Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T05:04:59.042Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Storytelling training to promote stakeholder engagement in research dissemination

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 August 2021

Hae-Ra Han*
Affiliation:
The Johns Hopkins School of Nursing, Baltimore, Maryland The Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland The Johns Hopkins Institute for Clinical and Translational Research, Baltimore, Maryland
Samuel Byiringiro
Affiliation:
The Johns Hopkins School of Nursing, Baltimore, Maryland The Johns Hopkins Institute for Clinical and Translational Research, Baltimore, Maryland
Cyd Lacanieta
Affiliation:
The Johns Hopkins Institute for Clinical and Translational Research, Baltimore, Maryland The Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
Christine Weston
Affiliation:
The Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland The Johns Hopkins Institute for Clinical and Translational Research, Baltimore, Maryland
Mia Terkowitz
Affiliation:
The Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland The Johns Hopkins Institute for Clinical and Translational Research, Baltimore, Maryland
Melanie Reese
Affiliation:
The Johns Hopkins Institute for Clinical and Translational Research, Baltimore, Maryland Older Women Embracing Life, Baltimore, Maryland
Michael Rosen
Affiliation:
The Johns Hopkins Institute for Clinical and Translational Research, Baltimore, Maryland The Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
Cheryl Dennison Himmelfarb
Affiliation:
The Johns Hopkins School of Nursing, Baltimore, Maryland The Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland The Johns Hopkins Institute for Clinical and Translational Research, Baltimore, Maryland The Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
Payam Sheikhattari
Affiliation:
Morgan State University, Baltimore, Maryland
Michelle Medeiros
Affiliation:
University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
David Fakunle
Affiliation:
The Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland DiscoverME/RecoverME: Enrichment Through the African Oral Tradition, Baltimore, Maryland
*
Address for correspondence: H.-R. Han, PhD, RN, FAAN, The Johns Hopkins School of Nursing, 525 N. Wolfe Street, Baltimore, MD 21205. Email: hhan3@jhu.edu
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Storytelling is increasingly recognized as a culturally relevant, human-centered strategy and has been linked to improvements in health knowledge, behavior, and outcomes. The Community Engagement Program of the Johns Hopkins Institute for Clinical and Translational Research designed and implemented a storytelling training program as a potentially versatile approach to promote stakeholder engagement. Data collected from multiple sources, including participant ratings, responses to open-ended questions, and field notes, consistently pointed to high-level satisfaction and acceptability of the program. As a next step, the storytelling training process and its impact need to be further investigated.

Type
Brief Report
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Association for Clinical and Translational Science

Storytelling to Promote Stakeholder Engagement

Stakeholder engagement is defined as the process of meaningfully involving persons affected by research findings or programs in the research process. Reference Bowen, Hyams, Goodman, West, Harris-Wai and Yu1 Recognized as a key process to improve the way research is prioritized, translated, and used in real-life settings, Reference Brett, Staniszewska and Mockford2 stakeholder engagement can occur across all stages of research, spanning from topic identification and study design to interpretation and dissemination of findings. Reference Forsythe, Ellis and Edmundson3 A national survey Reference Skinner, Williams and Richmond4 revealed “research results disseminated to the community in a culturally relevant and appropriate manner” as one of the top indicators of successful community engagement.

The National Institutes of Health Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) program emphasizes the importance of engaging nonacademic stakeholders in the research process. Therefore, many CTSAs have developed methods and infrastructure to support stakeholder engaged research. Reference Joosten, Israel and Williams5Reference Cunningham, Miller and Joosten7 The Community Engagement Program of the Johns Hopkins Institute for Clinical and Translational Research (ICTR, Hopkins CTSA), which includes members representing three academic institutions and nonacademic stakeholders, collectively developed a training program using storytelling as a strategy for dissemination of research information and findings.

Storytelling or narrative communication (referred to as storytelling hereafter) is increasingly recognized as an effective, human-centered technique used among various settings and populations, such as older adults to improve cognition, Reference Whitty, Mansour and Aguirre8,Reference Fong, Tan, Mahendran, Kua and Chee9 patients with cancer, diabetes, and hypertension to improve their health behaviors, Reference Lipsey, Waterman, Wood and Balliet10 healthcare workers to address psychosocial stress, Reference Phillips and Becker11 and community-level stigma reduction and awareness related to suicide. Reference Mohatt, Singer and Evans12 Recent systematic reviews highlight the positive impact of storytelling on health behaviors and outcomes among traditionally undervalued demographic groups, such as American Indian and Alaskan Native youth Reference Andreo and Andrade13 and African American women. Reference Ballard, Davis and Hoffner14 Additionally, some researchers used storytelling as a stakeholder engagement approach to identify research priorities impacting young African American breast cancer survivors. Reference Yan, Millon-Underwood and Walker15

