IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/epplan/v36y2013i1p165-171.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Seeing voices of health disparity: Evaluating arts projects as influence processes

Author

Listed:
  • Parsons, Janet
  • Heus, Lineke
  • Moravac, Catherine

Abstract

Arts-informed approaches are increasingly popular as vehicles for research, knowledge translation and for engaging key stakeholders on topics of health and health care. This paper describes an evaluation of a multimedia art installation intended to promote awareness of health disparities as experienced by homeless persons living in Toronto (Canada). The objective of the evaluation was to determine whether the installation had an impact on audience members, and if so, to understand its influence on viewers’ perspectives on homelessness and the health concerns of homeless persons. Key themes were identified through the analysis of direct observational data of viewer interactions with the exhibit and qualitative interviews with different audience members after the exhibit. The four key themes were: (1) Promoting recognition of common humanity between viewers and viewed (challenging previously held assumptions and stereotypes, narrowing perceived social distance); (2) functions fulfilled (or potentially fulfilled) by the exhibit: raising awareness, educational applications, and potential pathways by which the exhibit could serve as a call to social action; (3) stories that prompt more stories: the stories within the exhibit (coupled with the interview questions) prompted further sharing of stories amongst the evaluation respondents, highlighting the iterative nature of such approaches. Respondents told of recognizing similarities in the experiences recounted in the exhibit with their own interactions with homeless persons; (4) strengths and weaknesses identified: including aesthetic features, issues of audience ‘reach’ and the importance of suitable venues for exhibition. Theoretically informed by narrative analysis and visual anthropology, this evaluation demonstrates that arts-informed ‘interventions’ are highly complex and work in subtle ways on viewers, allowing them to re-imagine the lives of others and identify points of common interest. It also problematizes our assumptions about which outcomes matter and why.

Suggested Citation

  • Parsons, Janet & Heus, Lineke & Moravac, Catherine, 2013. "Seeing voices of health disparity: Evaluating arts projects as influence processes," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 165-171.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:36:y:2013:i:1:p:165-171
    DOI: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2012.03.003
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149718912000225
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2012.03.003?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Carmel Kelly & Esther Reid & Maria Lohan & Fiona Alderdice & Dale Spence, 2014. "Creating an eLearning Resource to Improve Knowledge and Understanding of Pregnancy in the Context of HIV Infection," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-14, October.
    2. Lafrenière, Darquise & Hurlimann, Thierry & Menuz, Vincent & Godard, Béatrice, 2014. "Evaluation of a cartoon-based knowledge dissemination intervention on scientific and ethical challenges raised by nutrigenomics/nutrigenetics research," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 103-114.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:36:y:2013:i:1:p:165-171. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/evalprogplan .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.