Volume 7, Issue 3
  • ISSN 2211-4742
  • E-ISSN: 2211-4750
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes



The argument from example is frequently used in health communication interventions. Some of these arguments are narrative in nature, in the sense that they relate a series of logically related events containing an experiencing agonist. In this article, research on narrative persuasion is discussed in order to show how such narrative arguments from examples can influence the target audience’s beliefs about the possibility that a certain action will lead to certain consequences, the desirability of such consequences, as well as provide the target audience with ways by which to circumvent obstacles that prevent them from putting their intentions into actions. As such, narrative arguments from example can serve the needs of both people who still need to be motivated to change their behavior as those of people who already intend to adapt their behavior but fail to put this intention into action.


A commentary article has been published for this article:
Commentary of Hoeken, Boeijinga & Sanders (2018)

Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Allen, Mike, and Raymond Preiss
    1997 “Comparing the persuasiveness of narrative and statistical evidence using meta-analysis.” Communication Research Reports14: 125–131. 10.1080/08824099709388654
    https://doi.org/10.1080/08824099709388654 [Google Scholar]
  2. Baesler, James, and Judee Burgoon
    1994 “The temporal effects of story and statistical evidence on belief change.” Communication Research, 21(5): 582–602. 10.1177/009365094021005002
    https://doi.org/10.1177/009365094021005002 [Google Scholar]
  3. Bandura, Albert
    1977 “Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change.” Psychological review, 84(2): 191–215. 10.1037/0033‑295X.84.2.191
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191 [Google Scholar]
  4. Boeijinga, Anniek, Hans Hoeken, and José Sanders
    2016 “Health promotion in the trucking setting: Understanding Dutch truck drivers’ road to health lifestyle changes.” Work, 55(2): 385–397. 10.3233/WOR‑162409
    https://doi.org/10.3233/WOR-162409 [Google Scholar]
  5. 2017a “An analysis of health promotion materials for Dutch truck drivers: off target and too difficult?” Work, 56: 539–549. doi:  10.3233/WOR‑172503
    https://doi.org/10.3233/WOR-172503 [Google Scholar]
  6. 2017b “The persuasive effects of risk perception-focused versus planning strategies-focused health narratives targeting Dutch truck drivers.” International Journal of Communication, 11: 5007–5026.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Braddock, Kurt and James Dillard
    2016 “Meta-analytic Evidence For the Persuasive Effect of Narratives on Beliefs, Attitudes, Intentions, and Behaviors.” Communication Monographs, 83 (4): 446–67. 10.1080/03637751.2015.1128555
    https://doi.org/10.1080/03637751.2015.1128555 [Google Scholar]
  8. Busselle, Rick, and Helena Bilandzic
    2009 “Measuring narrative engagement.” Media Psychology, 12 (4): 321–347. doi: 10.1080/15213260903287259
    https://doi.org/10.1080/15213260903287259 [Google Scholar]
  9. De Graaf, Anneke, Hans Hoeken, José Sanders, and Johannes Beentjes
    2009 “The role of dimensions of narrative engagement in narrative persuasion.” Communications, 34 (4): 385–405. doi:  10.1515/COMM.2009.024
    https://doi.org/10.1515/COMM.2009.024 [Google Scholar]
  10. 2012 “Identification as a mechanism of narrative persuasion.” Communication Research, 39 (6): 802–821. doi:  10.1177/0093650211408594
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650211408594 [Google Scholar]
  11. De Wit, John, Enny Das, and Raymond Vet
    2008 “What works best: Objective statistics or a personal testimonial? An assessment of the persuasive effects of different types of message evidence on risk perception.” Health Psychology, 27(1): 110–115. doi:  10.1037/0278‑6133.27.1.110
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-6133.27.1.110 [Google Scholar]
  12. Dillard, Amanda, Angela Fagerlin, Sonya Dal Cin, Brian Zikmund-Fisher, and Peter Ubel
    2010 “Narratives that address affective forecasting errors reduce perceived barriers to colorectal cancer screening.” Social Science & Medicine, 71(1): 45–52. doi:  10.1016/j.socscimed.2010.02.038
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2010.02.038 [Google Scholar]
  13. Fishbein, Martin, and Icek Ajzen
    2011Predicting and changing behavior: The reasoned action approach. Taylor & Francis. 10.4324/9780203838020
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203838020 [Google Scholar]
  14. Green, Melanie, and Timothy Brock
