Volume 8, Issue 2
  • ISSN 2210-4372
  • E-ISSN: 2210-4380
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes



Fiction enables readers to simulate the social experiences of characters and may facilitate prosociality. Research has indicated that fiction print exposure positively relates to empathy and may promote altruistic behaviors. Whether associations hold across different media formats and thematic genres remains unclear. This study took a multidimensional approach to both fiction engagement and empathic abilities. Specifically, it aimed to replicate previous findings that lifetime fiction exposure positively predicts empathy, and to extend this literature through an exploration of the relationships between media and genre formats, empathy and altruism. Participants ( = 404) completed a multidimensional task measure of fiction media exposure and answered questions about fiction engagement, empathic and altruistic tendencies. Results showed divergent associations between fiction format, genre, and empathic abilities, and fiction media exposure positively predicted the tendencies to become transported into narratives and to help others. Engagement with fiction formats and thematic genres may differentially support adults’ prosocial development.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Acheson, D. J., Wells, J. B., & MacDonald, M. C.
    (2008) New and updated tests of print exposure and reading abilities in college students. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 278–289. doi:  10.3758/BRM.40.1.278
    https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.40.1.278 [Google Scholar]
  2. Appel, M., & Richter, T.
    (2007) Persuasive effects of fictional narratives increase over time. Media Psychology, 10, 113–134. doi: 10.108/15213260701301194
    https://doi.org/10.108/15213260701301194 [Google Scholar]
  3. Aykan, S., & Nalçacı, E.
    (2018) Assessing theory of mind by humor: The Humor Comprehension and Appreciation Test (ToM-HCAT). Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 1470. doi:  10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01470
    https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01470 [Google Scholar]
  4. Bal, P. M. & Veltkamp, M.
    (2013) How does fiction reading influence empathy? An experimental investigation of the role of emotional transportation. PLoSOne, 8(1), doi:  10.1371/journal.pone.0055341
    https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0055341 [Google Scholar]
  5. Baron-Cohen, S., Wheelwright, S., Hill, J., Raste, Y., & Plumb, I.
    (2001) The “Reading the Mind in the Eyes” Test revised version: a study with normal adults, and adults with Asperger syndrome or high-functioning autism. Child Psychology and Psychiatry, and Allied Disciplines, 42, 241–251. doi:  10.1111/1469‑7610.00715
    https://doi.org/10.1111/1469-7610.00715 [Google Scholar]
  6. Baron-Cohen, S. & Wheelwright, S. J.
    (2004) The empathy quotient. An investigation of adults with Asperger Syndrome or High Functioning Autism, and normal sex differences. Autism and Developmental Disorders, 34, 163–175. doi:  10.1023/B:JADD.0000022607.19833.00
    https://doi.org/10.1023/B:JADD.0000022607.19833.00 [Google Scholar]
  7. Batson, C. D., Duncan, B. D., Ackerman, P., Buckley, T. & Birch, K.
    (1981) Is empathic emotion a source of altruistic motivation?Personality and Social Psychology, 40, 290–302. doi:  10.1037//0022‑3514.40.2.290
    https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.40.2.290 [Google Scholar]
  8. Batson, C. D., Early, S. & Salvarani, G.
    (1997) Perspective-taking: Imagining how another would feel versus imagining how you would feel. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23, 751–758. doi:  10.1177/0146167297237008
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167297237008 [Google Scholar]
  9. Batson, C. D., & Shaw, L.
    (1991) Evidence for altruism: Toward a pluralism of prosocial motives. Psychological Inquiry, 2, 107–122. doi:  10.1207/s15327965pli0202_1
    https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327965pli0202_1 [Google Scholar]
  10. Black, J. E., & Barnes, J. L.
    (2015a) Fiction and social cognition: The effect of viewing award-winning television dramas on theory of mind. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 9, 355–494. doi:  10.1037/aca0000031
    https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000031 [Google Scholar]
  11. (2015b) The effects of reading material on social and non-social cognition. Poetics, 52, 32–43. doi:  10.1016/j.poetic.2015.07.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.poetic.2015.07.001 [Google Scholar]
  12. Black, J. E., Capps, S. C., & Barnes, J. L.
    (2018) Fiction, genre exposure and moral reality. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity and the Arts, 12(13), 328–340. doi:  10.1037/aca0000116
    https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000116 [Google Scholar]