Storytelling has a typical structure that includes the following: Reference Dahlstrom16 (1) cause-and-effect relationships between events that take place (2) over a certain period (3) that impact certain character(s). Different from traditional scientific communication aimed at providing abstract truths that are valid and context-free, storytelling is context-dependent as it attempts to derive a depiction and meaning of individual experiences from the cause-and-effect structure of the events. Within a sociocultural framework, storytelling is considered as a central medium of knowledge sharing and communicating science across diverse audiences in ways that make sense to the communities where the research takes place. Reference Louis17,Reference Christensen18

Educational Gap

Storytelling is considered highly relevant to populations with health disparities such as African Americans, for whom there is a strong cultural connection as a form of social discourse. Reference Ballard, Davis and Hoffner14 While literature is growing to discuss “what” happened as a result of storytelling, Reference Whitty, Mansour and Aguirre8Reference Ballard, Davis and Hoffner14,Reference Fakunle, Thomas David, Gonzales, Vidot and Johnson19 published evaluations of storytelling training (i.e., how it was done and how it was received) are rare. Given the increasing attention to storytelling as a potentially versatile stakeholder engagement approach, it is important to describe the ways in which storytelling training is provided so that it can be adopted by future research teams as a practical engagement method. Therefore, this paper’s purpose is to discuss the format, scope, and evaluation outcomes of the storytelling training program offered by the ICTR’s Community Engagement Program.

Target Audience

The target audience of the storytelling training program were faculty, research staff, community members, students, and fellows interested in utilizing storytelling approaches for disseminating research findings. The introductory seminar was advertised on Eventbrite, ICTR’s social media handles, through ICTR’s Community Engagement Program partners at the University of Maryland and Morgan State University, Hopkins’ School of Nursing network, emailing lists of existing community partner organizations, and to Hopkins’ Community Research Advisory Council members. The “how to” phase was a workshop designed to provide basic skills for creating individual stories and was primarily advertised to participants of the introductory storytelling seminar.

Description of the Storytelling Training Program

Table 1 details the format, structure, and scope of the two-session storytelling training program which was offered over Zoom, an online video conferencing platform. The introductory seminar (first session) and skills building workshop (second session) were both facilitated by the same expert (DF), who has over 20 years of experience in the art of Black storytelling, African drumming, singing, and theater. Serving as a faculty and professor at two universities in the USA, the expert integrates the artistic and cultural practice to strengthen health, social equity, and liberation. Both sessions were designed to fit the needs of scholarly and community members wishing to share stories about what matters to them.

Table 1. Curriculum of storytelling training program

The purpose of the 1-hour introductory seminar was to orient participants to what storytelling is and how it can empower stakeholders. The presentation discussed how to portray one’s own personal context in a story, why storytelling matters, making the audience find themselves in a story, and the general elements that make a story a “story.”

The objective of the second session was to equip participants with the specific storytelling skills needed to better collaborate as researchers and community members, thus promoting community engagement in research. Not all participants had attended the introductory seminar, but the second session presented and dived deep into many of the concepts introduced in the first seminar. The second session began with the facilitator and each participant introducing themselves and expressing anything they enjoyed doing and/or were thankful for. Following introductions, the workshop consisted of two main activities: The Hero’s Journey and the Movie Trailer. The Hero’s Journey was used as the most common and popular template of storytelling that our participants can easily relate to. Reference Sander20 Through the Hero’s Journey, an individual’s evolving life story can be created to provide the person with meaning and purpose. Reference Kerr, Deane and Crowe21 The Hero’s Journey activity involved participants identifying where they would place themselves on a narrative progression map, which ranges from limited awareness of a problem to the mastery of a problem. Reference Williams22 This activity provided participants with a method for reflection on and framing of stories for prospective audiences. The movie trailer activity involved participants developing a short story analogous to a movie advertisement, applying the techniques introduced in the skills building workshop. The two main activities were structured as general introductions by the storytelling expert, followed by small group breakout sessions for hands-on practice and a full group debrief to discuss the experience. There were no specific story topics other than what interested the participants, and they were willing to share with their peers in the breakout rooms, and occasionally with the bigger group during debrief. Finally, participants convened to receive further elucidation on the “story” and “telling” components of storytelling and concluded with a question-and-answer period to address outstanding and critical points.

