How Narrative Focus and a Statistical Map Shape Health Policy Support Among State Legislators

Abstract

This study attempts to advance theorizing about health policy advocacy with combinations of narrative focus and a statistical map in an attempt to increase state legislators’ support for policies to address the issue of obesity by reducing food deserts. Specifically, we examine state legislators’ responses to variations in narrative focus (individual vs. community) about causes and solutions for food deserts in U.S. communities, and a statistical map (presence vs. absence) depicting the prevalence of food deserts across the United States. Using a Web-based randomized experiment (N = 496), we show that narrative focus and the statistical map interact to produce different patterns of cognitive response and support for policies to reduce the prevalence of food deserts. The presence of a statistical map showing the prevalence of food deserts in the United States appeared to matter only when combined with an individual narrative, offsetting the fact that the individual narrative in isolation produced fewer thoughts consistent with the story’s persuasive goal and more counterarguments in opposition to environmental causes and solutions for obesity than other message conditions. The image did not have an impact when combined with a story describing a community at large. Cognitive responses fully mediated message effects on intended persuasive outcomes. We conclude by discussing the study’s contributions to communication theory and practice.

Notes

¹ We use the term statistical map throughout the rest of the article to refer to maps that depict statistical information (in this case, a map of the United States showing neighborhoods that are considered food deserts based on statistical criteria; see later description of the criteria used to determine which geographic locations constitute food deserts).

² None of the state legislators from Alaska agreed to participate in the study.

³ We measured a variety of other state legislator characteristics, including details about their political history and future political goals (e.g., number of previous terms in office, desired number of future terms) and their own weight status. None differed by condition.