  13. Bormann, D., & Greitemeyer, T.
    (2015) Immersed in virtual worlds and minds: effects of in-game storytelling on immersion, need satisfaction, and affective theory of mind. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 6, 646–652. doi:  10.1177/1948550615578177
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550615578177 [Google Scholar]
  14. Bureau of Labor Statistics
    Bureau of Labor Statistics (2017) American Time Use Survey – 2016 Results. Retrieved from: https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/atus.pdf
  15. Busselle, R., & Bilandzic, H.
    (2009) Measuring narrative engagement. Media Psychology, 12, 321–347. doi:  10.1080/15213260903287259
    https://doi.org/10.1080/15213260903287259 [Google Scholar]
  16. Castano, E.
    (2012) Anti-social behavior in individuals and groups: an empathy-focused approach. InK. Deux & M. Snyder (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of personality and social psychology (pp.419–445). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Cohen, J.
    (1988) Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Coll, M., Viding, E., Rütgen, M., Silani, G., Lamm, C., Catmur, C. & Bird, G.
    (2017) Are we really measuring empathy? Proposal for a new measurement framework. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 83, 132–139. doi:  10.1016/j.neubiorev.2017.10.009
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2017.10.009 [Google Scholar]
  19. Davis, M. H.
    (1980) A multidimensional approach to individual differences in empathy. JSAS Catalog of Selected Documents in Psychology, 10, 85. Retrieved from: www.uv.es/~friasnav/Davis_1980.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Davis, M. H., Mitchell, K. V., Hall, J. A., Lothert, J., Snapp, T. & Meyer, M.
    (1999) Empathy, expectations, and situational preferences: Personality influences on the decision to participate in volunteer helping behaviors. Personality, 67, 469–503. doi:  10.1111/1467‑6494.00062
    https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6494.00062 [Google Scholar]
  21. De Mulder, H. N. M., Hakemulder, F., van den Berghe, R., Klassen, F., & Berkum, J. J. A.
    (2017) Effects of exposure to literary narrative fiction: From book smart to street smart?Scientific Study of Literature, 7, 129–169. doi:  10.1075/ssol.7.1.06dem
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ssol.7.1.06dem [Google Scholar]
  22. Djikic, M. & Oatley, K.
    (2014) The art in fiction: From indirect communication to changes in the self, Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity and the Arts, 8, 498–505. doi:  10.1037/a0037999
    https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037999 [Google Scholar]
  23. Dodell-Feder, D. & Tamir, D. I.
    (2018) Fiction reading has a small positive impact on social cognition: A meta-analysis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 147, 1713–1727. doi:  10.1037/xge0000395
    https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000395 [Google Scholar]
  24. Duval, C., Piolino, P., Bejanin, A., Eustache, F., & Desgranges, B.
    (2010) Age effects on different components of theory of mind. Consciousness and Cognition20, 627–642. doi:  10.1016/j.concog.2010.10.025
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2010.10.025 [Google Scholar]
  25. Felisberti, F. M., & King, R.
    (2017) Mindreading in altruists and psychopaths. InA. Ibáñez, L. Sedeño & A. García (Eds.), Neuroscience and social science: The missing link (pp.121–140). Cham, Switzerland: Springer. 10.1007/978‑3‑319‑68421‑5_6
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-68421-5_6 [Google Scholar]
  26. Fong, K., Mullin, J. B., & Mar, R. A.
    (2013) What you read matters: The role of fiction genre in predicting interpersonal sensitivity. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity and the Arts, 7, 370–376. doi:  10.1037/a0034084
    https://doi.org/10.1037/a0034084 [Google Scholar]
  27. Gabriel, S., & Young, A. F.
    (2011) Becoming a vampire without being bitten: The narrative collective-assimilation hypothesis. Psychological Science, 22, 990–994. doi:  10.1177/0956797611415541
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797611415541 [Google Scholar]
  28. Gentile, D. A., Anderson, C. A., Yukawa, S., Ihori, N., Saleem, M., Lim, K. M., … Sakamoto, A.
    (2009) The effects of prosocial video games on prosocial behaviors: International evidence from correlational, longitudinal and experimental studies. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 35, 752–763. doi:  10.1177/0146167209333045
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167209333045 [Google Scholar]
  29. Gerrig, R.
    (1993) Experiencing narrative worlds. On the psychological activities of reading. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Goldman, A. I.
    (2006) Simulating minds. The philosophy, psychology and neuroscience of mindreading. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/0195138929.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/0195138929.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  31. Goldstein, T., & Winner, E.
