1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Narrative Inquiry
  4. Volume 29, Issue 2
  5. Article
Volume 29, Issue 2
  • ISSN 1387-6740
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9935
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This article explores fictionality within the context of the discourse of conspiracy. In particular it examines the phenomenon of ‘false flag’ narratives: alternative versions of an event constructed by individuals who have become convinced that a news story has in fact been staged for malfeasant purposes. The article uses figure-ground analysis, which facilitates examination of how attention is distributed within a text. Specifically, it enables an examination of the prominence and salience that is afforded to particular elements within a text, and how this can be used to construct a fiction out of facts. The article problematises the notion of using a pragmatic assessment of authorial intention to establish the fictive or nonfictive status of a text. Finally, it proposes that more work needs to be undertaken in considering instances where authors either do not know or are conflicted about what they believe.

© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/ni.19023.mas
2019-10-16
2026-04-10

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/ni.19023.mas
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Abalakina-Paap, M., Stephan, W. G., Craig, T., & Gregory, L.
    (1999), Beliefs in conspiracies, Political Psychology20: 637–647. 10.1111/0162‑895X.00160
     https://doi.org/10.1111/0162-895X.00160 [Google Scholar]
  2. Barton, S. B., & Sanford, A. J.
    (1993) A case study of anomaly detection: Shallow semantic processing and cohesion establishment. Memory & cognition, 21(4), 477–487. 10.3758/BF03197179
     https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03197179 [Google Scholar]
  3. Bjerg, O. & Presskorn-Thygesen, T.
    (2017) Conspiracy theory: Truth claim or language game?. Theory, Culture and Society, 34(1), 137–59. 10.1177/0263276416657880
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276416657880 [Google Scholar]
  4. Brotherton, R., & French, C. C.
    (2014) Belief in conspiracy theories and susceptibility to the conjunction fallacy. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 28, 238–248. 10.1002/acp.2995
     https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.2995 [Google Scholar]
  5. Bruder, M., Haffke, P., Neave, N., Nouripanah, N., & Imhoff, R.
    (2013) ‘Measuring individual differences in generic beliefs in conspiracy theories across cultures: Conspiracy Mentality Questionnaire’, Frontiers in Psychology4: 1–15. 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00225
     https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00225 [Google Scholar]
  6. Coady, D.
    (2003) Conspiracy theories and official stories. International Journal of Applied Philosophy, 17(2), 197–209. 10.5840/ijap200317210
     https://doi.org/10.5840/ijap200317210 [Google Scholar]
  7. (2006) Conspiracy theories: The philosophical debate. Aldershot: Ashgate.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. (2007) Are conspiracy theories irrational?. Episteme, 4(2), 193–204. 10.3366/epi.2007.4.2.193
     https://doi.org/10.3366/epi.2007.4.2.193 [Google Scholar]
  9. Cohn, D.
    (1990) Signposts of fictionality. Poetics Today, 11(4), 755–804. 10.2307/1773077
     https://doi.org/10.2307/1773077 [Google Scholar]
  10. (1999) The distinction of fiction. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Douglas, K. M., Sutton, R. M. & Cichocka, A.
    (2017) The psychology of conspiracy theories. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 26(6), 538–42. 10.1177/0963721417718261
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721417718261 [Google Scholar]
  12. Douglas, K. M., & Sutton, R. M.
    (2008) The hidden impact of conspiracy theories: Perceived and actual impact of theories surrounding the death of Princess Diana. Journal of Social Psychology, 148, 210–221. 10.3200/SOCP.148.2.210‑222
     https://doi.org/10.3200/SOCP.148.2.210-222 [Google Scholar]
  13. Emmott, C. & Alexander, M.
    (2014) Foregrounding, burying and plot construction. InP. Stockwell & S. Whiteley (Eds.) The Cambridge Handbook of Stylistics (pp.329–343). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139237031.025
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139237031.025 [Google Scholar]
  14. Gerrig, R. J.
    (1993) Experiencing Narrative Worlds: On the Psychological Activities of Reading. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Gibbons, A.
    (2012) Multimodality, cognition and experimental literature. London/New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203803219
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203803219 [Google Scholar]
  16. Giovanelli, M. & Mason, J.
    (2018) The language of literature: An introduction to stylistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Goertzel, T.
    (1994) Belief in conspiracy theories. Political Psychology, 15, 731–742. 10.2307/3791630
     https://doi.org/10.2307/3791630 [Google Scholar]
  18. Grzesiak-Feldman, M.
    (2013) The effect of high-anxiety situations on conspiracy thinking. Current Psychology, 32, 100–118. 10.1007/s12144‑013‑9165‑6
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-013-9165-6 [Google Scholar]
  19. Hamburger, K.
    (1993) The logic of literature (2nd ed.; M. J. Rose, Trans.). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Hatavara, M. & Mildorf, J.
    (2017) Hybrid fictionality and vicarious narrative experience. Narrative, 25(1), 65–82. 10.1353/nar.2017.0004
     https://doi.org/10.1353/nar.2017.0004 [Google Scholar]
  21. Heaps, C. & Nash, M.
    (2001) Comparing recollective experiences in true and false autobiographical memories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 27, 920–930.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Iversen, S. & Nielsen, H. S.