Evaluation Methods

At the end of each of the two sessions, we administered a short survey to evaluate participants’ experience. The survey included multiple-choice, 5-point Likert-type scale, and open-ended questions. Given that this was an early and innovative program, the evaluation goals were largely formative and sought to characterize participants’ reactions and content of the process of the program. Additionally, qualitative evaluation of the skills building workshop utilized field notes captured during breakout sessions. Four notetakers were staff with the ICTR Community Collaboration Core and one was from University of Maryland Baltimore—a partner University for Community Engagement. Notetakers were each assigned to a breakout group solely to observe and document group interactions. Prior to the skills building workshop, notetakers were informed about the main objectives and briefed on good practices of field (albeit virtual) observations. Notetakers were instructed to document factual data (e.g., date, time, how many participants) along with participants’ interactions and conversational points.

Descriptive analysis was used to examine participants’ characteristics, as well as their ratings to the evaluation surveys administered after the introductory seminar and skills building workshop. Content analysis was used to summarize the main themes identified from the open-ended survey questions, and field notes pooled from the skills building workshop breakout groups.

Results

Workshop Session 1: Introduction to Storytelling

The introductory seminar received 289 registrants, and 110 attended the event on November 5th, 2020 (38% attendance rate). Fifty-six participants completed the evaluation survey (response rate = 51%), and feedback was mostly positive. When asked if they grasped the core elements of storytelling, 66% strongly agreed and 29% somewhat agreed. When asked if they appreciated the introductory seminar overall, 86% strongly agreed and 11% somewhat agreed. The qualitative feedback was also positive, with some respondents noting that the session was an “eye opener.”

Workshop Session 2: Storytelling Skills Building

The skills building workshop registration was capped at 50 individuals yet resulted in 60 registrants and 21 people attended (35% attendance rate). The workshop was held in two identically structured sessions on November 12 and 19, 2020. Participants were diverse, comprising of students and research fellows (52%), faculty and staff (38%), and community members (10%). Seventeen participants completed the evaluation survey (response rate = 81%). Among survey respondents, at least 80% felt very or somewhat equipped to use the “hero’s journey” to orient their personal, professional, and empirical stories, to make a movie trailer or elevator pitch, and to be intentional about sharing stories to relevant audiences (Fig. 1). Regarding the application of the skills learned from the workshop, 100% replied “strongly agree” or “somewhat agree” on committing to use the learned skills at their work, and they believed people they know could benefit from such workshop. Finally, all participants replied “strongly agree” that they appreciated the workshop overall.

Fig. 1. Storytelling participants’ responses to how they felt equipped to use “Hero’s journey,” “Make movie trailer,” and “be intentional about sharing stories to ideal and important audiences.”

Workshop participants’ written responses to open-ended questions about their experiences were notably positive, expressing that they learned tools to better communicate and help others to understand their work. Several participants wrote about their plans for using storytelling as a tool to engage stakeholders and as a method for disseminating their research to target communities and noted that it was a paradigm shift. Participants also appreciated the opportunity to interact with other participants while practicing their learned storytelling skills. One participant wrote:

“This was the best workshop on Zoom that I’ve attended ALL YEAR. Thank you for keeping it so engaging and relevant. I think people often do not take the extra time and create the space needed to think about how to share their research in a way that is compelling/relevant/moving. Everyone in public health should take this workshop…”

Field notes taken by trained staff included similar, generally positive responses shared verbally or observed in their breakout groups. Notetakers unanimously wrote that participants were highly engaged and showed passion for goals and topics. Participants were respectful of one another and were interested in each other’s stories. During the second breakout, some groups struggled with creating trailers but moved forward once their questions were answered by the instructor. One of the notetakers observed that the group seemed to have more energy when the instructor joined, and their discussion became more fluent.

Lessons Learned and Moving Forward

Leveraging the growing emphasis and relevance of stakeholder engagement, the ICTR’s Community Engagement Program successfully developed and implemented a storytelling training workshop targeting researchers, research staff, community members, and students. According to evaluation data, using a two-phase approach (i.e., introduction to storytelling followed by a skills building workshop with interactive breakout activities) worked well for giving participants a general orientation about storytelling and followed by the opportunity to practice the art of storytelling. These findings are consistent with Urstad et al. Reference Urstad, Ulfsby, Brandeggen, Bodsberg, Jensen and Tjoflåt23 who reported that storytelling generated strong emotional engagement while maintaining high levels of attention and interest from students in higher education. We observed that the learner-to-learner interaction increased communication and collaboration among participants. Such educational experiences have been shown to facilitate quality learning experience with significant positive outcomes for students. Reference Al-Huneidi and Schreurs24

