Storytelling 

 Storytelling is a two - way interaction , written or oral , between someone telling a story and   one or more listeners . It is a well - known and powerful means of communicating messages and   engaging audiences . In this commentary paper , we present a framework for the integration of   storytelling in systematic reviews and systematic maps at the stages where stakeholders are   actively involved . Using storytelling to explain complex research has , in the past , not been   considered a rigorous method of communicating science . Collecting contextual narratives from   stakeholders at the stages of question formulation and protocol writing can help to inform and   generate relevant research questions and review designs . Creating a final story that faithfully   presents the review results , while also relating to the contextual narratives , can contribute to   effective communication of the results to stakeholders as well as to a broader audience . This   approach can increase their engagement with the science and the implementation of evidence- based decisions .                The issues at stake in environmental management and conservation are often complex ,   while communication of systematic reviews and systematic maps needs to be clear and   comprehensible . Traditionally , scientific knowledge has been communicated as isolated logical   ideas with limited context given to the target audience . This poses the risk that the audience ,   particularly the non - expert one , might make inaccurate assumptions when they try to make   sense of new information . Therefore , effective science communication is considered to be an   important foundation for evidence - based decision - making . The results from systematic   reviews and systematic maps are commonly communicated to stakeholders through formats   such as final reports , policy briefs and summaries . In the case of evidence - based environmental   management , stakeholders are defined as “ all individuals and organisations that might have a   stake in the findings of the review ” . The findings are , in similarity with primary research , most   often written with a traditional logical - scientific structure .           Communicating evidence in an understandable and practically relevant way for   stakeholders , for instance by embedding knowledge in a narrative storyline , has shown to   increase an audience ’s engagement , willingness to act upon the knowledge and use the   evidence as a basis for their decisions . By placing knowledge into context , stories are easier to   process and generate more attention and engagement than traditional logical - scientific   communication . Storytelling , the ancient tool of using stories to communicate knowledge , has   the potential to give evidence meaning , motivate and engage audiences and give relevance to   their realities . Although storytelling has grown as a tool for science communication in several   research fields such as health care and science education , integrating it into systematic reviews   and systematic maps in environmental management and conservation to communicate   evidence to stakeholders and other target audiences is yet to be explored and used to its full   potential . Storytelling exists in many different forms and there are many different techniques .   It can be applied to visually describe a narrative using different mediums such as video ,   photography or graphics / illustrations , in what is usually called visual storytelling . Something   relatively new is to go digital in storytelling , i.e. using our modern digital means that makes it   possible for essentially anyone to share their stories . Of course , storytelling often exists in   traditional forms as well , such as in theatrical performances .   Based on my understanding , In spite of its increased popularity in science communication in   general , the particular use of storytelling to communicate results from systematic reviews and   systematic maps in environmental management and conservation has been rare , if used at all .   Given the complexity of the issues and interests at stake in environmental management , we   argue that exploring innovative tools to transfer evidence and communicate it to multiple   audiences is highly relevant . But based on number of studies which are   showing how narratives   can be useful for developing trust with an audience and increasing knowledge retention as well   as the ability and willingness by audiences to learn and take action . Being easily digested by 

