The Role of Temporal Distance Perception in Narrative vs. Non-Narrative Persuasion Related to E-Cigarettes

Abstract

Research has long identified narrative persuasion as an effective health communication strategy. This study explores temporal distance perception, which is the perceived distance of a health threat, as a possible psychological mechanism through which narrative persuasion influences young adults’ attitude and behavioral intention related to e-cigarette use. When reading the narrative message featuring negative consequences of nicotine addiction, participants demonstrate a higher level of transportation and subsequently perceive the health threat related to e-cigarette as temporally closer. The shortened temporal distance perception, along with transportation, mediates the relationship between exposure to the narrative message and participants’ attitude and behavioral intention. Participants’ past experience also plays an important role. In particular, participants who have not used e-cigarette before report more negative attitude after reading the narrative message. Findings of the current study indicate that narrative persuasion may be an effective strategy to deter young adults from using e-cigarettes.

Notes

¹ Six participants were removed because they failed to identify e-cigarette as the topic discussed and 76 participants failed the attention check question included in the latter part of the survey, which asked them to choose a specific response option.

² The experiment included another experimental factor (gain vs. loss framing), but transportation and temporal distance perception did not vary based on this factor, so we focus on message type in this study. All findings reported here remain consistent after controlling for the other experimental factor. Results related to gain vs. loss manipulation are reported elsewhere.

³ The fourth item in the original scale is focused on the impact of climate change on future generations, which was deemed as less relevant to this study.Perceived temporal distance was sufficiently different from risk perception, heterotrait-monotrait (HTMT) ratios of correlation (HTMT_{distance-severity} = −0.637; HTMT_{distance-susceptibility} = −0.629) indicate that there was sufficient discriminant validity (Henseler, Ringle, & Sarstedt, 2015; Kline, 2011).