Changing Minds Through Narrative
Submitting Institution
University of NottinghamUnit of Assessment
PhilosophySummary Impact Type
SocietalResearch Subject Area(s)
Medical and Health Sciences: Clinical Sciences
Psychology and Cognitive Sciences: Psychology
Language, Communication and Culture: Literary Studies
Summary of the impact
Currie's research into the role and nature of narrative and character
has brought about a range
of significant benefits in the fields of healthcare, education
and public debate.
- Physicians working with mental health patients rely on Currie's work
to support a specific
treatment programme
- Training for more than 300 medical practitioners has been delivered,
developed from materials
in Currie's research
- Children's confidence and attainment levels have been improved
- Public debate has been stimulated
- Schools have changed their curricula to teach some of the research
findings
Underpinning research
The philosophical research leading to the impacts described was carried
out by Professor Gregory
Currie (Nottingham 2000-13) between 2002 and 2010, and concerns the nature
and effects of
narrative and character in both fictional and non-fictional contexts.
In collaboration with Professor Jon Jureidini (Child Psychiatrist,
Department of Psychological
Medicine Women's and Children's Hospital, Adelaide), research published in
2003-04 focused on
narrative in issues concerning mental health. In particular, Currie and
Jureidini considered what we
might call pathologies of narrative; this includes the tendency to
exaggerate the effect of a person's
character, and particularly their intentions, on the explanation of
events.
Reviewing earlier work on Munchausen by proxy syndrome, Currie and
Jureidini [3.1] argue that the
narrative form itself has a tendency to encourage this exaggeration due to
its opportunities to "tell
stories" about why things happen which have emotional appeal, coherence
and intelligibility, rather
than scientific-explanatory virtues of evidential support, theoretical
parsimony, etc.
They also [3.2] suggest that narrative modes of thinking are writ large
in psychosis. Certain features
normally present in a standard fictional story, such as unrealistic
emphasis on the role of character
and intention (and the assumption that everything that happens in the
story is significant), are
grossly exaggerated in psychosis. They hypothesised that certain psychotic
states are therefore
"disorders of narrative".
Building on the discussion of narrative found in [3.1] and [3.2], Currie
[3.3 & 3.4] then focuses on
the way in which the construction of a fictional story is enhanced and
enlivened through the use of
character. Currie argues that character may add to the coherence of
fictional narrative by enriching
the connections between events as it helps generate the emotional appeal,
coherence and
intelligibility of the fictional narrative. Thus, the same factors vivid
in the hypothesis that psychotic
states are "disorders of narrative" are, Currie claims, those that play an
active and important role in
a compelling fictional narrative.
Currie brings together and evaluates the literature and evidence from
empirical psychology,
drawing two findings from this work that trouble his hypothesis regarding
fictional narratives: we
tend to think that people's behaviour justifies attributions of character
when it does not; people
behave in ways that are strongly determined by circumstances. Both
findings suggest that real
character is far less significant than one might imagine to how people
behave in the world. That
threatens the suggestion that character adds to narrative: if there is no
such thing as real character,
then it is hard to see what value fictional character will have in
narrative.
Against this threat, Currie suggests we view character, less as a
psychological-explanatory tool,
and more as a device for making vivid and coherent the interplay of other,
psychologically real
factors. So, Currie suggests, character adds a great deal to narrative,
even in the absence of real
character in the world itself. Fictional characters need not be
(indeed, should not be) at all like real
people in order to play the role required of them in successful narrative.
References to the research
3.1: Currie, G. and Jureidini, J. 2004. `Narrative and coherence', Mind
and Language, 19, 409-27
[DOI: 10.1111/j.0268-1064.2004.00266.x]
3.2: Currie, G. and Jureidini, J. 2003. Art and Delusion, Monist,
86, 556-78
PDF provided
3.3: Currie, G., 2010. Narratives and Narrators: A Philosophy of
Stories Oxford University Press
[DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199282609.001.0001]
3.4: Currie, G, 2009. `Narrative and the psychology of character' Journal
of Aesthetics and Art
Criticism. 67, 61-71
[DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-6245.2008.01335.x]
3.1, 3.2 & 3.4 were peer reviewed and each appears in a journal given
top ranking by the European
Science Foundation.
