STORYTELLING- Module 2

CHALLENGE AND SELECTION:

I am very impressed and like to choose my peer review topic as  storytelling. Because I am interested in creating stories. Stories and storytelling help us to  make sense of our thoughts and experiences, our interactions with the environment and each  other, to formulate our beliefs, our identities and our values. Most poignantly, the making of  stories ‘reveals things to us that we know but didn’t know we knew’, according to  phenomenological philosopher Maurice Merleau-Ponty in 1964.

APPLICATION:

Essential to storytelling is that it seeks to convey an experience in such a way  that it seems real. There is appeal in storytelling because it often presents information  incorporated within a personal account that engages the reader and may validate their own  experiences.

A story is often loosely defined as having a beginning, a middle and an end,  with a protagonist (often human), an object, a practice or an idea, followed by a form of  transformation or conflict. Throughout the relevant literature, the term ‘narrative’ is often used  interchangeably with ‘story’. However, the events that comprise a certain story can be  presented in many different ways forming different narratives, chronologically or not, but the  story remains the same. Reshuffling the order of events changes the narrative, not the story.  The terms ‘story’ and ‘storytelling’ will be preferred in this review, unless specific cases require  the use of ‘narrative’

INSIGHT AND APPROACH:

This  seeks evidence of peer-reviewed studies that use storytelling as a  research method or tool and relates to people telling their personal stories of real-life or  authentic experiences around public health issues.

The process of storytelling has multiple researches aims. Included in these aims is its  ability to inform the researcher (through extraction of information), but also as an intervention  to facilitate a process of ‘reflection and reworking of experience and knowledge in the research  participant’. Storytelling has been used as a tool to gain insight into public knowledge, attitudes  and behavior (KAB), for example, storytelling has been used with African-American women who  fail to attend breast cancer screening and has revealed attitudes and behavior driven by pain,  fear, loss and faith in God. The same research also used storytelling to clarify misinformation,  validate personal experiences and enhance learning around the importance of screening.

It needs to be noted that unlike more conventional qualitative research methods,  storytelling is an emergent research method and validation remains to be established. However,  lack of a substantial body of validation does not justify dismissing storytelling as a research  method. Ideally, this review will identify studies that provide evidence of the validity of  storytelling as used in the research context.

Storytelling has been used as a research method in various disciplines, some of which  touch on public health, some of which are removed from it. For example, social work,  healthcare and its delivery, understanding marginalized communities and anthropology, to  provide a few examples.

In attempting a definition of storytelling as a research tool, first, there is a distinction  to be made between science and storytelling/narrative as two research paradigms. Second,  storytelling needs to be distinguished from other forms of narrative research, for example,  narrative medicine. According to Bleakly, science and narrative are two ways of knowing. Bleakly  points out the value of story compared with more conventionally analytical methods that ‘tend  to lose the concrete story and its emotional impact to abstract categorizations, which may claim  explanatory value but often remain descriptive’. Essentially, within clinical education at least,  Bleakly refers to how narrative offers value over and above objective measures, pointing out  that while objective morbidity and mortality data characteristically remain faceless, narrative  inquiry often seeks to personalize and also to engage proactively with its research population  through deliberate intervention, as research with, not on, people.

Reflecting Bleakly, this systematic review aims to find examples of where research has  been carried out with people (within the context of various public health topics) rather than on  people, and work that seeks to engage proactively with the study population via storytelling as a  method.

Storytelling as a research method shares some similarities but also notable  differences to narrative medicine as a research method. According to Columbia Narrative  Medicine, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, ‘narrative medicine fortifies clinical  practice with the narrative competence to recognize, absorb, metabolize, interpret, and be  moved by the stories of illnesses. Physician and advocate of narrative medicine, Rita Charon, in  a paper in JAMA, describes narrative medicine as, ‘Medicine practiced with narrative  competence, is proposed as a model for humane and effective medical practice’. Narrative  medicine appears to be more closely aligned with physicians’ practice and the patient–physician  relationship (aimed at improving patient care) than the storytelling research method that this  systematic review aims to explore. This review aims to seek data on KAB from members of the  public and does not serve the purpose of improving a physician–patient relationship or  improving care as directly as narrative medicine appears to do.