    (2012) Enhancing empathy and theory of mind. Cognition and Development, 13, 19–37. doi:  10.1080/15248372.2011.573514
    https://doi.org/10.1080/15248372.2011.573514 [Google Scholar]
  32. Goldstein, T., Wu, K., and Winner, E.
    (2009) Actors are skilled in theory of mind but not empathy. Imagination, Cognition and Personality, 29, 115–133. doi:  10.2190/IC.29.2.c
    https://doi.org/10.2190/IC.29.2.c [Google Scholar]
  33. Green, M. C. & Brock, T. C.
    (2000) The Role of Transportation in the Persuasiveness of Public Narratives. Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 701–721. doi:  10.1037//0022‑3514.79.5.701
    https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.79.5.701 [Google Scholar]
  34. (2002) In the mind’s eye: Transportation-imagery model of narrative persuasion. InM. C. Green, J. J. Strange, & T. C. Brock (Eds.) Narrative impact: social and cognitive foundations (pp.315–341). New York, NY: Psychology Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Hakemulder, J.
    (2000) The Moral Laboratory: Experiments examining the effects of reading literature on social perception and moral self-concept. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins. 10.1075/upal.34
    https://doi.org/10.1075/upal.34 [Google Scholar]
  36. Hall, A. E. & Bracken, C. C.
    (2011) “I really liked that movie”: Testing the relationship between trait empathy, transportation, perceived realism and movie enjoyment. Media Psychology, 23, 90–99. doi:  10.1027/1864‑1105/a000036
    https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-1105/a000036 [Google Scholar]
  37. Happé, F. G. E.
    (1994) An advanced test of theory of mind: Understanding story characters’ thoughts and feelings by able Autistic, mentally Handicapped, and normal children and adults. Autism and Developmental Disorders, 24, 129–154. doi:  10.1007/BF02172093
    https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02172093 [Google Scholar]
  38. Happé, F. G. E., Winner, E., & Brownell, H.
    (1998) The getting of wisdom: theory of mind and old age. Developmental Psychology, 34, 358–362. doi:  10.1037/0012‑1649.34.2.358
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.34.2.358 [Google Scholar]
  39. Heide, F. J., Porter, N., & Saito, P. K.
    (2012) Do you hear the people sing? Musical theatre and attitude change. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity and the Arts, 6, 224–230. doi:  10.1037/a0027574
    https://doi.org/10.1037/a0027574 [Google Scholar]
  40. Hollywood Foreign Press Association. Winners and Nominees Best Motion Picture
    Hollywood Foreign Press Association. Winners and Nominees Best Motion Picture (n.d.). www.goldenglobes.com/winners-nominees/best-motion-picture-dramaAccessed26.05.17.
  41. Hsu, C., Conrad, M., & Jacobs, A. M.
    (2014) Fiction Feelings in Harry Potter: haemodynamic responses in the mid-cingulate cortex correlates with immersive reading experience. Neuroport, 25, 1356–1361. doi:  10.1097/WNR.0000000000000272
    https://doi.org/10.1097/WNR.0000000000000272 [Google Scholar]
  42. Ickes, W.
    (Ed.) (1997) Empathic accuracy. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Johnson, D. R.
    (2012) Transportation into a story increases empathy, prosocial behavior, and perceptual bias toward fearful expressions. Personality and Individual Differences, 52, 150–155. doi:  10.1016/j.paid.2011.10.005
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2011.10.005 [Google Scholar]
  44. Keen, S.
    (2007) Empathy and the novel. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195175769.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195175769.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  45. Kidd, D. C., & Castano, E.
    (2013) Reading literary fiction improves theory of mind. Science, 342, 377–380. doi:  10.1126/science.1239918
    https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1239918 [Google Scholar]
  46. Kidd, D., & Castano, E.
    (2017a) Panero et al. (2016): Failure to replicate methods caused failure to replicate results. Personality and Social Psychology, 112, e–e4. doi:  10.1037/pspa0000072
    https://doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000072 [Google Scholar]
  47. (2017b) Different stories: How levels of familiarity with literary and genre fiction relate to mentalizing. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity and the Arts, 11, 474–486. doi:  10.1037/aca0000069
    https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000069 [Google Scholar]
  48. (2018a) Reading literary fiction and theory of mind: Three preregistered replications and extensions of Kidd and Castano (2013). Social Psychological and Personality Science, 20, 1–10. doi:  10.1177/1948550618775410
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550618775410 [Google Scholar]
  49. (2018b) Reading literary fiction can improve theory of mind. Nature Human Behavior, 2, 604, doi:  10.1038/s41562‑018‑0408‑2
    https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-018-0408-2 [Google Scholar]
