Narrative Intervention to Address Conflict

Harnessing the power of stories for social change: Why stories we tell matter?

Humans are storytelling species. Every culture has storytelling traditions. Stories have been shared to entertain, educate, and inspire. Stories have been used to mobilize people to war, oppress, dehumanize, and exclude. Stories are also used to liberate, empower, humanize, foster solidarity, and break down stereotypes. Using the power of stories, narrative intervention has emerged as an effective strategy to instill positive individual and social change. Research shows that narrative interventions can be effective in reducing gender-based violence, poverty, corruption, and in promoting reconciliation, positive intergroup attitudes, and cooperation between groups.

How do narrative interventions impact individual and social change? 

• Shape social and cultural norms

• Raise awareness about sensitive issues and spark community discussions 

• Encourage critical reflection and engagement with different perspectives

• Counter simplistic narratives and break down stereotypes 

• Provide opportunity to explore difficult situations, and one’s responses to it 

• Influence people’s efficacy to tackle social problems in their community 

• Promote behaviors and critical action through role models

We work with storytelling partners to: 

1. Generate new knowledge and evidence 

• In collaboration with partners, we design rigorous research to test how stories influence us.

• We study the impact of different elements of a story and different change pathways.

Why should producers and organizations engage in research collaborations?

• We don’t have all the answers about how stories and its different elements influence us; indeed, stories can have unintended effects (e.g., Archie Bunker effect) 

• By disentangling and testing the effects of different components of complex narratives and pathways of influence, producers and organizations can maximize the impact of their ongoing and future programs

• Engaging in research collaborations provides an opportunity to contribute to common knowledge from which all storytellers can learn, maximizing impact beyond one’s own work  

2. Use evidence to design, implement and assess effective stories

• Conduct research prior to narrative design to understand social norms, attitudes, and perceived solutions regarding the issues tackled 

• Translate existing scholarly knowledge and principles to specific contexts 

• Work with creative teams in the narrative design process 

• Provide ongoing feedback on scripts prior to production 

• Assess audience feedback on new productions

• Design and conduct impact assessment 

Findings from our Research  on Narrative Interventions to Address Intergroup Conflict and Violence 

Can narrative interventions help societies reckon with historical conflicts and violence?

Bilali and Vollhardt (2013) examined this question by assessing the impact of a conflict radio drama, part of which focused on reckoning with the past fictional conflict (specifically, the narrative drama portrays characters working through a process of truth telling and dialogue about the past). We used audio priming to assess whether the drama influenced people’s willingness to engage with different versions of history, their victimhood beliefs, and outgroup trust. Specifically, participants completed an audio-delivered questionnaire in which the questionnaire and interview were recorded either in the voice of one of the characters of the drama or in the voice of an unknown actor. Listeners to whom the questionnaire was read by the drama character exhibited (1) more historical perspective taking (i.e., were less likely to report that their group’s version of history is the only true history, (2) were more likely to report that they try to understand other groups’ perspective of history), (3) reported higher outgroup trust and more inclusive victimhood (i.e., seeing others as having suffered similarly to themselves). (Link to study here.)

In a large-scale survey in Burundi, we (Bilali et al., 2016) examined the effect of a radio drama on reconciliation after a history of violence. Because citizens who choose to listen to dramas on reconciliation are likely to differ from non-listeners, we used a statistical technique to match listeners and non-listeners in a series of demographic characteristics, regional background, and experiences with violence. We subsequently assessed the differences between matched listeners and non-listeners on a series of outcomes. Drama listeners were more likely than non-listeners to acknowledge the ingroup’s responsibility for the history violence in the country, and they were less likely to blame the outgroup. Listeners also reported higher outgroup trust and lower social distance, and they were less likely to perceive the ingroup as superior to the outgroup. (Link to study here)

Can narrative interventions counter violent extremism? 

In a cluster randomized controlled trial of a narrative intervention (radio drama) in 132 villages in Burkina Faso (~3000 participants), Bilali (2022) found that an awareness-raising narrative delivered through weekly listening sessions over 12 weeks, increased behavioral intentions to collaborate with the police and prioritization of addressing violent extremism, and reduced justification of extremist violence. The intervention did not influence beliefs about or attitudes toward the police, or beliefs about the causes of violent extremism. Content analyses of discussions among participants reveal that the effects are likely due to changes in social norms and moral lessons drawn from the story and shared in group discussions. (Link to study here)

Do story role models increase people’s self-efficacy to act in one’s own community? 

To disentangle the effect of role modeling from other influences in narrative interventions, Bilali et al. (2017) conducted a field experiment in the Democratic Republic of Congo. In collaboration with script writers, they created two versions of a prototypical episode of a narrative intervention. In one episode (experimental condition: role-modeling) the fictional characters discussed community problems (e.g., corruption, intergroup relations, economic grievances) and planned community action to address them. A parallel episode used the same stories, except that the fictional characters did not plan actions to address the community problems (control condition). Participants in different communities in Eastern DRC were exposed to either the role-modeling episode (role modeling story), an episode lacking role modeling (control story), or did not listen to the show at all. The role modeling episode increased perceived collective efficacy for change and perspective taking. Role modeling also shifted the focus of discussions from grievances to collective efficacy and action for social change. However, listening to the role modeling episode was also related to more negative intergroup attitudes, such as heightened social distance and stronger agreement that discussions including members of different ethnic groups might aggravate matters. These mixed effects hint at a complex relationship between collective action and social harmony outcomes. (Link to study here)

In a different study, in a randomized controlled trial in 132 villages in Burkina Faso, Bilali (2024) examined the effects of a narrative intervention storyline using role models on efficacy beliefs, behavioral options, social norms, and attitudes related to corruption. Randomly selected participants in intervention villages participated in group listening sessions of a radio drama over three months. Compared to a business-as-usual control, role modeling storyline increased self and collective efficacy beliefs to impact change, and influenced behavioral choices to fight corruption (i.e., participants in listening group were more likely to report that they would report corruption when they see it). 

Can narrative interventions have unintended effects? 

In the South and North Kivu provinces of DRC, Bilali and Vollhardt (2015) used audio priming to assess the impact of a narrative intervention on intergroup violence on a variety of intergroup attitudes. The results revealed mixed effects. In line with the goals of the intervention, priming of the radio drama was related to more tolerance of intergroup marriages, and to perceiving the ingroup’s and outgroup’s suffering as more similar to each other (i.e., higher inclusive and less competitive victimhood). Contrary to the goals of the intervention, however, participants exposed to the character’s voice were more likely to agree that people should obey leaders without asking questions (i.e., more obedience), that a good leader should promote the ethnic ingroup’s success, and that discussions between members of different ethnic or political groups make things worse. 

To address these mixed findings, we conducted focus group discussions with listeners (Bilali & Vollhardt, 2015, Study 2), showing that the negative stories of conflict, trauma, or corruption sometimes elicit negative reactions (e.g., hopelessness). Depictions of negative realities might serve as reminders of ongoing grievances, which in turn might inhibit social change processes by increasing hopelessness. (Link to study here)