1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Narrative Inquiry
  4. Online First Articles
  5. Online First Article
image of Assessing coherence and fidelity
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

Non-fictional narratives have an open-ended character that projects roles and values to those who participate in them. Narrative participation, in turn, entails narrative assessment and identification processes, through which adherence to values and positions may fail or be achieved. In the analysis of interviews with university students across Turkey, we draw on Fisher’s narrative paradigm to focus on how our participants carry out assessments of narrative credibility. To elucidate narrative coherence and fidelity, we take inspiration from an argumentative-rhetorical perspective, and focus specifically on the relationship among the criteria identified in the literature on narrative assessment. Our study of interviewee evaluations of COVID-19 narratives confirms the use of the coherence criteria, calls into question the fidelity criteria, and highlights the relevance of identification as a basic process for fidelity assessments. We conclude by discussing our limitations and directions for further research.

© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/ni.23053.uze
2024-01-16
2024-10-08

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/ni.23053.uze
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Björninen, S.
    (2019) The rhetoric of factuality in narrative: Appeals to authority in Claas Relotius’s feature journalism. Narrative Inquiry, (), –. 10.1075/ni.19024.bjo
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ni.19024.bjo [Google Scholar]
  2. Björninen, S., Hatavara, M., & Mäkelä, M.
    (2020) Narrative as social action: a narratological approach to story, discourse and positioning in political storytelling. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, (), –. 10.1080/13645579.2020.1721971
     https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2020.1721971 [Google Scholar]
  3. Bubikova-Moan, J.
    (2021) Credible as Evidence? Multilayered Audience Reception of Narrative Arguments. Informal Logic, (), –. 10.22329/il.v41i2.6506
     https://doi.org/10.22329/il.v41i2.6506 [Google Scholar]
  4. Castells, M., & Cardoso, G.
    (2005) The network society: From knowledge to policy. Johns Hopkins University.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Chen, K., Zhang, J., Ao, X., & Ramdass, J.
    (2022) The burden of being certain: National identity certainty predicts support for COVID-related restrictive measures and outgroup conspiracy beliefs. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, (), –. 10.1111/jasp.12868
     https://doi.org/10.1111/jasp.12868 [Google Scholar]
  6. Dentith, M. R.
    (2014) Evidence and conspiracy theories. InM. R. Dentith (Ed.), The Philosophy of Conspiracy Theories (pp.–). Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1057/9781137363169_9
     https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137363169_9 [Google Scholar]
  7. Fairclough, I., & Fairclough, N.
    (2012) Political discourse analysis: A method for advanced students. Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. De Fina, A.
    (2021) Doing narrative analysis from a narratives-as-practices perspective. Narrative Inquiry, (), –. 10.1075/ni.20067.def
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ni.20067.def [Google Scholar]
  9. Fisher, W. R.
    (1984) Narration as a human communication paradigm: The case of public moral argument. Communications Monographs, (), –. 10.1080/03637758409390180
     https://doi.org/10.1080/03637758409390180 [Google Scholar]
  10. Fisher, V. R.
    (1987) Human communication as narration: Toward a philosophy of reason, value, and action. University of South Carolina Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Fisher, W. R.
    (2002) Reconfiguring Practical Wisdom. Proceedings of International Society for the Study of Argumentation. SICSAT.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Gagliardone, I., Diepeveen, S., Findlay, K., Olaniran, S., Pohjonen, M., & Tallam, E.
    (2021) Demystifying the COVID-19 infodemic: Conspiracies, context, and the agency of users. Social Media & Society, (), –. 10.1177/20563051211044233
     https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051211044233 [Google Scholar]
  13. Hyvärinen, M.
    (2020) Toward a Theory of Counter-Narratives: Narrative Contestation, Cultural Canonicity, and Tellability. InK. Lueg & M. W. Lundholt (Eds.), Routledge Handbook of Counter-Narratives (pp.–). Routledge. 10.4324/9780429279713‑3
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429279713-3 [Google Scholar]
  14. Innocenti, B.
    (2011) A normative pragmatic model of making fear appeals. Philosophy & Rhetoric, (), –. 10.5325/philrhet.44.3.0273
     https://doi.org/10.5325/philrhet.44.3.0273 [Google Scholar]
  15. Jackson, S.
    (1992) Virtual Standpoints and the Pragmatics of Conversational Argument. InF. H. van Eemeren, R. Grootendorst, J. A. Blair, & C. Willard (Eds.), Argumentation Illuminated (pp.–). SIC-SAT.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Mackenzie, S.
    (2011) Dissecting the social body: social inequality through AIDS counter-narratives. Public Understanding of Science, (), –. 10.1177/0963662510392297
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662510392297 [Google Scholar]
  17. McClure, K.
    (2009) Resurrecting the narrative paradigm: Identification and the case of young earth creationism. Rhetoric Society Quarterly, (), –. 10.1080/02773940902766771
