1887
Volume 10, Issue 1
  • ISSN 2210-4372
  • E-ISSN: 2210-4380
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

Social cognition, the skillset involved in interpreting the cognitive and affective states of others, is essential for navigating the social world. Research has indicated that reading about fictional social content may support social cognitive abilities; however, the processes underpinning these effects remain unidentified. This study aimed to examine the effect of narrative engagement on social cognition. A text pretest ( = 11), a manipulation pilot ( = 29) and full experiment ( = 93) were conducted. In the full experiment, the manipulation failed to vary levels of narrative engagement (transportation, identification and affective empathy) with a passage from a popular fiction text. A correlation analysis revealed positive associations between narrative engagement dimensions and social cognition. An exploratory between-groups analysis comparing reading to no-reading found a significant gain in explicit mental state attribution in the reading group, when controlling for demographic and dispositional differences.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/ssol.19008.tur
2020-12-09
2021-01-22
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Appel, M., & Richter, T.
    (2007) Persuasive effects of fictional narratives increase over time. Media Psychology, 10, 113–134. doi: 10.1080/15213260701301194
    https://doi.org/10.1080/15213260701301194 [Google Scholar]
  2. Bal, P. M., & Veltkamp, M.
    (2013) How does fiction reading influence empathy? An experimental investigation of the role of emotional transportation. PLOS ONE, 8, 1–12. doi:  10.1371/journal.pone.0055341
    https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0055341 [Google Scholar]
  3. Baron-Cohen, S., & Wheelwright, S.
    (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]
  4. 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]
  5. Batson, C. D., Polycarpou, M. P., Harmon-Jones, E., Imhoff, H. J., Mitchener, E. C., Bednar, L. L., Klein, T. R., & Highberger, L.
    (1997) Empathy and attitudes: Can feeling for a member of a stigmatized group improve feelings toward the group?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 7, 105–118. doi:  10.1037//0022‑3514.72.1.105
    https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.72.1.105 [Google Scholar]
  6. 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]
  7. Black, J. E., & Barnes, J. L.
    (2015) 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]
  8. Black, J. E., Capps, S. C., & Barnes, J. L.
    (2018) Fiction, genre exposure and moral reality. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity and the Arts, 12, 328–340. doi:  10.1037/aca0000116
    https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000116 [Google Scholar]
  9. 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]
  10. Busselle, R., & Bilandzic, H.
    (2008) Fictionality and perceived realism in experiencing stories: A model of narrative comprehension and engagement. Communication Theory, 18, 255–280. doi:  10.1111/j.1468‑2885.2008.00322.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2008.00322.x [Google Scholar]
  11. (2009) Measuring narrative engagement. Media Psychology, 12, 321–347. doi:  10.1080/15213260903287259
    https://doi.org/10.1080/15213260903287259 [Google Scholar]
  12. Cadwell, O. G.
    (2015) Literary fiction’s influence on social cognitive brain activity. Proceedings of the National Conference on Undergraduate Research (pp.570–574). Cheney, WA: Eastern Washington University.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Camerer, C. F., Dreber, A., Holzmeister, F., Ho, T. -H., Huber, J., Johannesson, M., Kirchler, M., Navé, M., Nosek, B., Pfeiffer, T., Altmejd, A., Buttrick, N., Chan, T., Chen, Y., Forsell, E., Gampa, A., Heikensten, E., Hummer, L., Imai, T., … Wu, H.
    (2018) Evaluating the replicability of social science experiments in Nature and Science between 2010 and 2015. Nature Human Behaviour, 2, 637–644. doi:  10.1038/s41562‑018‑0399‑z
    https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-018-0399-z [Google Scholar]
  14. 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]
  15. Chaiken, S.
    (1987) The heuristic model of persuasion. InM. P. Zanna, J. M. Olson, & C. P. Herman (Eds.), Social influence: The Ontario symposium, 5. (pp.3–39). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Cohen, J.
    (1988) Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. (2001) Defining identification: A theoretical look at the identification of audiences with media characters. Mass Communication and Society, 4, 245–264. doi:  10.1207/S15327825MCS0403_01
    https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327825MCS0403_01 [Google Scholar]
  18. Constanzo, M., & Archer, D.
    (1993) The Interpersonal Perception Task-15 (IPT-15): A guide for researchers and teachers. Unpublished Manual.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Davis, M.