 the human brain , stories help bridging between our logos and pathos ; when an audience   becomes emotionally receptive of facts , chances increase that they will respond and act on the   knowledge . Here , we argue that storytelling holds potential as a tool in systematic reviews and   systematic maps , serving mainly two purposes .         Embedding knowledge from reports , briefs and notes in a coherent story that connects with   the interests and concerns of stakeholders is one tool to build shared understanding . A final   story can provide relevant context to review results and helps stakeholders identify when and   where they can engage and take action . To situate review results in a coherent and relevant   final story , we propose gathering contextual narratives at the initial stages of a systematic   review and map . These contextual narratives describe stakeholders ’ understanding of the issues   under investigation in the systematic review or map , based on their experiences and previous   knowledge . We believe the process of gathering contextual narratives can also increase   stakeholder engagement . In the following section , we describe how these two ways of using   storytelling can be integrated into systematic reviews and systematic maps . It should , however ,   be clear that storytelling for communication of evidence should not be understood as the sole   way to reach and engage a target audience , but rather as a complementary tool to the battery of   traditional communication products .   Following are the pointer that I understood from the session and the videos .   In storytelling , a classic plot is presented , that of a person extricating him / herself from an   awkward situation through wit . The effect is compounded by the leader 's apparent absence of   fear or courage . In this way , characters in stories manage to find new and strange ways of   behaving true to form and presenting a message . Characters of stories are mature , they   experience powerful emotions , they learn or fail to learn from their adventures and mistakes .   Yet , the changes they undergo are themselves specific to the situation and to the characters   themselves rather than psychological development in the present scenario . Unlike the heroes   of novels or plays , the characters of tales do not pose many psychological puzzles but rather   present a picture . The puzzle which they pose is whether they can find unpredictable ways of   behaving predictably , a puzzle which mirrors the challenge facing the storyteller , that of telling   an old story in a novel way , so as to entertain his / her audience . The storyteller buys his / her   audience 's suspension of disbelief at the cost of delivering a good story not to make the   unbelievable made believable but to represent the flawed situation in the organisation . Failed   stories may actually feed a good story , that of a pretentious person failing to deliver his   promise . Alternatively , it made me aware that , stories that are not understood may lead to a   collapse of meaning , just like a text or a joke in a foreign language which leaves us suspecting   that there is meant to be meaning somewhere though the meaning eludes us . Form change , not   only introduces legitimate though temporary aberrations in the behaviour of the characters , but   also allows for sudden shifts in the balance of power among the characters . A few magic words   can budge the mighty rock for example a behaviour that no amount of physical effort could   move . To summarize then , within the universe storytelling is a process whose primary aim is   to entertain audiences . It is achieved through a creative blend of the unfamiliar with the   familiar , the reassuring oppositions between primary forces and the storyteller 's performing   craft . Stories travel easily , mutating along the way , resurfacing in unexpected places in   unexpected shapes . Good stories represent a successfully met challenge . 


EMAIL: 
ID_NUM: 
NAME_STUDENT: 
PHONE_NUM: 
STREET_ADDRESS: 
URL_PERSONAL: 
USERNAME: 

### Task: You are a PII (Personal Identity Information) Detection. Given a essays written by students, you have to identify ONLY the following:
NAME_STUDENT - The full or partial name of a student that is not necessarily the author of the essay. This excludes instructors, authors, and other person names.
EMAIL - A student’s email address.
USERNAME - A student's username on any platform.
ID_NUM - A number or sequence of characters that could be used to identify a student, such as a student ID or a social security number.
PHONE_NUM - A phone number associated with a student.
URL_PERSONAL - A URL that might be used to identify a student.
STREET_ADDRESS - A full or partial street address that is associated with the student, such as their home address.
### Input: Storytelling 

 Storytelling is a two - way interaction , written or oral , between someone telling a story and   one or more listeners . It is a well - known and powerful means of communicating messages and   engaging audiences . In this commentary paper , we present a framework for the integration of   storytelling in systematic reviews and systematic maps at the stages where stakeholders are   actively involved . Using storytelling to explain complex research has , in the past , not been   considered a rigorous method of communicating science . Collecting contextual narratives from   stakeholders at the stages of question formulation and protocol writing can help to inform and   generate relevant research questions and review designs . Creating a final story that faithfully   presents the review results , while also relating to the contextual narratives , can contribute to   effective communication of the results to stakeholders as well as to a broader audience . This   approach can increase their engagement with the science and the implementation of evidence- based decisions .                The issues at stake in environmental management and conservation are often complex ,   while communication of systematic reviews and systematic maps needs to be clear and   comprehensible . Traditionally , scientific knowledge has been communicated as isolated logical   ideas with limited context given to the target audience . This poses the risk that the audience ,   particularly the non - expert one , might make inaccurate assumptions when they try to make   sense of new information . Therefore , effective science communication is considered to be an   important foundation for evidence - based decision - making . The results from systematic   reviews and systematic maps are commonly communicated to stakeholders through formats   such as final reports , policy briefs and summaries . In the case of evidence - based environmental   management , stakeholders are defined as “ all individuals and organisations that might have a   stake in the findings of the review ” . The findings are , in similarity with primary research , most   often written with a traditional logical - scientific structure .           Communicating evidence in an understandable and practically relevant way for   stakeholders , for instance by embedding knowledge in a narrative storyline , has shown to   increase an audience ’s engagement , willingness to act upon the knowledge and use the   evidence as a basis for their decisions . By placing knowledge into context , stories are easier to   process and generate more attention and engagement than traditional logical - scientific   communication . Storytelling , the ancient tool of using stories to communicate knowledge , has   the potential to give evidence meaning , motivate and engage audiences and give relevance to   their realities . Although storytelling has grown as a tool for science communication in several   research fields such as health care and science education , integrating it into systematic reviews   and systematic maps in environmental management and conservation to communicate   evidence to stakeholders and other target audiences is yet to be explored and used to its full   potential . Storytelling exists in many different forms and there are many different techniques .   It can be applied to visually describe a narrative using different mediums such as video ,   photography or graphics / illustrations , in what is usually called visual storytelling . Something   relatively new is to go digital in storytelling , i.e. using our modern digital means that makes it   possible for essentially anyone to share their stories . Of course , storytelling often exists in   traditional forms as well , such as in theatrical performances .   Based on my understanding , In spite of its increased popularity in science communication in   general , the particular use of storytelling to communicate results from systematic reviews and   systematic maps in environmental management and conservation has been rare , if used at all .   Given the complexity of the issues and interests at stake in environmental management , we   argue that exploring innovative tools to transfer evidence and communicate it to multiple   audiences is highly relevant . But based on number of studies which are   showing how narratives   can be useful for developing trust with an audience and increasing knowledge retention as well   as the ability and willingness by audiences to learn and take action . Being easily digested by 