     https://doi.org/10.1080/02773940902766771 [Google Scholar]
  18. Meretoja, H.
    (2020) A dialogics of counter-narratives. InK. Lueg & M. W. Lundholt (Eds.), Routledge handbook of counter-narratives (pp.–). Routledge. 10.4324/9780429279713‑4
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429279713-4 [Google Scholar]
  19. Mohammed, D., & Rossi, M. G.
    (2022) The argumentative potential of doubt: From legitimate concerns to conspiracy theories about COVID-19 vaccines. InS. Oswald (Eds.), The Pandemic of Argumentation (pp.–). Springer Cham. 10.1007/978‑3‑030‑91017‑4_7
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-91017-4_7 [Google Scholar]
  20. Olmos, P.
    (2015) Story credibility in narrative arguments. InF. van Eemeren & B. Garssen (Eds.), Reflections on Theoretical Issues in Argumentation Theory (pp.–). Springer Cham. 10.1007/978‑3‑319‑21103‑9_12
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-21103-9_12 [Google Scholar]
  21. (Ed.) (2017) Narration as argument. Springer Cham. 10.1007/978‑3‑319‑56883‑6
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56883-6 [Google Scholar]
  22. Oswald, S.
    (2016) Conspiracy and bias: Argumentative features and persuasiveness of conspiracy theories. OSSA Conference Archive 168. https://scholar.uwindsor.ca/ossaarchive/OSSA11/papersandcommentaries/168
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Paliewicz, N. S., & McHendry, G. F.
    (2020) Post-dialectics and fascistic argumentation in the global climate change debate. Argumentation and Advocacy, (), –. 10.1080/10511431.2020.1790781
     https://doi.org/10.1080/10511431.2020.1790781 [Google Scholar]
  24. Paskey, S.
    (2014) The law is made of stories: Erasing the false dichotomy between stories and legal rules. Legal Communication & Rhetoric, , –.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Perelman, C.
    (1982) The realm of rhetoric. University of Notre Damme Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Pollock, J.
    (1986) A Theory of Moral Reasoning. Ethics, (), –. 10.1086/292772
     https://doi.org/10.1086/292772 [Google Scholar]
  27. Rideout, J. C.
    (2008) Storytelling, narrative rationality, and legal persuasion. Legal Writing, , –.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. (2013) A twice-told tale: Plausibility and narrative coherence in judicial storytelling. Legal Communication & Rhetoric, , –.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Stevens, K., & Cohen, D.
    (2019) The attraction of the ideal has no traction on the real: on adversariality and roles in argument. Argumentation & Advocacy, (), –. 10.1080/10511431.2018.1504584
     https://doi.org/10.1080/10511431.2018.1504584 [Google Scholar]
  30. Tindale, C.
    (2017) Narratives and the Concept of Argument. InP. Olmos (Ed.), Narration as argument (pp.–). Springer Cham. 10.1007/978‑3‑319‑56883‑6_2
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56883-6_2 [Google Scholar]
  31. Toulmin, S.
    (1958) The Uses of Argument. Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Törrönen, J.
    (2010) The passionate text. The pending narrative as a macrostructure of persuasion. Social Semiotics, (), –. 10.1080/103503300114568
     https://doi.org/10.1080/103503300114568 [Google Scholar]
  33. (2021) COVID-19 as a generator of pending narratives: Developing an empirical tool to analyze narrative practices in constructing futures. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, , –. 10.1177/1609406921996855
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406921996855 [Google Scholar]
  34. Üzelgün, M. A., Mohammed, D., Levinski, M., Castro, P.
    (2015) Managing disagreement through yes, but… constructions: An argumentative analysis. Discourse Studies, (): –. 10.1177/1461445615578965
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445615578965 [Google Scholar]
  35. Üzelgün, M. A., Fernandes-Jesus, M., & Küçükural, O.
    (2022) Reception of climate activist messages by low-carbon transition actors: argument evasion in the carbon offsetting debate, Argumentation and Advocacy, (), –. 10.1080/10511431.2021.1971381
     https://doi.org/10.1080/10511431.2021.1971381 [Google Scholar]
  36. van den Hoven, P.
    (2017) Narratives and pragmatic arguments: Ivens’ The 400 million. InP. Olmos (Ed.), Narration as argument (pp.–). Springer Cham. 10.1007/978‑3‑319‑56883‑6_7
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56883-6_7 [Google Scholar]
  37. van Eemeren, F. H., Grootendorst, R., & Jackson, S.
    (1993) Reconstructing Argumentative Discourse. University of Alabama Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. van Eemeren, F. H.
    (2016) Identifying Argumentative Patterns: A Vital Step in the Development of Pragma-Dialectics. Argumentation, , –. 10.1007/s10503‑015‑9377‑z
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s10503-015-9377-z [Google Scholar]
  39. Walton, D., Reed, C., & Macagno, F.
    (2008) Argumentation schemes. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511802034
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511802034 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/ni.23053.uze
Loading
Assessing coherence and fidelity
John Benjamins ; https://doi.org/10.1075/ni.23053.uze
/content/journals/10.1075/ni.23053.uze
/content/journals/10.1075/ni.23053.uze
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keywords: conspiracy theories ; fidelity ; non-fictional narrative assessment ; identification ; COVID-19 narratives ; coherence ; interviews

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