    (2016) The politics of fictionality in documentary form: The act of killing and The ambassador. European Journal of English Studies, 20(3), 249–262. 10.1080/13825577.2016.1230389
     https://doi.org/10.1080/13825577.2016.1230389 [Google Scholar]
  23. Kearns, E. M., Conlon, B. & Young, J. K.
    (2014) Lying about terrorism. Studies in Conflict and Terrorism, 37(5), 422–439. 10.1080/1057610X.2014.893480
     https://doi.org/10.1080/1057610X.2014.893480 [Google Scholar]
  24. Labov, W.
    (1972) Language in the inner city: Studies in the black english vernacular. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Leman, P. J., & Cinnirella, M.
    (2013) Beliefs in conspiracy theories and the need for cognitive closure. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 1–10. 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00378
     https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00378 [Google Scholar]
  26. Lewandowsky, S., Oberauer, K., & Gignac, G. E.
    (2013) NASA faked the moon landing – Therefore, (climate) science is a hoax: An anatomy of the motivated rejection of science. Psychological Science, 24, 622–633. 10.1177/0956797612457686
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797612457686 [Google Scholar]
  27. Loftus, E. & Pickerell, J.
    (1995) The formation of false memories. Psychiatric Annals, 25, 720–725. 10.3928/0048‑5713‑19951201‑07
     https://doi.org/10.3928/0048-5713-19951201-07 [Google Scholar]
  28. Nielsen, H. S., Phelan, J. & Walsh, R.
    (2015) Ten theses about fictionality. Narrative, 23(1), 61–73. 10.1353/nar.2015.0005
     https://doi.org/10.1353/nar.2015.0005 [Google Scholar]
  29. Pace, L. A. & Livingston, M. M.
    (2005) Protecting human subjects in internet research. Electronic Journal of Business Ethics and Organization Studies, 10(1), 35–41.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Perry, B. & Szalavitz, M.
    (2006) The Boy Who Was Raised as a Dog: And Other Stories from a Child Psychiatrist’s Notebook. USA: Basic Books.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Pigden, C.
    (1995) Popper revisited, or what is wrong with conspiracy theories?. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 25(1), 3–34. 10.1177/004839319502500101
     https://doi.org/10.1177/004839319502500101 [Google Scholar]
  32. (2007) Conspiracy theories and the conventional wisdom. Episteme, 4(2), 219–232. 10.3366/epi.2007.4.2.219
     https://doi.org/10.3366/epi.2007.4.2.219 [Google Scholar]
  33. Phelan, J.
    (2016) Local fictionality within global non-fiction: Roz Chast’s Why can’t we talk about something more pleasant?Enthymema, 16, 19–31.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Porter, S., Yuille, J. C. & Lehman, D. R.
    (1999) The nature of real, implanted, and fabricated memories for emotional childhood events: implications for the recovered memory debate. Law and Human Behavior, 23(5), 517–537. 10.1023/A:1022344128649
     https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022344128649 [Google Scholar]
  35. Rosenblatt, L.
    (1938) Literature as exploration. New York: D. Appleton-Century.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. (1978) The reader, the text, the poem: The transactional theory of the literary work. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Sanford, A.
    (2002) Context, attention, and depth of processing during interpretation. Mind and Language, 17(1–2), 188–206. 10.1111/1468‑0017.00195
     https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0017.00195 [Google Scholar]
  38. Sanford, A. & Emmott, C.
    (2014) Mind, brain and narrative. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. Sanford, A. & Sturt, P.
    (2002) Depth of processing in language comprehension: Not noticing the evidence. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 6(9), 382–386. 10.1016/S1364‑6613(02)01958‑7
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-6613(02)01958-7 [Google Scholar]
  40. Scott Terry, W.
    (2009) Learning and memory: basic principles, processes and procedures. (4th ed.). Boston: Pearson Education Inc.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Spilioti, T. & Tagg, C.
    (2017) The ethics of online research methods in applied linguistics. Applied Linguistics Review, 8(2–3), 163–168.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Stockwell, P.
    (2002) Cognitive poetics: An introduction. London: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  43. (2009) Texture: A cognitive aesthetics of reading. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  44. Swami, V., Voracek, M., Stieger, S., Tran, U. S., & Furnham, A.
    (2014) Analytic thinking reduces belief in conspiracy theories. Cognition, 133, 572–585. 10.1016/j.cognition.2014.08.006
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2014.08.006 [Google Scholar]
  45. Wood, M. J., Douglas, K. M. & Sutton, R. S.
    (2012) Dead and alive: Belief in contradictory conspiracy theories. Social Psychology and Personality Science, 3(6), 767–773. 10.1177/1948550611434786
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550611434786 [Google Scholar]
  46. van Prooijen, J. W., & Jostmann, N. B.
    (2013) Belief in conspiracy theories: The influence of uncertainty and perceived morality. European Journal of Social Psychology, 43, 109–115. 10.1002/ejsp.1922
     https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.1922 [Google Scholar]
  47. VICE
    VICE (2018) The rise of the crisis actor conspiracy movement [video file]. Retrieved fromhttps://video.vice.com/en_us/video/vice-hysteria-the-rise-of-the-crisis-actor-conspiracy-movement/5a830d13f1cdb335993dd871
/content/journals/10.1075/ni.19023.mas
Loading
Making fiction out of fact
Narrative Inquiry 29, 293 (2019); https://doi.org/10.1075/ni.19023.mas
/content/journals/10.1075/ni.19023.mas
/content/journals/10.1075/ni.19023.mas
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): attention; belief; burying; Charlottesville; cognitive stylistics; conspiracy; false flag; figure-ground; Sandy Hook

Most Cited

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