: Effects of compelling negative television news images on memory. Journal of Communication, 42(2), 25-41. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.1992.tb00776.x
32.
NorrickN. R. (2016). Narrative discourse. In RocciA.de SaussureL. (Eds.), Verbal communication (pp. 225-244). Boston, MA: De Gruyter.
33.
PanttiM. (2010). The value of emotion: An examination of television journalists’ notions on emotionality. European Journal of Communication, 25, 168-181. doi:10.1177/0267323110363653
34.
Pew Research Center. (2011). Navigating news online: Where people go, how they get there and what lures them away. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center for the People & the Press.
35.
Pew Research Center. (2012). Trends in news consumption: 1991-2012. In changing news landscape, even television is vulnerable. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center for the People & the Press.
36.
PotterR. F.ChoiJ. (2006). The effects of auditory structural complexity on attitudes, attention, arousal, and memory. Media Psychology, 8, 395-419. doi:10.1207/s1532785xmep0804_4
37.
PöttkerH. (2003). News and its communicative quality: The inverted pyramid—When and why did it appear?Journalism Studies, 4, 501-511. doi:10.1080/1461670032000136596
38.
ReevesB. R.NewhagenJ.MaibachE.BasilM.KurzK. (1991). Negative and positive television messages: Effects of message type and context on attention and memory. American Behavioral Scientist, 34, 679-694. doi:10.1177/0002764291034006006
39.
ReisJ.BenevenutoF.de MeloP. O.PratesR.KwakH.AnJ. (2015). Breaking the news: First impressions matter on online news. In Proceedings of ICWSM. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/1503.07921
40.
SargentS. L. (2007). Image effects on selective exposure to computer-mediated news stories. Computers in Human Behavior, 23, 705-726. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2004.11.005
41.
SchneiderW.ShiffrinR. (1977). Controlled and automatic human information processing: I. Detection, search, and attention. Psychological Review, 84, 1-66. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.84.1.1
42.
ShoemakerP. J. (1996). Hardwired for news: Using biological and cultural evolution to explain the surveillance function. Journal of Communication, 46, 32-47. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.1996.tb01487.x
43.
SorokaS.McAdamsS. (2015). News, politics, and negativity. Political Communication, 32, 1-22. doi:10.1080/10584609.2014.881942
44.
TewksburyD.AlthausS. L. (2000). Differences in knowledge acquisition among readers of the paper and online versions of a national newspaper. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 77, 457-479. doi:10.1177/107769900007700301
45.
ThorsonE.LangA. (1992). The effects of television videographics and lecture familiarity on adult cardiac orienting responses and memory. Communication Research, 19, 346-369. doi:10.1177/009365092019003003
46.
TompkinsA. (2012). Aim for the heart: Write, shoot, report and produce for TV and multimedia. Washington, DC: CQ Press.
47.
TrusslerM.SorokaS. (2014). Consumer demand for cynical and negative news frames. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 19, 360-379. doi:10.1177/1940161214524832
48.
TulvingE. (1972). Episodic and semantic memory. In TulvingE.DonaldsonW. (Eds.), Organization of memory (pp. 381-403). New York, NY: Academic Press.
49.
TunP. A. (1989). Age differences in processing expository and narrative texts. The Journals of Gerontology, 44, 9-15. doi:10.1093/geronj/44.1.P9
50.
UscinskiJ. E. (2014). The people’s news: Media, politics, and the demands of capitalism. New York: New York University Press.
51.
WiseK.BollsP.MyersJ.SternadoriM. (2009). When words collide online: How writing style and video intensity affect cognitive processing of online news. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 53, 532-546. doi:10.1080/08838150903333023
52.
YarosR. A. (2006). Is it the medium or the message? Structuring complex news to enhance engagement and situational understanding by nonexperts. Communication Research, 33, 285-309. doi:10.1177/0093650206289154
53.
YarosR. A.CookA. E. (2011). Attention versus learning of online content: Preliminary findings from an eye-tracking study. International Journal of Cyber Behavior, Psychology and Learning, 1, 49-69. doi:10.4018/978-1-4666-1858-9.ch009
54.
YegiyanN. S.LangA. (2010). Processing central and peripheral detail: How content arousal and emotional tone influence encoding. Media Psychology, 13, 77-99. doi:10.1080/15213260903563014
55.
YorkC. (2013). Overloaded by the news: Effects of news exposure and enjoyment on reporting information overload. Communication Research Reports, 30, 282-292. doi:10.1080/08824096.2013.836628
56.
ZillmannD.ChenL.KnoblochS.CallisonC. (2004). Effects of lead framing on selective exposure to Internet news reports. Communication Research, 31, 58-81. doi:10.1177/0093650203260201
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
