• Hans-Joachim BackeEmail author


The chapter discusses the importance of narrative strategies and their relationship to scientific precision in the context of biomedicine. Narrative is frequently equated with fiction and thus understood as antithetical to scientific truth. The chapter counters these simplifying views by unpacking both the fact/fiction discussion and the functional properties of narrativity. It presents positions ranging from narratology to philosophy of mind that identify the distinction between fact and fiction as rooted not in essential difference, but in communicative conventions and preferences for certain linguistic modes. With regard to narrativity, it discusses several approaches to (story-)telling that outline how it is a tool for cognitive accessibility, regardless of subject matter. A certain degree of narrative structuring of information has been shown to create contextualization and coherence that greatly improve comprehension and memory retention. Furthermore, the chapter shows how narrative allows for the production of critical distance through the use of self- and meta-referential strategies, actively provoking engagement with otherwise easily ignored contexts and discourses.


  1. Abbott, H.P. 2009. Narrativity. In Handbook of narratology, ed. P. Hühn, 309–328. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  2. Beer, G. 2000. Darwin’s plots: Evolutionary narrative in Darwin, George Eliot, and nineteenth-century fiction. Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ben-Porat, Z. 1976. The poetics of literary allusion. Poetics and Theory of Literature 1 (1): 105–128.Google Scholar
  4. Bruner, J. 1987. Life as narrative. Social Research 54 (1): 11–32.Google Scholar
  5. Coulter, C.A., and M.L. Smith. 2009. The construction zone: Literary elements in narrative research. Educational Researcher 38 (8): 577–590.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dahlstrom, M.F., and S.S. Ho. 2012. Ethical considerations of using narrative to communicate science. Science Communication 34 (5): 592–617.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Elleström, L. 2010. The modalities of media: A model for understanding intermedial relations. In Media borders, multimodality and intermediality, ed. L. Elleström and J. Bruhn, 11–48. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Fludernik, M. 2001. Fiction vs. non-fiction. Narratological differentiations. In Erzählen und Erzähltheorie im 20. Jahrhundert, ed. J. Helbig, 85–103. Heidelberg: Winter.Google Scholar
  9. Gutkind, L. 2012. You can’t make this stuff up. The complete guide to writing creative nonfiction – from memoir to literary journalism and everything in between. Boston: Da Capo Press/Lifelong Books.Google Scholar
  10. Hart, J. 2011. Storycraft: The complete guide to writing narrative nonfiction. Chicago/London: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Harweg, R. 2011. Story-time and fact-sequence-time. In Time: From concept to narrative construct a reader, ed. J.C. Meister and W. Schernus, 143–170. Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  12. Herman, D. 2002. Story logic: Problems and possibilities of narrative. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.Google Scholar
  13. Heyne, E. 1987. Toward a theory of literary nonfiction. MFS Modern Fiction Studies 33 (3): 479–490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Latour, B. 1996. On actor-network theory. A few clarifications. Soziale Welt 47: 369–381.Google Scholar
  15. Lehman, D.W. 2001. Mining a rough terrain: Weighing the implications of nonfiction. Narrative 9 (3): 334–342.Google Scholar
  16. Narayan, K. 2007. Tools to shape texts: What creative nonfiction can offer ethnography. Anthropology and Humanism 32 (2): 130–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Oatley, K. 1996. Inference in narrative and science. In Modes of thought: Explorations in culture and cognition, ed. D.R. Olson and N. Torrance, 123–140. Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Phelan, J. 2007. Experiencing fiction: Judgments, progressions, and the rhetorical theory of narrative. Columbus: Ohio State University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Rajewsky, I.O. 2005. Intermediality, intertextuality, and remediation: A literary perspective on intermediality. Intermédialités: Histoire et théorie des arts, des lettres et des techniques Intermediality:/History and Theory of the Arts, Literature and Technologies 6: 43–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Richards, R.J. 1992. The structure of narrative explanation in history and biology. In History and evolution, ed. M.H. Nitecki and D.V. Nitecki, 19–54. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  21. Riffaterre, M. 1993. Fictional truth. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Ryan, M., ed. 2004. Narrative across media: The languages of storytelling. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.Google Scholar
  23. ———. 2007. Toward a definition of narrative. In The Cambridge companion to narrative, ed. D. Herman, 22–35. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Schaeffer, J. 2009. Fictional vs. factual narration. In Handbook of narratology, ed. P. Hühn, 98–114. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  25. Tedlock, B. 2011. Braiding narrative ethnography with memoir and creative nonfiction. In The Sage handbook of qualitative research, ed. N.K. Denzin and Y.S. Lincoln, 331–339. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  26. Wolf, W. 2009. Metareference across media: The concept, its transmedial potentials and problems, main forms and functions. In Metareference across media: Theory and case studies, ed. W. Wolf, K. Bantleon, J. Thoss, and W. Bernhart, 1–85. Rodopi: Amsterdam/New York.Google Scholar
  27. Zelizer, B. 2006. Definitions of journalism. In The Institutions of American democracy: The press, ed. G. Overholser and K.H. Jamieson, 66–80. New York: Oxford University Press, Incorporated.Google Scholar
  28. Zunshine, L. 2006. Why we read fiction: Theory of mind and the novel. Columbus: Ohio State University Press.Google Scholar


  1. House M.D. Creat. Shore D. Fox. 2004–2012.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Center for Computer Games ResearchIT University of CopenhagenCopenhagenDenmark

Personalised recommendations