ArticleBMC psychology2026
Changing the narrative: stories reduce biases against anomalous faces.
Article in BMC psychology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Facial anomalies, such as scars, are often linked to an "anomalous-is-bad" stereotype, in which people with visible differences are seen as less warm or less moral. We developed the "Normalizing Anomalies with Mobile Exposure" (NAME) intervention based on the idea that repeated exposure and narratives can shift automatic evaluations of others. In a between-subjects design, one group of participants was repeatedly exposed to faces with visible anomalies paired with narratives describing morally praiseworthy actions, while a second group viewed phenotypically typical faces of people of color paired with the same type of narratives. Each group completed two daily sessions for five consecutive days via a mobile application. Across both versions of the intervention, implicit evaluations of the targeted faces became more positive over time, with the anomalous faces version showing the clearest target-specific improvement. Explicit attitudes did not change. These findings suggest that exposure-based storytelling can alter automatic evaluations of individuals with facial anomalies and may offer a promising, scalable approach to reducing stigma associated with visible differences, although further research is needed to test durability and generalizability to other groups.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.