Despite the positive impact of the training program, some of the participants noted uncertainty about what they were expected to do or how to frame the stories. For future iterations, we will need to consider spending more time to review the process of developing stories with clearer instructions and modeling to foster a better understanding of the activities’ purposes. As for modeling, audiovisual material such as slides and pre-recorded videos could be used as examples to better orient the learner to the process. Such orientation and training may help stimulate the learner’s creation of story while allowing the training team to teach storytelling skills on a larger scale and with consistency. Additionally, training activities could include diverse media avenues to accommodate varying learning styles. Reference Rodríguez-Almagro, Prado-Laguna, Hernández-Martínez, Monzón-Ferrer, Muñoz-Camargo and Martín-Lopez25 The proportion of community members who attended the training was relatively small. Other training sessions should conduct targeted recruitment to ensure community representativeness. Finally, it would be important to assess the participants’ readiness to share and proceed with storytelling, and as the field is evolving, new tools are being developed to measure storytellers’ readiness. For example, questionnaires may serve as a self-reflective tool that prospective storytellers could use, Reference Ashdown and Maniate26 and trainers can use quantitative ratings as a basis to gauge changes before and after the training workshop.

In conclusion, the ICTR’s storytelling training program was successfully implemented with consistently high satisfaction ratings and positive comments. The utility of storytelling as a culturally relevant experiential technique to potentially improve stakeholder engagement in the research process is to be determined. Future programs should address the impact of such training on actual engagement of participants’ storytelling abilities with stakeholders in the research process, from ideation of research questions to the dissemination of findings.

Acknowledgements

This publication was made possible by the Johns Hopkins Institute for Clinical and Translational Research (ICTR) which is funded in part by Grant Number UL1 TR003098 from the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS), a component of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and NIH Roadmap for Medical Research. Additional funding was provided by the National Institute of Nursing Research (P30NR018093) and the National Institute on Aging (R01AG062649). Its contents are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official view of the Johns Hopkins ICTR, NCATS or NIH.