In practice, storytelling as a tool in research might adopt various formats. One that has  found prominence in recent years, with an emergent literature base generally, as well as in the  field of health research, is digital storytelling (DST) comprising a 25 min video17, a 3–5 min short  video,18 ‘Photovoice’ (photo collections to promote dialogue)19 or verbal telling of personal  stories. 20 DST has the potential to capture lived experiences and share research findings in a  manner that is highly engaging and possibly made accessible on a digital platform. Storytelling  as a research tool alongside conventional qualitative research method.

Storytelling as a qualitative research method is still an emergent area and may serve  to complement data sourced via more conventional, empirical qualitative research methods.  However, certain nuances of individuals’ insights associated with their experiences might not be  accessible via some of these more established methods of inquiry.

Moreover, stories do not reveal one, single discoverable truth because truth is a  matter of degree and perspective. In this respect, using the telling of a story as a research tool  rests on a premise that is starkly different to that of a conventional scientific method. Both the  established scientific method and the storytelling research method each provide a distinctive  way of ordering experience and constructing reality, and using the two knowledge systems to  complement and enhance each other might provide broader and more in-depth insight into an  experience than using one method alone.

In a discussion paper by Dahlstrom, the author addresses storytelling as a means to  communicate science to non-expert audiences. According to Dahlstrom, narratives are easier to  comprehend, and audiences find them more engaging than traditional logical-scientific  communication. The nature of learning from storytelling differs from that derived from more  conventional scientific information, for example, from statistical data. Scientific information  provides abstract truths that can be applied to a specific case, as in deductive reasoning,  whereas narrative information follows inductive reasoning, which often involves a depiction of  an individual experience from which an inference to a general or even a collective truth can be  made.

Storytelling is a highly nuanced means of communication, usually articulating  cause-and-effect relationships between events over a period of time, and often in relation to a  certain character. It is also grounded in a level of realism that might be less evident with other  forms of communication. Storytelling potentially draws on commonalities between the story or  the storyteller and the listener or reader. This, combined with the underlying assumption of  credibility in the teller’s story or experience, can potentially motivate and persuade individuals  towards behavioral change and reduces resistance to any action implied by the message.

Studies have used stories and storytelling for their value in both communicating with  and influencing others. Among the reasons for choosing storytelling as a research tool, one of  the most important is that it is a highly accessible modality that does not require specialized  knowledge and skills to connect with, or derive meaning from.


