Recapturing the Oral Tradition of Storytelling in Spiritual Conversations with Older Adults: An Afro-Indigenous Approach
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The historical value of the oral tradition permeates literature as represented in multiple disciplines, including theology. An aspect of this tradition has proven viable in spiritual conversations with older adults. This paper will discuss the oral tradition’s medium of storytelling and listening to demonstrate its relevance in therapeutic conversations with older adults. Therapeutic storytelling is a distinct intervention prevalent in the African oral tradition This approach is also gaining attention in the contemporary context, blending seamlessly within the narrative approach. Using the quantitative research method of ethnography and autoethnography, I analyze specific therapeutic encounters that employ a storytelling/listening approach in spiritual conversations. The analysis reveals the relevance of storytelling in specific therapeutic encounters. Storytelling is gaining interest and reclaiming space in therapeutic settings with diverse populations, but mostly with older adults. The study also highlights the apparent similarities between the traditional approach to storytelling and the narrative approach in the contemporary therapeutic milieu.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it