  50. Klimecki, O. M., Mayer, S. V., Jusyte, A., Scheeff, J., & Schönenberg, M.
    (2016) Empathy promotes altruistic behavior in economic interactions. Scientific Reports, 6(31961), 1–5. doi:  10.1038/srep31961
    https://doi.org/10.1038/srep31961 [Google Scholar]
  51. Konrath, S.
    (2013) Critical synthesis package: Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI). MedEdPORTAL, 9(9596). doi:  10.15766/mep_2374‑8265.9596
    https://doi.org/10.15766/mep_2374-8265.9596 [Google Scholar]
  52. Koopman, E. M.
    (2015) Empathic reactions after reading. The role of genre, personal factors and affective responses. Poetics, 50, 62–79. doi:  10.1016/j.poetic.2015.02.008
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.poetic.2015.02.008 [Google Scholar]
  53. (2016) Effects of “literariness” on emotions and on empathy and reflection after reading. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity and the Arts, 10, 82–98. doi:  10.1037/aca0000041
    https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000041 [Google Scholar]
  54. Lehne, M., Engel, P., Rohrmeier, M., Menninghaus, M., Jacobs, A. M., & Koelsch, S.
    (2015) Reading a suspenseful literary text activates brain areas related to social cognition and predictive inference. PLoSOne, 10(5), 1–18. doi:  10.1371/journal.pone.0124550
    https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0124550 [Google Scholar]
  55. MacCallum, R. C., Widaman, K. F., Zhang, S., & Hong, S.
    (1999) Sample size in factor analysis. Psychological Methods, 4, 84–99. doi: 10.1037/1082989X.4.1.84
    https://doi.org/10.1037/1082989X.4.1.84 [Google Scholar]
  56. Mangen, A., & Kuiken, D.
    (2014) Lost in an iPad: Narrative engagement on paper and tablet. Scientific Study of Literature, 4, 150–177. doi:  10.1075/ssol.4.2.02man
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ssol.4.2.02man [Google Scholar]
  57. Mar, R. A., & Oatley, K.
    (2008) The function of fiction is the abstraction and simulation of social experience. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 3, 173–192. doi:  10.1111/j.1745‑6924.2008.00073.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6924.2008.00073.x [Google Scholar]
  58. Mar, R. A., Oatley, K., Hirsch, J., dela Paz, J. & Peterson, J. B.
    (2006) Bookworms versus nerds: Exposure to fiction versus non-fiction, divergent associations with social ability, and the simulation of fictional social worlds. Research in Personality, 40, 694–712. doi:  10.1016/j.jrp.2005.08.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2005.08.002 [Google Scholar]
  59. Mar, R. A., Oatley, K., & Peterson, J. B.
    (2009) Exploring the link between reading fiction and empathy: Ruling out individual differences and examining outcomes. Communications, 34, 407–428. doi:  10.1515/COMM.2009.025
    https://doi.org/10.1515/COMM.2009.025 [Google Scholar]
  60. Mar, R., Tackett, J. L., & Moore, C.
    (2010) Exposure to media and theory-of-mind development in preschoolers. Cognitive Development, 25, 69–78. doi:  10.1016/j.cogdev.2009.11.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogdev.2009.11.002 [Google Scholar]
  61. Maylor, E. A., Moulson, J. M., Muncer, A. M., & Taylor, L. A.
    (2002) Does performance on theory of mind tasks decline in old age?British Journal of Psychology, 93, 465–485. doi:  10.1348/000712602761381358
    https://doi.org/10.1348/000712602761381358 [Google Scholar]
  62. McLuhan, M.
    (1964/1994) Understanding media: The extensions of man. (Rev. ed.) MIT Press: Cambridge, MA.
    [Google Scholar]
  63. McQuail, D.
    (2010) Mass communication theory: An introduction. London, England: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
  64. Miesen, H.
    (2004) Fiction readers’ appreciation of text attributes in literary and popular novels: Some empirical findings. International Journal of Arts Management, 7, 45–56.