    (1983) Measuring individual differences in empathy: Evidence for a multidimensional approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 113–126. doi:  10.1037/0022‑3514.44.1.113
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.44.1.113 [Google Scholar]
  20. Davis, M. H.
    (1980) A multidimensional approach to individual differences in empathy. JSAS Catalog of Selected Documents in Psychology, 10, 1–19. www.uv.es/~friasnav/Davis_1980.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  21. 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]
  22. de Graaf, A., Hoeken, H., Sanders, J., & Beentjes, W. J.
    (2012) Identification as a mechanism of narrative persuasion. Communication Research, 39, 802–823. doi:  10.1177/0093650211408594
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650211408594 [Google Scholar]
  23. De Mulder, H. N. M., Hakemulder, F., van den Berghe, R., Klassen, F., & van 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]
  24. 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]
  25. Dodell-Feder, D., Lincoln, S. H., Coulson, J. P., & Hooker, C. I.
    (2013) Using fiction to assess mental state understanding: A new task for assessing theory of mind in adults. PLOS ONE, 8, 1–14. doi:  10.1371/journal.pone.0081279
    https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0081279 [Google Scholar]
  26. 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]
  27. 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]
  28. Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A. -G., & Buchner, A.
    (2007) G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 175–191. doi:  10.3758/BF03193146
    https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193146 [Google Scholar]
  29. Fiske, S. T., & Taylor, S. E.
    (2013) Social cognition: From brains to culture. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage publications. 10.4135/9781446286395
    https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446286395 [Google Scholar]
  30. 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]
  31. Gerrig, R.
    (1993) Experiencing narrative worlds. On the psychological activities of reading. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Gilbert, D. T.
    (1991) How mental systems believe. American Psychologist, 46, 107–119. doi:  10.1037/0003‑066X.46.2.107
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.46.2.107 [Google Scholar]
  33. Gilbert, D. T., & Hixon, J. G.
    (1991) The trouble of thinking: Activation and application of stereotypic beliefs. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 509–517. doi:  10.1037/0022‑3514.60.4.509
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.60.4.509 [Google Scholar]
  34. Green, M. C., & Brock, T. C.
    (2000) The role of transportation in the persuasiveness of public narratives. Journal of 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]
  35. (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]
  36. Green, M. C., Garst, J., & Brock, T. C.
    (2004) The power of fiction: Determinants and boundaries. InL. J. Shrum (Ed.) Blurring the lines between entertainment and persuasion (pp.161–176). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. 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]
  38. Hakemulder, J. F.
    (2004) Foregrounding and its effect on readers’ perception. Discourse Processes, 38, 193–218. doi:  10.1207/s15326950dp3802_3
    https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326950dp3802_3 [Google Scholar]
  39. 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]
  40. Hauser, D. J., & Schwarz, N.
    (2016) Attentive Turkers: MTurk participants perform better on attention checks than do subject pool participants. Behavior Research Methods, 48, 400–407. doi:  10.3758/s13428‑015‑0578‑z
    https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-015-0578-z [Google Scholar]
  41. Hemingway, E.
    (1988) The end of something. InHemingway, E.In our time (pp.42–46). London, England: Vintage.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Hsu, C., Conrad, M., & Jacobs, A. M.
    (2014) Fiction Feelings in Harry Potter: haemodynamic response 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]
  43. Ickes, W.
    (Ed.) (1997) Empathic accuracy. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Iguarta, J. -J.
    (2010) Identification with characters and narrative persuasion through fictional feature films. Communications, 35, 347–373. doi:  10.1515/comm.2010.019
    https://doi.org/10.1515/comm.2010.019 [Google Scholar]
  45. Joyce, R.
    (2012) The unlikely pilgrimage of Harold Fry. London, England: Random House.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Kanske, P., Böckler, A., Trautwein, F., & Singer, T.
