oa Experiential imagination and norms of literary engagement

References

1. Arcangeli, Margherita
   2019 The two faces of mental imagery. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research101(2). 304–322. 10.1111/phpr.12589
   https://doi.org/10.1111/phpr.12589 [Google Scholar]
2. Brosch, Renate
   2018 What we “see” when we read: Visualization and vividness in reading fictional narratives. Cortex1051. 135–43. 10.1016/j.cortex.2017.08.020
   https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2017.08.020 [Google Scholar]
3. Currie, Gregory
   2016 Does fiction make us less empathic?Teorema: Revista Internacional de Filosofía35(3). 47–68.
   [Google Scholar]
4. Currie, Gregory
   1990 The nature of fiction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511897498
   https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511897498 [Google Scholar]
5. Currie, Gregory
   1995 Image and mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511551277
   https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511551277 [Google Scholar]
6. Carroll, Noël
   2014 The creative audience. Some ways in which readers, viewers, and/or listeners use their imaginations to engage fictional artworks. InPaul S. Elliot & Scott B. Kaufman (eds.), The philosophy of creativity: New essays, 62–81. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199836963.003.0004
   https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199836963.003.0004 [Google Scholar]
7. Coplan, Amy & Peter Goldie
   (eds.) 2011 Empathy: Philosophical and psychological perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199539956.001.0001
   https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199539956.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
8. D’Angiulli, Amedeo, Matthew Runge, Andrew Faulkner, Jila Zakizadeh, Aldrich Chan & Selvana Morcos
   2013 Vividness of visual imagery and incidental recall of verbal cues, when phenomenological availability reflects long-term memory accessibility. Frontiers in Psychology4(1). Article 1. 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00001
   https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00001 [Google Scholar]
9. de Saussure, Louis
   2021 An experiential view on what makes literature relevant. InElly Ifantidou, Louis de Saussure & Tim Wharton (eds.), Beyond meaning, 99–118. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.324.c6
   https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.324.c6 [Google Scholar]
10. Esrock, Ellen J.
    2005 Visualisation. InDavid Herman, Jahn Manfred & Marie-Laure Ryan (eds.), The Routledge encyclopedia of narrative theory, 633–634. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
11. Fosse, Jon
    2004 Aliss at the fire (transl. byDamion Searls). Champaign/London: Dalkey Archive Press.
    [Google Scholar]
12. Gendler, Tamar
    2006 Imaginative resistance revisited. InShaun Nichols (ed.), The architecture of the imagination: New essays on pretense, possibility, and fiction, 149–173. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199275731.003.0009
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199275731.003.0009 [Google Scholar]
13. Gilmore, Jonathan
    2025 Imagining empathy for fictional characters. InKaterina Bantinaki, Efi Kyprianidou & Fotini Vassiliou (eds.), Empathy and the aesthetic mind, 31–44. London: Bloomsbury. 10.5040/9781350409552.0010
    https://doi.org/10.5040/9781350409552.0010 [Google Scholar]
14. Jajdelska, Elspeth, Christopher Butler, Steve Kelly, Allan McNeill & Katie Overy
    2011 Crying, moving, and keeping it whole: What makes literary description vivid?Poetics Today31(3). 433–463. 10.1215/03335372‑2010‑002
    https://doi.org/10.1215/03335372-2010-002 [Google Scholar]
15. Keen, Suzanne
    2007 Empathy and the novel. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195175769.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195175769.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
16. Kind, Amy
    2001 Putting the image back in imagination. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research62(1). 85–109. 10.1111/j.1933‑1592.2001.tb00042.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1933-1592.2001.tb00042.x [Google Scholar]
17. Kind, Amy
    2022 Fiction and the cultivation of imagination. InPatrik Engisch & Julia Langkau (eds.), The philosophy of fiction: Imagination and cognition, 262–281. London: Routledge. 10.4324/9781003139720‑17
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003139720-17 [Google Scholar]
18. Koopman, Emy
    2016 Effects of “literariness” on emotions and on empathy and reflection after reading. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts. 10(1). 1–47. 10.1037/aca0000041
    https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000041 [Google Scholar]
19. Kuzmičová, Anežka
    2014 Literary narrative and mental imagery: A view from embodied cognition. Style48(3). 275–293.
    [Google Scholar]
20. Lamarque, Peter & Stein H. Olsen
    1994 Truth, fiction and literature. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
21. Langkau, Julia
    2025a Imaginative freedom and epistemic constraints in the context of literary text. InFotini Vassiliou, Efi Kyprianidou & Katerina Bantinaki (eds.), Empathy and the aesthetic mind, 45–60. London: Bloomsbury. 10.5040/9781350409552.0011
    https://doi.org/10.5040/9781350409552.0011 [Google Scholar]
22. Langkau, Julia
    2025b What is creative imagining? Analysis85(1). 79–87.
    [Google Scholar]
23. Langkau, Julia
    2020 The empathic skill fiction can’t teach us. Philosophical Psychology33(3). 313–331. 10.1080/09515089.2020.1731446
    https://doi.org/10.1080/09515089.2020.1731446 [Google Scholar]
24. Livingston, Paisley
    2005 Art and intention: A philosophical study. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/0199278067.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/0199278067.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
25. Maibom, Heidi L.
    (ed.) 2014 Empathy and morality. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199969470.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199969470.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
26. Moran, Daniel
    1994 The expression of feeling in imagination. The Philosophical Review. 103(1). 75–106. 10.2307/2185873
    https://doi.org/10.2307/2185873 [Google Scholar]
27. Nagel, Thomas
    1974 What is it like to be a bat?Philosophical Review831. 435–450. 10.2307/2183914
    https://doi.org/10.2307/2183914 [Google Scholar]
28. Nussbaum, Martha C.
    1992 Love’s knowledge: Essays on philosophy and literature. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oso/9780195074857.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780195074857.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
29. Oatley, Keith
    2016 Fiction: Simulation of social worlds. Trends in Cognitive Sciences. 20(8). 618–628. 10.1016/j.tics.2016.06.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2016.06.002 [Google Scholar]
30. Paul, Laurie
    2014 Transformative experience. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198717959.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198717959.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
31. Sperber, Dan & Deirdre Wilson
    1986 Relevance, communication and cognition. Oxford: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
32. Sperber, Dan & Deirdre Wilson
    2015 Beyond speaker’s meaning. Croatian Journal of Philosophy15(2). 117–149.
    [Google Scholar]
33. Stock, Kathleen
    2017 Only imagine: Fiction, interpretation and imagination. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oso/9780198798347.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198798347.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
34. Tooming, Uku
    2018 Imaginative resistance as imagistic resistance. Canadian Journal of Philosophy48(5). 684–706. 10.1080/00455091.2017.1378534
    https://doi.org/10.1080/00455091.2017.1378534 [Google Scholar]
35. Walton, Kendall
    1990 Mimesis as make-believe: On the foundations of the representational arts. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
36. Walton, Kendall
    2015 In other shoes: Music, metaphor, empathy, existence. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
37. Weatherson, Brian
    2004 Morality, fiction, and possibility. Philosophers’ Imprint4(3). 1–27.
    [Google Scholar]