    2000 “The role of transportation in the persuasiveness of public narratives.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79 (5): 701–721. doi:  10.1037//0022‑3514.79.5.701
    https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.79.5.701 [Google Scholar]
  15. 2002 “In the mind’s eye: Transportation-Imagery Model of narrative persuasion.” InNarrative impact: Social and cognitive foundations, ed. byMelanie C. Green, Jeffrey J. Strange, and Timothy C. Brock, 315–341. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Greene, Kathryn, Shelly Campo, and Smita C. Banerjee
    2010 “Comparing normative, anecdotal, and statistical risk evidence to discourage tanning bed use.” Communication Quarterly58 (2): 111–132. doi:  10.1080/01463371003773366
    https://doi.org/10.1080/01463371003773366 [Google Scholar]
  17. Hitchcock, David, and Jean Wagemans
    2011 “The pragma-dialectical account of argument schemes.” InKeeping in touch with pragma-dialectics, ed. byEveline Feteris, Bart Garssen, and Francisca Snoeck Henkemans, 185–205. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/z.163.13hit
    https://doi.org/10.1075/z.163.13hit [Google Scholar]
  18. Hoeken, Hans
    2001 “Anecdotal, statistical, and causal evidence: Their perceived and actual persuasiveness.” Argumentation15 (4): 425–437. doi:  10.1023/A:1012075630523
    https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1012075630523 [Google Scholar]
  19. Hoeken, Hans, and Karin Fikkers
    2014 “Issue-relevant thinking and identification as mechanisms of narrative persuasion.” Poetics, 44: 84–99. doi:  10.1016/j.poetic.2014.05.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.poetic.2014.05.001 [Google Scholar]
  20. Hoeken, Hans, and Lettica Hustinx
    2007 “The impact of exemplars on responsibility stereotypes in fund-raising letters.” Communication Research, 34(6): 596–617. doi:  10.1177/0093650207307898
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650207307898 [Google Scholar]
  21. 2009 “When is statistical evidence superior to anecdotal evidence? The role of argument type.” Human Communication Research, 35: 491–510. 10.1111/j.1468‑2958.2009.01360.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.2009.01360.x [Google Scholar]
  22. Hoeken, Hans, and Jop Sinkeldam
    2014 “The role of identification and emotion and perception of just outcome in evoking emotions in narrative persuasion.” Journal of Communication, 64 (5): 935–955. doi:  10.1111/jcom.12114
    https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12114 [Google Scholar]
  23. Hoeken, Hans, Ester Šorm, and Peter Jan Schellens
    2014 “Arguing about beliefs: Lay people’s criteria to distinguish strong arguments from weak ones.” Thinking & Reasoning, 20 (1): 77–98. 10.1080/13546783.2013.807303
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13546783.2013.807303 [Google Scholar]
  24. Hoeken, Hans, Matthijs Kolthoff, and José Sanders
    2016 “Story perspective and character similarity as drivers of identification and narrative persuasion.” Human Communication Research, 42 (2): 292–311. doi:  10.1111/hcre.12076
    https://doi.org/10.1111/hcre.12076 [Google Scholar]
  25. Hornikx, Jos
    2018 “Combining anecdotal and statistical evidence in real-life discourse: Comprehension and persuasiveness.” Discourse Processes, 55 (3): 324–336. doi:  10.1080/0163853X.2017.1312195
    https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2017.1312195 [Google Scholar]
  26. Hornikx, Jos, and Hans Hoeken
    2007 “Cultural differences in the persuasiveness of evidence types and evidence quality.” Communication Monographs74 (4): 443–463. doi:  10.1080/03637750701716578
    https://doi.org/10.1080/03637750701716578 [Google Scholar]
  27. Maio, Gregory R., Bas Verplanken, Antony Manstead, Wolfgang Stroebe, Charles Abraham, Paschal Sheeran, and Mark Conner
    2007 “Social psychological factors in lifestyle change and their relevance to policy.” Social Issues and Policy Review, 1 (1): 99–137. doi:  10.1111/j.1751‑2409.2007.00005.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-2409.2007.00005.x [Google Scholar]
  28. Moyer-Gusé, Emily
    2008 “Toward a theory of entertainment persuasion: Explaining the persuasive effects of entertainment-education messages.” Communication Theory, 18 (3): 407–425. doi:  10.1111/j.1468‑2885.2008.00328.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2008.00328.x [Google Scholar]
  29. Moyer-Gusé, Emily, Adrienne H. Chung, and Parul Jain
    2011 “Identification with characters and discussion of taboo topics after exposure to an entertainment narrative about sexual health.” Journal of Communication, 61(3): 387–406. 10.1111/j.1460‑2466.2011.01551.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2011.01551.x [Google Scholar]
