{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.014396456256921373, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.366197183098592, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Stories, illness, and narrative norms

Collecting illness narratives has become an established way to explore illness experiences. Often both collecting and analysing illness narratives are based on taken for granted narrative norms about how a narrative should look in order to be counted as a narrative and as researchable. Autobiographical illness stories are for instance generally supposed to be coherent and true. Many persons, especially with neurocognitive disorders, have problems living up to and adhere to these narrative norms, thus telling stories that risk being considered as non-stories or as incoherent and fragmented stories. A number of examples of conflicts between narrative norms and illness stories will be discussed. In conclusion, it is argued that researchers must use data collecting methods as well as analytical strategies that allow for alternative ways of telling stories.