Scholarly context · Source transparency
Foundational scholarship helps interpret the six themes. These supplementary references are not new interview evidence and are not presented as the dissertation’s complete bibliography.
AI-generated conceptual illustration · Not research evidence or a real study site
What this evidence can support
Twelve interviews illuminate how participants perceive and interpret data storytelling. They do not establish causation, represent every workplace, or demonstrate that an AI intervention improves engagement. Public NCDOT documents add organizational context, not confirmation of the experiences of these participants.
Twelve references are listed below. Publication identity was checked against publisher records or author/institutional copies; the connection notes are supplementary interpretation, not a systematic literature review or a certification of the manuscript’s full bibliography.
Synthesis, implications, and completion review01 · Theoretical foundation
Sensemaking provides a lens for interpreting how people construct meaning when organizational information is ambiguous. It is the dissertation’s stated theoretical foundation, not a causal model tested here.
Publisher / DOI02 · Narrative visualization
Their design framework balances author-directed storytelling and reader exploration. It helps situate audience fit and explanation without assuming that any chart automatically increases engagement.
Publisher / DOI03 · Engagement theory
Meaningfulness, safety, and availability offer conceptual context for engagement. The dissertation’s participants described relevance and trust; these interviews did not measure or test all of Kahn’s conditions.
Publisher / DOI04 · Methodological context
Thematic analysis requires explicit analytic choices and coherent interpretation. This methodological reference is supplementary context, not a claim that the dissertation used reflexive thematic analysis or that its coding has been independently validated.
Publisher / DOI05 · Transparency and trust
Disclosure, clarity, and accuracy are distinct aspects of perceived transparency. They contextualize participants’ concerns about omissions and data limitations; the dissertation does not estimate their effects.
Publisher / DOI06 · Engagement definition and measurement
Vigor, dedication, and absorption distinguish work engagement from immediate interest in a report. The student and employee samples support measurement discussion, not a claim that storytelling improved engagement in this dissertation.
Publisher / DOI07 · Job versus organizational engagement
A survey of 102 employees distinguishes job engagement from organization engagement. It helps specify which construct a future study would investigate and consider support and fairness as alternative explanations; survey associations do not demonstrate causation or a storytelling effect.
Publisher / DOI08 · Narrative framing and omission
Their analytical framework examines how visual choices, annotations, additions, and omissions privilege interpretations. It strengthens scrutiny of selective storytelling in Themes 4 and 5; it is not an employee-engagement intervention or an effect-size estimate.
Publisher / DOI09 · Interpretation connected to action
This theoretical synthesis connects rendering circumstances comprehensible with possible action. It extends the existing Weick foundation for interpreting dialogue and response loops, without establishing a tested pathway or guaranteeing shared understanding.
Publisher / DOI10 · Qualitative sample sufficiency
Aim, sample specificity, established theory, dialogue quality, and analysis strategy inform a reasoned sample justification. Citing information power alone does not validate twelve interviews or establish saturation, especially within a heterogeneous sample.
Publisher / DOI11 · Analytic coherence and reflexivity
The authors clarify reflexive thematic analysis and warn about conceptual mismatches. This is a lens for checking consistency between stated assumptions and actual procedures—not permission to retrospectively rename the dissertation’s analysis.
Publisher / DOI12 · Safety to question and learn
A multimethod study of 51 manufacturing teams associates psychological safety with learning behavior. It contextualizes opportunities to challenge interpretations in Theme 3; safety is not interchangeable with trust, and the dissertation did not measure it.
Publisher / DOI
Analytic integrity