  30. Nisbett, Richard E., and Lee Ross
    1980Human inference: Strategies and shortcomings of social judgment. Prentice-Hall.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Oatley, Keith
    1999 “Meeting of minds: Dialogue, sympathy, and identification in reading fiction.” Poetics, 28 (5–6): 439–454. doi:  10.1016/S0304‑422X(99)00011‑X
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-422X(99)00011-X [Google Scholar]
  32. Prati, Gabriele, Luca Pietrantoni, and Bruna Zani
    2012 “Influenza vaccination: The persuasiveness of messages among people aged 65 years and older.” Health Communication, 27(5): 413–420. doi:  10.1080/10410236.2011.606523
    https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2011.606523 [Google Scholar]
  33. Schellens, Peter Jan, and Menno De Jong
    2004 “Argumentation Schemes in Persuasive Brochures.” Argumentation, 18(3): 295–323. 10.1023/B:ARGU.0000046707.68172.35
    https://doi.org/10.1023/B:ARGU.0000046707.68172.35 [Google Scholar]
  34. Schellens, Peter Jan, Ester Šorm, Rian Timmers, and Hans Hoeken
    2017 “Laypeople’s Evaluation of Arguments: Are Criteria for Argument Quality Scheme-Specific?” Argumentation, 31(4):681–703. 10.1007/s10503‑016‑9418‑2
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10503-016-9418-2 [Google Scholar]
  35. Schwarzer, Ralf
    2008 “Modeling Health Behavior Change: How to Predict and Modify the Adoption and Maintenance of Health Behaviors.” Applied Psychology, 57(1):1–29. 10.1111/j.1464‑0597.2007.00325.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-0597.2007.00325.x [Google Scholar]
  36. Sheeran, Paschal
    2002 “Intention – behavior relations: A conceptual and empirical review.” European review of social psychology, 12(1): 1–36. 10.1080/14792772143000003
    https://doi.org/10.1080/14792772143000003 [Google Scholar]
  37. Shen, Fuyuan, Vivian Sheer and Ruobing Li
    2015 “Impact of Narratives on Persuasion in Health Communication: A Meta-Analysis.” Journal of Advertising, 44 (2): 105–113. 10.1080/00913367.2015.1018467
    https://doi.org/10.1080/00913367.2015.1018467 [Google Scholar]
  38. Slater, Michael, and Donna Rouner
    2002 “Entertainment-education and elaboration likelihood: Understanding the processing of narrative persuasion.” Communication Theory, 12 (2): 173–191. doi:  10.1111/j.1468‑2885.2002.tb00265.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2002.tb00265.x [Google Scholar]
  39. So, Jiyeon, and Robin Nabi
    2013 “Reduction of perceived social distance as an explanation for media’s influence on personal risk perceptions: A test of the risk convergence model.” Human Communication Research, 39(3): 317–338. doi:  10.1111/hcre.12005
    https://doi.org/10.1111/hcre.12005 [Google Scholar]
  40. Toolan, Michael
    2001Narrative: a critical linguistic introduction (2nd Ed.). London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Walton, Douglas, Christopher Reed, and Fabrizio Macagno
    2008Argumentation schemes. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511802034
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511802034 [Google Scholar]
  42. Webb, Thomas, and Paschal Sheeran
    2006 “Does changing behavioral intentions engender behavior change? A meta-analysis of the experimental evidence.” Psychological bulletin, 132(2): 249–268. 10.1037/0033‑2909.132.2.249
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.132.2.249 [Google Scholar]
  43. Zebregs, Simon, Bas van den Putte, Peter Neijens, and Anneke de Graaf
    2015 “The differential impact of statistical and narrative evidence on beliefs, attitude, and intention: A meta-analysis.” Health communication, 30(3): 282–289. 10.1080/10410236.2013.842528
    https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2013.842528 [Google Scholar]
  44. Zillmann, Dolf
    1999 “Exemplification theory: Judging the whole by some of its parts.” Media Psychology, 1(1): 69–94. 10.1207/s1532785xmep0101_5
    https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532785xmep0101_5 [Google Scholar]
  45. 2006 “Exemplifcation effects in the promotion of safety and health.” Journal of Communication, 56(1): 221–237. 10.1111/j.1460‑2466.2006.00291.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00291.x [Google Scholar]
  46. Zillmann, Dolf, and Hans-Bernd Brosius
    2000Exemplification in communication: The influence of case reports on the perception of issues. Mahwah, NJ: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): argument from example; health communication; narrative persuasion
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error