STORYTELLING- Module 2 CHALLENGE AND SELECTION : I am very impressed and like to choose my peer review topic as storytelling . Because I am interested in creating stories . Stories and storytelling help us to make sense of our thoughts and experiences , our interactions with the environment and each other , to formulate our beliefs , our identities and our values . Most poignantly , the making of stories ‘ reveals things to us that we know but did n’t know we knew ’ , according to phenomenological philosopher Maurice Merleau - Ponty in 1964 . APPLICATION : Essential to storytelling is that it seeks to convey an experience in such a way that it seems real . There is appeal in storytelling because it often presents information incorporated within a personal account that engages the reader and may validate their own experiences . A story is often loosely defined as having a beginning , a middle and an end , with a protagonist ( often human ) , an object , a practice or an idea , followed by a form of transformation or conflict . Throughout the relevant literature , the term ‘ narrative ’ is often used interchangeably with ‘ story ’ . However , the events that comprise a certain story can be presented in many different ways forming different narratives , chronologically or not , but the story remains the same . Reshuffling the order of events changes the narrative , not the story . The terms ‘ story ’ and ‘ storytelling ’ will be preferred in this review , unless specific cases require the use of ‘ narrative ’ INSIGHT AND APPROACH : This seeks evidence of peer - reviewed studies that use storytelling as a research method or tool and relates to people telling their personal stories of real - life or authentic experiences around public health issues . The process of storytelling has multiple researches aims . Included in these aims is its ability to inform the researcher ( through extraction of information ) , but also as an intervention to facilitate a process of ‘ reflection and reworking of experience and knowledge in the research participant ’ . Storytelling has been used as a tool to gain insight into public knowledge , attitudes and behavior ( KAB ) , for example , storytelling has been used with African - American women who fail to attend breast cancer screening and has revealed attitudes and behavior driven by pain , fear , loss and faith in God . The same research also used storytelling to clarify misinformation , validate personal experiences and enhance learning around the importance of screening . It needs to be noted that unlike more conventional qualitative research methods , storytelling is an emergent research method and validation remains to be established . However , lack of a substantial body of validation does not justify dismissing storytelling as a research method . Ideally , this review will identify studies that provide evidence of the validity of storytelling as used in the research context . Storytelling has been used as a research method in various disciplines , some of which touch on public health , some of which are removed from it . For example , social work , healthcare and its delivery , understanding marginalized communities and anthropology , to provide a few examples . In attempting a definition of storytelling as a research tool , first , there is a distinction to be made between science and storytelling / narrative as two research paradigms . Second , storytelling needs to be distinguished from other forms of narrative research , for example , narrative medicine . According to Bleakly , science and narrative are two ways of knowing . Bleakly points out the value of story compared with more conventionally analytical methods that ‘ tend to lose the concrete story and its emotional impact to abstract categorizations , which may claim explanatory value but often remain descriptive ’ . Essentially , within clinical education at least , Bleakly refers to how narrative offers value over and above objective measures , pointing out that while objective morbidity and mortality data characteristically remain faceless , narrative inquiry often seeks to personalize and also to engage proactively with its research population through deliberate intervention , as research with , not on , people . Reflecting Bleakly , this systematic review aims to find examples of where research has been carried out with people ( within the context of various public health topics ) rather than on people , and work that seeks to engage proactively with the study population via storytelling as a method . Storytelling as a research method shares some similarities but also notable differences to narrative medicine as a research method . According to Columbia Narrative Medicine , Columbia University Irving Medical Center , ‘ narrative medicine fortifies clinical practice with the narrative competence to recognize , absorb , metabolize , interpret , and be moved by the stories of illnesses . Physician and advocate of narrative medicine , Rita Charon , in a paper in JAMA , describes narrative medicine as , ‘ Medicine practiced with narrative competence , is proposed as a model for humane and effective medical practice ’ . Narrative medicine appears to be more closely aligned with physicians ’ practice and the patient – physician relationship ( aimed at improving patient care ) than the storytelling research method that this systematic review aims to explore . This review aims to seek data on KAB from members of the public and does not serve the purpose of improving a physician – patient relationship or improving care as directly as narrative medicine appears to do . In practice , storytelling as a tool in research might adopt various formats . One that has found prominence in recent years , with an emergent literature base generally , as well as in the field of health research , is digital storytelling ( DST ) comprising a 25 min video17 , a 3–5 min short video,18 ‘ Photovoice ’ ( photo collections to promote dialogue)19 or verbal telling of personal stories . 20 DST has the potential to capture lived experiences and share research findings in a manner that is highly engaging and possibly made accessible on a digital platform . Storytelling as a research tool alongside conventional qualitative research method . Storytelling as a qualitative research method is still an emergent area and may serve to complement data sourced via more conventional , empirical qualitative research methods . However , certain nuances of individuals ’ insights associated with their experiences might not be accessible via some of these more established methods of inquiry . Moreover , stories do not reveal one , single discoverable truth because truth is a matter of degree and perspective . In this respect , using the telling of a story as a research tool rests on a premise that is starkly different to that of a conventional scientific method . Both the established scientific method and the storytelling research method each provide a distinctive way of ordering experience and constructing reality , and using the two knowledge systems to complement and enhance each other might provide broader and more in - depth insight into an experience than using one method alone . In a discussion paper by Dahlstrom , the author addresses storytelling as a means to communicate science to non - expert audiences . According to Dahlstrom , narratives are easier to comprehend , and audiences find them more engaging than traditional logical - scientific communication . The nature of learning from storytelling differs from that derived from more conventional scientific information , for example , from statistical data . Scientific information provides abstract truths that can be applied to a specific case , as in deductive reasoning , whereas narrative information follows inductive reasoning , which often involves a depiction of an individual experience from which an inference to a general or even a collective truth can be made . Storytelling is a highly nuanced means of communication , usually articulating cause - and - effect relationships between events over a period of time , and often in relation to a certain character . It is also grounded in a level of realism that might be less evident with other forms of communication . Storytelling potentially draws on commonalities between the story or the storyteller and the listener or reader . This , combined with the underlying assumption of credibility in the teller ’s story or experience , can potentially motivate and persuade individuals towards behavioral change and reduces resistance to any action implied by the message . Studies have used stories and storytelling for their value in both communicating with and influencing others . Among the reasons for choosing storytelling as a research tool , one of the most important is that it is a highly accessible modality that does not require specialized knowledge and skills to connect with , or derive meaning from .