 the human brain , stories help bridging between our logos and pathos ; when an audience   becomes emotionally receptive of facts , chances increase that they will respond and act on the   knowledge . Here , we argue that storytelling holds potential as a tool in systematic reviews and   systematic maps , serving mainly two purposes .         Embedding knowledge from reports , briefs and notes in a coherent story that connects with   the interests and concerns of stakeholders is one tool to build shared understanding . A final   story can provide relevant context to review results and helps stakeholders identify when and   where they can engage and take action . To situate review results in a coherent and relevant   final story , we propose gathering contextual narratives at the initial stages of a systematic   review and map . These contextual narratives describe stakeholders ’ understanding of the issues   under investigation in the systematic review or map , based on their experiences and previous   knowledge . We believe the process of gathering contextual narratives can also increase   stakeholder engagement . In the following section , we describe how these two ways of using   storytelling can be integrated into systematic reviews and systematic maps . It should , however ,   be clear that storytelling for communication of evidence should not be understood as the sole   way to reach and engage a target audience , but rather as a complementary tool to the battery of   traditional communication products .   Following are the pointer that I understood from the session and the videos .   In storytelling , a classic plot is presented , that of a person extricating him / herself from an   awkward situation through wit . The effect is compounded by the leader 's apparent absence of   fear or courage . In this way , characters in stories manage to find new and strange ways of   behaving true to form and presenting a message . Characters of stories are mature , they   experience powerful emotions , they learn or fail to learn from their adventures and mistakes .   Yet , the changes they undergo are themselves specific to the situation and to the characters   themselves rather than psychological development in the present scenario . Unlike the heroes   of novels or plays , the characters of tales do not pose many psychological puzzles but rather   present a picture . The puzzle which they pose is whether they can find unpredictable ways of   behaving predictably , a puzzle which mirrors the challenge facing the storyteller , that of telling   an old story in a novel way , so as to entertain his / her audience . The storyteller buys his / her   audience 's suspension of disbelief at the cost of delivering a good story not to make the   unbelievable made believable but to represent the flawed situation in the organisation . Failed   stories may actually feed a good story , that of a pretentious person failing to deliver his   promise . Alternatively , it made me aware that , stories that are not understood may lead to a   collapse of meaning , just like a text or a joke in a foreign language which leaves us suspecting   that there is meant to be meaning somewhere though the meaning eludes us . Form change , not   only introduces legitimate though temporary aberrations in the behaviour of the characters , but   also allows for sudden shifts in the balance of power among the characters . A few magic words   can budge the mighty rock for example a behaviour that no amount of physical effort could   move . To summarize then , within the universe storytelling is a process whose primary aim is   to entertain audiences . It is achieved through a creative blend of the unfamiliar with the   familiar , the reassuring oppositions between primary forces and the storyteller 's performing   craft . Stories travel easily , mutating along the way , resurfacing in unexpected places in   unexpected shapes . Good stories represent a successfully met challenge .
### Output: 