Policy narratives significantly shape public discourse, influencing individual perceptions, opinions, and attitudes toward contentious issues such as animal experimentation. Despite this, the role of policy narratives in shaping public and researcher perceptions of animal research remains underexplored, particularly through experimental methods. This study investigates the extent to which different policy narratives, grounded in distinct ethical perspectives and moral arguments, influence the perceptions and policy opinions of the Swiss public and researchers involved in animal research. Employing two survey experiments, the study draws on the moderated multiple mediator model and builds on recent advancements in policy narrative research. Participants are randomly assigned to treatments involving various narrative types—character-based stories (heroes, villains, victims), factual/scientific information, and narratives with or without visual imagery—designed to elicit affective and cognitive responses. The study aims to test four hypotheses, including the congruence of narratives with preexisting beliefs, the differential impact of narrative styles on public and researcher audiences, and the amplifying effect of visual imagery. Findings will elucidate the mechanisms through which policy narratives shape public and researcher perceptions and policy opinions, offering critical insights for stakeholders and policymakers to enhance public discourse and decision-making in the field of animal experimentation policy. This research contributes to the body of knowledge on the intersection of policy, ethics, and communication strategies in animal experimentation.