    [Google Scholar]
  65. Mol, S. E., & Bus, A. G.
    (2011) To read or not to read: A meta-analysis of print-exposure from infancy to early adulthood. Psychological Bulletin, 137, 267–296. doi:  10.1037/a0021890
    https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021890 [Google Scholar]
  66. Mumper, M. L., & Gerrig, R. J.
    (2017) Leisure reading and social cognition: A meta-analysis. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity and the Arts, 11, 109–120. doi:  10.1037/aca0000089
    https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000089 [Google Scholar]
  67. National Theatre. NT 2000: The Most Significant Plays of the 20th Century
    National Theatre. NT 2000: The Most Significant Plays of the 20th Century (n.d.). www.nationaltheatre.org.uk/discover-more/platforms/nt2000-one-hundred-plays-of-the-centuryAccessed09.06.2016
  68. Nell, V.
    (1988) The psychology of reading for pleasure: Needs and gratifications. Reading Research Quarterly, 23, 6–50. 10.2307/747903
    https://doi.org/10.2307/747903 [Google Scholar]
  69. Nettle, D.
    (2006) Psychological profiles of professional actors. Personality and Individual Differences, 40, 376–383. doi:  10.1016/j.paid.2005.07.008
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2005.07.008 [Google Scholar]
  70. New York Theater. The 50 best plays of past 100 years
    New York Theater. The 50 best plays of past 100 years (2013) newyorktheater.me/2013/06/27/the-50-best-plays-of-the-past-100-years-according-to-entertainment-weekly/Accessed26.05.17.
  71. Nussbaum, M.
    (2010) Not for profit. Why democracy needs the humanities. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  72. Oatley, K.
    (1999) Meetings of minds: Dialogue, sympathy, and identification, in reading fiction. Poetics, 26, 439–454. doi:  10.1016/S0304‑422X(99)00011‑X
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-422X(99)00011-X [Google Scholar]
  73. (2016) Fiction: Simulation of social worlds. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 20, 618–628. doi:  10.1016/j.tics.2016.06.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2016.06.002 [Google Scholar]
  74. Paal, T., & Bereczkei, T.
    (2007) Adult theory of mind, cooperation, Machiavellianism: The effect of mindreading on social relations. Personality and Individual Differences, 43, 541–551. doi:  10.1016/j.paid.2006.12.021
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2006.12.021 [Google Scholar]
  75. Panero, M. E., Weisberg, D. S., Black, J., Goldstein, T. R., Barnes, J. L., Brownell, H., & Winner, E.
    (2016) Does reading a single passage of literary fiction really improve theory of mind? An attempt at replication. Personality and Social Psychology, 111, 46–54. doi:  10.1037/pspa0000064
    https://doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000064 [Google Scholar]
  76. (2017) No support for the claim that literary fiction uniquely and immediately improves theory of mind: A reply to Kidd and Castano’s commentary on Panero, Weisberg, Black, Goldstein, Barnes, Brownell & Winner (2016). Personality and Social Psychology, 112, e5–e8. doi:  10.1037/pspa0000079
    https://doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000079 [Google Scholar]
  77. Penner, L. A., Fritzsche, B. A., Craiger, J. P., & Freifeld, T. R.
    (1995) Measuring the prosocial personality. InJ. Butcher & C. D. Spielberger (Eds.) Advances in personality assessment (Vol.10.). Hillsdale, NJ: LEA.
    [Google Scholar]
  78. Perner, J., & Wimmer, H.
    (1985) “John thinks that Mary thinks that”: Attribution of second-order beliefs by 5- to 10-year old children. Experimental Child Psychology, 39, 437–471. doi:  10.1016/0022‑0965(85)90051‑7
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-0965(85)90051-7 [Google Scholar]
  79. Pino, M. C., & Mazza, M.
    (2016) The use of “literary fiction” to promote mentalizing ability. PloSONE11(8). doi:  10.1371/journal.pone.0160254
    https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0160254 [Google Scholar]
  80. Rushton, J. P., Chrisjohn, R. D., & Fekken, G. C.
    (1981) The altruistic personality and the self-report altruism scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 1, 292–302. doi:  10.1016/0191‑8869(81)90084‑2
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(81)90084-2 [Google Scholar]
  81. Samur, D., Tops, M., & Koole, S. L.
    (2018) Does a single session of reading literary fiction prime enhanced mentalising performance? Four replication experiments of Kidd and Castano (2013). Cognition and Emotion, 32, 130–144. doi  10.1080/02699931.2017.1279591
    https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2017.1279591 [Google Scholar]
  82. Schellenberg, E. G.
    (2004) Music lessons enhance IQ. Psychological Science, 15, 511–514. doi:  10.1111/j.0956‑7976.2004.00711.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00711.x [Google Scholar]