    (2015) Dissecting the social brain: Introducing the EmpaToM to reveal distinct neural networks and brain-behavior relations for empathy and theory of mind. NeuroImage122, 6–19. doi:  10.1016/j.neuroimage.2015.07.082
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2015.07.082 [Google Scholar]
  47. 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]
  48. 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]
  49. (2017a) 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]
  50. (2017b) Panero et al. (2016): Failure to replicate methods caused failure to replicate results. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 112, 1–4. doi:  10.1037/pspa0000072
    https://doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000072 [Google Scholar]
  51. (2018a) 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]
  52. (2018b) 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]
  53. Kidd, D. C., Ongis, M., & Castano, E.
    (2016) On literary fiction and its effects on theory of mind. Scientific Study of Literature, 6, 42–58. doi:  10.1075/ssol.6.1.04kid
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ssol.6.1.04kid [Google Scholar]
  54. 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]
  55. (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]
  56. Koopman, E. M., & Hakemulder, F.
    (2015) Effects of literature on empathy and self-reflection: A theoretical-empirical framework. Journal of Literary Theory, 9, 79–111. doi:  10.1515/jlt‑2015‑0005
    https://doi.org/10.1515/jlt-2015-0005 [Google Scholar]
  57. Kumkale, G. T., & Albarracín, D.
    (2004) The sleeper effect in persuasion: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 130, 143–172. doi:  10.1037/0033‑2909.130.1.143
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.130.1.143 [Google Scholar]
  58. Kuzmičová, A., Mangen, A., Støle, H., & Begnum, A. C.
    (2017) Literature and readers’ empathy: A qualitative text manipulation study. Language and Literature: International Journal of Stylistics, 2, 137–152. doi:  10.1177/0963947017704729
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0963947017704729 [Google Scholar]
  59. 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. PLOS ONE, 10, 1–18. doi:  10.1371/journal.pone.0124550
    https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0124550 [Google Scholar]
  60. Mar, R. A.
    (2018a) Stories and the promotion of social cognition. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 27, 257–262. doi:  10.1177/0963721417749654
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721417749654 [Google Scholar]
  61. (2018b) Evaluating whether stories can promote social cognition: Introducing the Social Processes and Content Entrained by Narrative (SPaCEN) framework. Discourse Processes, 55, 454–479. doi:  10.1080/0163853X.2018.1448209
    https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2018.1448209 [Google Scholar]
  62. 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]
  63. Mar, R. A., Oatley, K., Djikic, M., & Mullin, J.
    (2011) Emotion and narrative fiction: Interactive influences before, during and after reading. Cognition and Emotion, 25, 818–833. doi:  10.1080/02699931.2010.515151
    https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2010.515151 [Google Scholar]
  64. Mar, R. A., Oatley, K., Hirsh, 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]
  65. 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]
  66. Mazzocco, P. J., Green, M. C., Sasota, J. A., & Jones, N. W.
    (2010) This story is not for everyone: Transportability and narrative persuasion. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 1, 361–368. doi:  10.1177/1948550610376600
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550610376600 [Google Scholar]
  67. 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]
  68. Nell, V.
    (1988) The psychology of reading for pleasure: Needs and gratifications. Reading Research Quarterly, 23, 6–50. doi:  10.2307/747903
    https://doi.org/10.2307/747903 [Google Scholar]
  69. Norman, G.
    (2010) Likert scales, levels of measurement and the “laws” of statistics. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 15, 625–632. doi:  10.1007/s10459‑010‑9222‑y
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-010-9222-y [Google Scholar]
  70. Nowicki, S.
    (2010) A manual for diagnostic analysis of nonverbal accuracy2. Unpublished manuscript. Department of Psychology, Emory University.
    [Google Scholar]
  71. Oakley, B. F. M., Brewer, R., Bird, G., & Catmur, C.
    (2016) Theory of mind is not theory of emotion: A cautionary note on the Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 125, 818–823. doi:  10.1037/abn0000182
    https://doi.org/10.1037/abn0000182 [Google Scholar]
  72. Oatley, K.
    (1999) Why fiction may be twice as true as fact: Fiction as cognitive and emotional simulation. Review of General Psychology, 3, 101–117. doi:  10.1037/1089‑2680.3.2.101
    https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.3.2.101 [Google Scholar]
  73. (2012) The cognitive science of fiction. WIREs Cognitive Science, 3, 425–430. doi:  10.1002/wcs.1185
    https://doi.org/10.1002/wcs.1185 [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. Journal of 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 et al. (2016) Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 112, 5–8. 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) (pp.147–163). Hillsdale, NJ: LEA.
