Does narrative information bias individual's decision making? A systematic review.

Area of Science:

• Health Communication
• Decision Science
• Behavioral Medicine

Background:

• Narratives are increasingly used in health-care interventions.
• Potential for narrative information to bias individual decision-making and lead to poorer patient choices.

Purpose of the Study:

• To systematically review evidence on the persuasiveness of narrative information in influencing individuals' decision-making.
• To explore the impact of narrative characteristics (e.g., first-person vs. third-person) on decision outcomes.

Main Methods:

• Systematic review of 17 studies examining the effects of narrative information on decision-making.
• Analysis of study designs, narrative types (first-person vs. third-person), and reported effects on decision processes and outcomes.

Main Results:

• Narrative information influenced decision-making more than no information or statistical data in approximately one-third of studies.
• First-person narratives were twice as likely to show an effect compared to third-person narratives.
• Some evidence suggests narratives may promote heuristic over systematic processing, but methods and content lack consistency.

Conclusions:

• Narrative information can be persuasive, particularly first-person accounts, but its impact on decision quality remains unclear.
• Inconsistent methodologies and narrative content limit understanding of *why* and *how* narratives affect decision-making.
• Cautious use of narratives in medical decision-making interventions is recommended until further evidence clarifies their effects.