Entertainment-education and elaboration likelihood¶
Slater, M. D., & Rouner, D. (2002). Entertainment-education and elaboration likelihood: Understanding the processing of narrative persuasion. Communication Theory, 12(2), 173-191.
Cited by¶
1 citation across 1 artifact.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Primes¶
- Narrative Persuasion
- The structural signature is communicative rather than purely cognitive: it requires a sender (the artifact and whoever deploys it), a receiver (a narrative-receiving cognitive system capable of mental simulation), and a story-shaped medium that transports the receiver's attention into a constructed world from which attitudes return as residue, a sender/medium/receiver decomposition Slater and Rouner (2002) place at the core of their extended elaboration likelihood model of narrative persuasion.
This sourceExtended Elaboration Likelihood Model (E-ELM): argues that absorption in a narrative and identification with characters suppress counter-arguing of implicit, counter-attitudinal content; develops the sender/medium/receiver decomposition of narrative persuasion as a research program for entertainment-education treating each role as an independent design variable.
- The structural signature is communicative rather than purely cognitive: it requires a sender (the artifact and whoever deploys it), a receiver (a narrative-receiving cognitive system capable of mental simulation), and a story-shaped medium that transports the receiver's attention into a constructed world from which attitudes return as residue, a sender/medium/receiver decomposition Slater and Rouner (2002) place at the core of their extended elaboration likelihood model of narrative persuasion.
Verification¶
Does it exist? Not checked yet. This entry carries no identifier to resolve. It was extracted from the citation as written in the article, normalized, and deduplicated against the rest of the registry.
Does it back the claim? Not recorded. The single citation of this work carries no recorded support check.
Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.
See how references were verified.
Registry ID ref:5795b6838404 · see in the full table