Disclosures

The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

References

Bowen, DJ, Hyams, T, Goodman, M, West, KM, Harris-Wai, J, Yu, JH. Systematic Review of Quantitative Measures of Stakeholder Engagement. Clinical and Translational Science 2017; 10: 314336. doi: 10.1111/cts.12474.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brett, J, Staniszewska, S, Mockford, C, et al. Mapping the impact of patient and public involvement on health and social care research: a systematic review. Health Expectations 2014; 17: 637650. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2012.00795.x.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Forsythe, LP, Ellis, LE, Edmundson, L, et al. Patient and Stakeholder Engagement in the PCORI Pilot Projects: Description and Lessons Learned. Journal of General Internal Medicine 2016; 31(1): 1321. doi: 10.1007/s11606-015-3450-z.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Skinner, JS, Williams, NA, Richmond, A, et al. Community Experiences and Perceptions of Clinical and Translational Research and Researchers. Progress in Community Health and Partnerships: Research, Education, and Action 2018; 12(3): 263271. doi: 10.1353/cpr.2018.0050.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Joosten, YA, Israel, TL, Williams, NA, et al. Community engagement studios: A structured approach to obtaining meaningful input from stakeholders to inform research. Academic Medicine 2015; 90(12): 16461650. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000000794.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McElfish, PA, Kohler, P, Smith, C, et al. Community-driven research agenda to reduce health disparities. Clinical and Translational Science 2015; 8(6): 690695. doi: 10.1111/cts.12350.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cunningham, J, Miller, ST, Joosten, Y, et al. Community engaged strategies to promote relevance of research capacity building efforts targeting community organizations. Clinical and Translational Science 2015; 8(5): 513517. doi: 10.1111/cts.12274.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Whitty, E, Mansour, H, Aguirre, E, et al. Efficacy of lifestyle and psychosocial interventions in reducing cognitive decline in older people: Systematic review. Ageing Research Reviews 2020; 62: 101113. doi: 10.1016/j.arr.2020.101113.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fong, ZH, Tan, SH, Mahendran, R, Kua, EH, Chee, TT. Arts-based interventions to improve cognition in older persons with mild cognitive impairment: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Aging & Mental Health 2020: 113. doi: 10.1080/13607863.2020.1786802.Google ScholarPubMed
Lipsey, AF, Waterman, AD, Wood, EH, Balliet, W. Evaluation of first-person storytelling on changing health-related attitudes, knowledge, behaviors, and outcomes: A scoping review. Patient Education and Counseling 2020; 103(10): 19221934. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2020.04.014.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Phillips, CS, Becker, H. Systematic Review: Expressive arts interventions to address psychosocial stress in healthcare workers. Journal of Advanced Nursing 2019; 75(11): 22852298. doi: 10.1111/jan.14043.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mohatt, NV, Singer, JB, Evans, AC Jr, et al. A community’s response to suicide through public art: stakeholder perspectives from the Finding the Light Within project. American Journal of Community Psychology 2013; 52(1–2): 197209. doi: 10.1007/s10464-013-9581-7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Andreo, CL, Andrade, JM. Determining Effective Nutrition Intervention Strategies and the Subsequent Impact on Nutrition Knowledge, Dietary Adherence, and Health Outcomes among American Indian/Alaska Native Youth (2–18 Years of Age): a Systematic Review. Journal of Racial and Ethnic Health Disparities 2020; 7(6): 12021213. doi: 10.1007/s40615-020-00745-3.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ballard, AM, Davis, A, Hoffner, CA. The Impact of Health Narratives on Persuasion in African American Women: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Health Communication 2020: 112. doi: 10.1080/10410236.2020.1731936.Google ScholarPubMed
Yan, A, Millon-Underwood, S, Walker, A, et al. Engaging young African American women breast cancer survivors: A novel storytelling approach to identify patient-centred research priorities. Health Expectations 2020; 23(2): 473482. doi: 10.1111/hex.13021.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dahlstrom, MF. Using narratives and storytelling to communicate science with nonexpert audiences. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 2014; 4: 1361413620. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1320645111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Louis, RP. Can You Hear us Now? Voices from the Margin: Using Indigenous Methodologies in Geographic Research. Geographical Research 2007; 45(2): 130139. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-5871.2007.00443.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christensen, J. Telling stories: Exploring research storytelling as a meaningful approach to knowledge mobilization with Indigenous research collaborators and diverse audiences in community-based participatory research. The Canadian Geographer/Le Géographe canadien. 2012; 56(2): 231242. Doi: 10.1111/j.1541-0064.2012.00417.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fakunle, DO, Thomas David, T MPH, Gonzales, KAM, Vidot, DC, Johnson, LP. What Anansi Did for Us: Storytelling’s Value in Equitably Exploring Public Health. Health Education & Behavior 2021; 48(3): 352360. doi: 10.1177/10901981211009741.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sander, R. Understanding personal narratives: an approach to practice. Nursing Older People 2005; 17(2). doi: 10.7748/nop.17.2.34.s11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kerr, DJR, Deane, FP, Crowe, TP. Narrative Identity Reconstruction as Adaptive Growth During Mental Health Recovery: A Narrative Coaching Boardgame Approach. Frontiers in Psychology 2019; 10: 994. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00994.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Williams, C. The Hero’s Journey: A Mudmap for Change. Journal of Humanistic Psychology 2019; 59(4): 522539. doi: 10.1177/0022167817705499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Urstad, KH, Ulfsby, KJ, Brandeggen, TK, Bodsberg, KG, Jensen, TL, Tjoflåt, I. Digital storytelling in clinical replacement studies: Nursing students’ experiences. Nurse Education Today 2018; 71: 9196. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2018.09.016.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Al-Huneidi, A, Schreurs, J. Constructivism based blended learning in higher education. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning 2012; 7(1): 49. doi: 10.3991/ijet.v7il.1792.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rodríguez-Almagro, J, Prado-Laguna, MDC, Hernández-Martínez, A, Monzón-Ferrer, A, Muñoz-Camargo, JC, Martín-Lopez, M. The Impact on Nursing Students of Creating Audiovisual Material through Digital Storytelling as a Teaching Method. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 2021; 18(2): 694. doi: 10.3390/ijerph18020694.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ashdown, LC, Maniate, JM. Determining Patient Readiness to Share Their Healthcare Stories: A Tool for Prospective Patient Storytellers to Determine Their Readiness to Discuss Their Healthcare Experiences. Journal of Patient Experience 2020; 7(6): 982985. doi: 10.1177/2374373520948439.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Figure 0

Table 1. Curriculum of storytelling training program

Figure 1

Fig. 1. Storytelling participants’ responses to how they felt equipped to use “Hero’s journey,” “Make movie trailer,” and “be intentional about sharing stories to ideal and important audiences.”