In a review of 3.3, for the Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism
(2011, pp. 331-3), Wilson (p. 331)
writes: `Currie has written a lively, original, and strikingly instructive
book on the theory of narrative'.
Details of the impact
A broad range of beneficiaries, some from quite disparate domains, have
engaged with the body of
research described in section 2. In part this is a product of the
pro-active approach taken to
maximising the scope and depth of benefits generated by the unit's
research, described in REF3a,
section b; it also reflects the transformative nature of Currie's
research into narrative and character.
Consequently, mental health care and education are two key
domains to have benefited from the
research, and we also note that the research has stimulated public
debate to a significant degree.
The different beneficiaries (in all we report 6; 4.1-4.6) indicate the
far-reaching applications of the
body of research.
Context: Mental Health Benefits
Since 2008, Staff at Adelaide Women's and Children's Hospital (AWCH) have
used Currie's work in
order to support an approach to the treatment of mental health issues
which mental health
practitioners believe to have beneficial outcomes for patients. The
research has also influenced a
training programme, the purpose of which is to educate mental health
practitioners in the use of this
treatment method. [5.1]
The approach taken to mental health issues emphasises building narratives
as the most ethically
responsible way to work with young people. To give some context: during
the period 2008-2012
AWCH had 24,045 Outpatients and 1,812 Inpatients. [5.1]
4.1 Benefits for Mental Health Care Patients
Research findings [3.1 & 3.2] were embedded into care programmes at
AWCH, by Jureidini, where
he continues to work in the area of Psychological medicine. This research
suggests a different
approach to treatment and patient care; the patient is encouraged to talk
to their physician (or a
confidante) about their feelings in order to challenge the dominant
narrative. For example, a young
patient with externalizing disorders (i.e., attention-deficit
hyperactivity disorder, conduct problems)
might perceive their disruptive actions as products of their own
characters (a story with emotional
appeal and coherence), rather than seeing these actions as legitimate
responses to particular
circumstances (e.g., parental break-up). This treatment path trades upon
the notion that certain
psychotic states are "disorders of narrative". Where appropriate, this
"narrative" that patients `tell
themselves' can be challenged. Currie's research has been integral to
this: "We rely on Currie's
work to support our emphasis on building more authentic narratives as
the most ethically
responsible way to work with young people" [5.1]
This approach to patient care, developed using Currie's collaborative
research with Jureidini, is
taken to have very specific benefits. According to the former Head
of Psychological medicine at
AWCH, there is no evidence in favour of medication or specific forms of
psychotherapy as the best
means with which to engage some types of patient. However, `"[t]hrough a
combination of `watchful
waiting' and physical and emotional rehabilitation, physicians may be
able to actively intervene
without reliance on medication or formulaic psychotherapy". [5.1]
4.2 Training for Mental Health Care Professionals
Also since 2008, a training unit has been developed, and it serves to
help spread the
influence of Currie's research. The unit is the Paediatric Mental
Health Training Unit (PMHTU);
the training portfolio delivered there, and developed by Jureidini, uses
findings from his
collaborative research with Currie. As noted: `PMHTU is quickly building
a strong profile
meaning that narrative approaches developed with Currie are influencing
a wide range of
practitioners'. [5.1]
More than 300 members of staff (including medical students, general
practitioners, allied health
professionals, teachers and counselors) have been trained (for at least 6
hours, each) in the use of
a care model that seeks to explore young people's distress with the aim of
developing a narrative
that explains their predicament. [5.1]
Context: improving confidence and attainment for school children
Seeking to apply Currie's body of research in a different domain, in 2011
the unit used existing links
with local schools to translate the research into workshops on narrative
and character for primary
school pupils. The workshops helped develop children's understanding
of character and story
writing, improved their confidence, and instilled in them a desire to
read. Similar workshops
for secondary-age pupils had substantial effects upon student
attainment at the IGCSE.
4.3 Primary School Improvement
Insight into character and its role in narrative was seen as especially
valuable to children looking to
construct compelling and vivid narratives for themselves. Workshops on
narrative were designed.
Their aim was to teach children about Currie's research findings:
specifically, about the important
role that character plays in narrative, by character adding to the
coherence of the narrative and
enriching the connections between events. The sessions also taught
children that fictional
characters need not be like real people to do this, and that it often aids
the narrative if they are not.
