1) It provides simulation (knowledge about how to act).
2) It provides inspiration (motivation to act).
Of utmost importance here is that both of these benefits lead to action.
Turning to point number one, researchers have uncovered that individuals create a “geographic simulation” of the stories that they hear. People do not merely visualize the story in their minds but they also simulate it, meaning that they reproduce the spatial components and relationships mentioned in the story (209). In this way, researchers have concluded that there cannot be passive audiences to hearing stories; we simulate them step by step in our minds (210).
The Heath brothers posed the following question: Why does mental simulation work? Their response claimed that “it works because we can’t imagine events or sequences without evoking the same modules of the brain that are evoked in real physical activity” (212). Mental simulations inevitably help us to manage our emotions, problem-solve, anticipate what the proper reaction or response would be to a future scenario, and build skills (212-213). Most importantly, they help us to place knowledge into a framework that resembles reality, so that we are better able to take appropriate actions; they give us a context in which to act (214).
“The takeaway is simple: Mental simulation is not as good as actually doing something, but it’s the next best thing. And, to circle back to the world of sticky ideas, what we’re suggesting is that the right kind of story is, effectively, a simulation” (213).
The second major benefit of stories is the inspiration they can provide for their audience. Think of the story of Jared the Subway customer that lost 245 pounds by eating a few healthy choices at Subway and doing a little walking to and from his college classes. Not only does the story of Jared highlight the ability for stories to inspire us to action (buying Subway…) but it also reminds us that sticky ideas are not always created; many times sticky ideas just need to be found.
So, how can we spot a sticky idea? Both Chip and Dan Heath have analyzed the composition of hundreds of inspirational stories and have outlined their three basic plots: the Challenge plot, the Connection plot, and the Creativity plot.
1) The Challenge Plot: Think David and Goliath. Here, the main character overcomes a tremendous obstacle and succeeds. Challenge plots inspire us to act because “they appeal to our perseverance and courage. They make us want to work harder, take on new challenges, overcome obstacles” (227).
2) The Connection Plot: Think the biblical story of the Good Samaritan. These are stories about how individuals can create relationships that serve to bridge gaps in race, class, religion, etc. They make us want to serve, work with, and love mankind (228-229).
3) The Creativity Plot: Think of the story of an apple falling on Newton’s head. These are stories that involve an individual undergoing a major breakthrough, solving a problem that has haunted individuals for some time, or tackling a problem in a new and creative way (229). Creativity plots make us want to try something new, to be imaginative, and to experiment with different ways of looking at a set problem (230).
One of the greatest traits of stories is that they inherently possess almost all of the SUCCESs framework components that have been outlined thus far. They are almost always concrete (full of details), and they mostly have emotional and unexpected elements. The hardest part is to be simple, meaning to reflect the core message.
Initially, when I think about stories in a museum environment, my mind wanders to how we write label text for our exhibitions and interactive components. Most of us know the proper techniques as described by Beverly Serrell: don’t use humor, stick to less than 50 words, etc. However, do we understand how to construct meaning within the content of our labels? I find that using stories within label copy can serve to drive the visitor forward, allowing them to read the text because it is in an understandable sequence and is entertaining (!), logical, and easy to follow.
Just a few weeks ago, I went to the Denver Firefighters Museum across the street from the Denver Art Museum offices. Given that they draw much of their content from local firefighters and their personal experiences, I imagined that there would be plenty of stories within the museum’s label panels. I was wrong. As I think about this experience in light of the information presented above, the effectiveness of utilizing set paths of stimuli (stories=constructed pieces of information that form a cohesive whole) seems completely obvious. Stories stick because they have the ability to carry the mind from one place to another in an orderly fashion. Do our label panels do this or do they contain gaps that can suck the visitor into a place from which they cannot escape or progress?
Stories are also an incredible tool in creating interpretive materials. For art museums, they can be particularly useful in drawing the visitor into a period of time or a specific piece of artwork. They include the visitor—something art museums for decades have struggled to remedy; they place the visitor at the center of the experience. Yes, we can give a tour of our Asian galleries by selecting objects to speak about (notice I didn’t say discuss). Or, we could tell the history of the Silk Road by taking our visitors on a pretend trip through Asia, using objects to enhance our understanding of the story of that area’s culture and lifestyle. I know which event I would want to be a part of…
Again, some very intriguing distillations of key theories out there in the world on learning and interaction. In particular the idea of stories is really big in museums right now--and in educational research. (narrative inquiry if you are interested). I like the concept of having a concept in which to act. Sound at all like Dewey's real life situations?? With the fire fighters museum, what was the gap there in the labels? Why didn't they have stories??
ReplyDelete