  83. Seddon, C.
    (2011) Lifestyles and social participation. Retrieved from Office for National Statistics: https://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/social-trends-rd/social…41/lifestyles-chapter.pdf. 10.1057/st.2011.7
  84. Singer, T., & Lamm, C.
    (2009) The social neuroscience of empathy. New York Academy of Sciences, 1156, 91–96. doi:  10.1111/j.1749‑6632.2009.04418.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.2009.04418.x [Google Scholar]
  85. Speer, N. K., Reynolds, J. R., Swallow, K. M., & Zacks, J. M.
    (2009) Reading stories activates neural representations of visual and motor experiences. Psychological Science, 20, 989–999. doi:  10.1111/j.1467‑9280.2009.02397.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02397.x [Google Scholar]
  86. Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F.
    (1989) Exposure to print and orthographic processing. Reading Research Quarterly, 24, 402–433. doi:  10.2307/747605
    https://doi.org/10.2307/747605 [Google Scholar]
  87. Stanovich, K. E., West, R. F., & Harrison, M. R.
    (1995) Knowledge growth and maintenance across the life span: the role of print exposure. Developmental Psychology, 31, 811–826. doi:  10.1037/0012‑1649.31.5.811
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.31.5.811 [Google Scholar]
  88. Stephens-Hernandez, A. B., Livingston, J. N., Dacons-Brock, K., Craft, H. L., Cameron, A., Franklin, S. O., & Howlett, A. C.
    (2007) Drama-based education to motivate participation in substance abuse prevention. Substance Abuse Treatment Prevention Policy, 2, 1–11. doi:  10.1186/1747‑597X‑2‑11
    https://doi.org/10.1186/1747-597X-2-11 [Google Scholar]
  89. Taylor, M., & Carlson, S. M.
    (1997) The relationship between individual differences in fantasy and theory of mind. Child Development, 68, 436–455. doi: 10.1111/1467‑8624.ep9709050626
    https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8624.ep9709050626 [Google Scholar]
  90. Turner, R. & Felisberti, F. M.
    (2017) Measuring Mindreading: A review of behavioral approaches to measuring “theory of mind” in neurologically typical adults. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 47. doi:  10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00047
    https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00047 [Google Scholar]
  91. Valente, T. W., & Bharath, U.
    (1999) An evaluation of the use of drama to communicate HIV/AIDS information. Education and Prevention, 11, 203–211. Retrieved fromhttp//:ProQuest.com/
    [Google Scholar]
  92. Valkenburg, P. M., Peter, J., & Walther, J. B.
    (2016) Media effects: theory and research. Annual Review of Psychology, 67, 315–338. doi:  10.1146/annurev‑psych‑122414‑033608
    https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-122414-033608 [Google Scholar]
  93. Wai, M., & Tiliopoulos, N.
    (2012) The affective and cognitive empathic nature of the dark triad of personality. Personality and Individual Differences, 52, 794–799. doi:  10.1016/j.paid.2012.01.008
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2012.01.008 [Google Scholar]
  94. Wallentin, M., Nielsen, A. H., Vuust, P., Dohn, A., Roepstorff, A., & Lund, T. E.
    (2011) BOLD response to motion verbs in left posterior middle temporal gyrus during story comprehension. Brain & Language, 119, 221–225. doi:  10.1016/j.bandl.2011.04.006
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2011.04.006 [Google Scholar]
  95. Winner, E., Brownell, H., Happé, F., Blum, A., & Pincus, D.
    (1998) Distinguishing lies from jokes: Theory of mind deficits and discourse interpretation in right hemisphere brain-damaged patients. Brain and Language, 62, 89–106. doi:  10.1006/brln.1997.1889
    https://doi.org/10.1006/brln.1997.1889 [Google Scholar]
  96. Zaki, J., & Ochsner, K.
    (2012) The neuroscience of empathy: progress, pitfalls and promise. Nature Neuroscience, 15, 675–680. doi:  10.1038/nn.3085
    https://doi.org/10.1038/nn.3085 [Google Scholar]
  97. Zillman, D.
    (1988) Mood management through communication choices. American Behavioral Scientist, 31, 327–340. Retrieved fromhttps://search.proquest.com/docview/194918241?accountid=14557
    [Google Scholar]
  98. Zunshine, L.
    (2006) Why we read fiction: theory of mind and the novel. Columbus, OH: Ohio State University Press.
    [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error