Feedback from the sessions attests to their success in raising authorial
confidence. A teacher notes
that, `[the] project has not only developed my children's understanding
of character and
story writing but, most importantly, instilled in them a love of
literature and a desire to read'.
[5.3] Children themselves reported benefits: most of those surveyed were more
confident that
they understood why interesting characters are important to stories
than they were before, and
they felt that they had learned something that would help them to
write a better story. [5.4]
4.4 Influencing School Curricula
Teacher-training sessions delivered to teachers from 5 schools in December
2012 led to three of
the Primary schools feeling able to run the sessions—described as
`Thinking Space' sessions—in
school straight away. Teachers from two special schools who attended also
found the workshop
valuable for further encouraging thinking skills and open ended thought.
[5.2] The training sessions
were designed to show-case to teachers how to deliver the workshops
created by the unit,
explaining how they were built around philosophical research, and looking
to articulate the value of
that research to the teachers.
4.5 Secondary School Attainment
To help pupils prepare for their English IGCSE a more advanced version of
the workshop on
narrative was designed in collaboration with a local Secondary
School—Nottingham University
Samworth Academy (NUSA)—which had substantial effects upon student
attainment at the
IGCSE in June 2013. 26 of the students attending declared themselves more
confident in their
understanding of the role of character in narrative; 25 that responded
that they had learned
something that would help them with their GCSE. [5.4] Their teacher
said that `Results show
that pupils had made considerable achievement at this stage in their
learning. The
intervention ... played a significant role in this success.' By
using research to explain the
benefits of creating unrealistic characters, the University of Nottingham
staff enabled pupils to
produce imaginative coursework that showed a greater level of maturity in
their writing.' [5.5] NUSA
have taken the decision to run the workshops on an annual basis, to
support their students, such
was the success of the programme. [5.5] This reflects a substantive
change to their curriculum.
Context: The Influence on Public Debate
Issued by the University of Nottingham in 2011 [5.6], a press release used
Currie's research to
explain the appeal of the Harry Potter series and thereby stimulated
wider debate within the
press, and provoked considerable social media engagement with Currie's
research.
Specifically, it drew on two of Currie's claims: that character adds a
great deal to narrative, even in
the absence of real character in the world itself, and
that fictional characters need not be (indeed,
should not be) at all like real people in order to play the
role required of them in successful
narrative. The press release builds on this insight in order to argue that
it is Potter's character that
ultimately drives the success of the franchise.
4.6: Stimulating Public Debate
The Daily Telegraph subsequently (2011) published a report on
Currie's research. It was tweeted
47 times, linked to on Facebook 61 times and `shared' a further 108 times
[5.6]. Following on from
this, a second article in the Daily Telegraph (2012) discusses
Currie's view on the Potter series.
This second article was tweeted 65 times, linked to on Facebook 356 times
and `shared' a total of
421 times. The latter piece is also cited in an article in the Times
Higher Education during May
2012. [5.6]
Currie then also authored a piece (`Does Great Literature Make us
Better?') that draws on his
research to argue for skepticism about the claim that great literature
makes us better people. In
particular, Currie draws on his discussion of the fact that we regularly
attribute our own failures to
circumstance and the failures of others to bad character, to undermine the
claim that great literature
makes us better people. Published in June of 2013 by The New York
Times, it attracted in excess
of 500 comments. [5.6] Reply pieces specifically focused on Currie's
article appeared during June
2013, published in Time and the Christian Science Monitor.
[5.6] To give a flavour of their reach:
the Time Magazine article was itself tweeted more than 2500 times
and `liked' on Facebook more
than 35,000 times. [5.6] The follow-up pieces and their very high
uptake in social media
circles demonstrate a clear contribution to public debate.
Sources to corroborate the impact
5.1: Email from former Head of Psychological medicine at AWCH; source is
also current Child
Psychiatrist, Department of Psychological Medicine Women's and Children's
Hospital, Adelaide.
5.2: Email from Education in Partnership Manager, Nottingham City
Council.
5.3: Quote from local teacher at Seagrave Primary School provided by the
Academy Project
Manager at the University of Nottingham
5.4: Summary of evaluation of events, available in a pdf (hard-copies of
surveys with children can
also be provided if required).
5.5: Email from English Teacher at NUSA
5.6: Summary of media impacts, available in a pdf