    [Google Scholar]
  78. Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T.
    (1986) Communication and persuasion: Central and peripheral routes to attitude change. New York, NY: Springer. 10.1007/978‑1‑4612‑4964‑1
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-4964-1 [Google Scholar]
  79. Pino, M. C., & Mazza, M.
    (2016) The use of “literary fiction” to promote mentalizing ability. PlOS ONE11, 1–14. doi:  10.1371/journal.pone.0160254
    https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0160254 [Google Scholar]
  80. Richter, D., Dietzel, C., & Kunzmann, U.
    (2010) Age differences in emotion recognition: The task matters. The Journals of Gerontology, 66B, 48–55. doi:  10.1093/geronb/gbq068
    https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbq068 [Google Scholar]
  81. Rocklage, M. D., Rucker, D. D., & Nordgren, L. F.
    (2018) Persuasion, emotion, and language: The intent to persuade transforms language via emotionality. Psychological Science, 29, 749–760. doi:  10.1177/0956797617744797
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797617744797 [Google Scholar]
  82. Samur, D., Tops, M., & Koole, S. L.
    (2018) Does a single session of reading literary fiction prime enhanced mentalising performance?Four replication experiments ofKidd 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]
  83. Shamay-Tsoory, S. G., & Aharon-Peretz, J.
    (2007) Dissociable prefrontal networks for cognitive and affective theory of mind: A lesion study. Neuropsychologia, 45, 3054–3067. doi:  10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2007.05.021
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2007.05.021 [Google Scholar]
  84. Singer, T., & Lamm, C.
    (2009) The social neuroscience of empathy. New York Academy of Sciences, 1156, 81–96. doi:  10.1111/j.1749‑6632.2009.04418.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.2009.04418.x [Google Scholar]
  85. Slater, M. D.
    (2002) Entertainment education and the persuasive impact of narratives. InM. C. Green, J. J. Strange, & T. C. Brock (Eds.), Narrative impact: Social and cognitive foundations (pp.157–182). New York, NY: Psychology Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  86. 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]
  87. 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]
  88. Teding van Berkhout, E., & Malouff, J. M.
    (2016) The efficacy of empathy training: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Counselling Psychology, 63, 32–41. doi:  10.1037/cou0000093
    https://doi.org/10.1037/cou0000093 [Google Scholar]
  89. Tormala, Z. L., & Petty, R. E.
    (2004) Source credibility and attitude certainty: A metacognitive analysis of resistance to persuasion. Consumer Psychology, 14, 427–442. doi:  10.1207/s15327663jcp1404_11
    https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327663jcp1404_11 [Google Scholar]
  90. Turner, R., & Felisberti, F. M.
    (2017) Measuring mindreading : A review of behavioral approaches to testing cognitive and affective mental state attribution 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. (2018) Relationships between fiction media, genre, and empathic abilities. Scientific Study of Literature, 8, 261–292. doi:  10.1075/ssol.19003.tur
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ssol.19003.tur [Google Scholar]
  92. Turner, R. & Vallée-Tourangeau, F.
    (2020) Narrative engagement and social cognition [Data set]. Open Science Framework. https://osf.io/ca5b9/
    [Google Scholar]
  93. van Kujik, I., Verkoeijen, P., Dijkstra, K., & Zwaan, R. A.
    (2018) The effect of reading a short passage of literary fiction on theory of mind: A replication of Kidd and Castano (2013). Collabra: Psychology, 4(1), 2–12. doi:  10.1525/collabra.117
    https://doi.org/10.1525/collabra.117 [Google Scholar]
  94. Wacker, R., Bölte, S., & Dziobek, I.
    (2017) Women know better what other women think and feel: Gender effects on mindreading across the adult life span. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1324. doi:  10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01324
    https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01324 [Google Scholar]
  95. 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]
  96. Walter, H.
    (2012) Social cognitive neuroscience of empathy: Concepts, circuits and genes. Emotion Review, 4, 9–17. doi:  10.1177/1754073911421379
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1754073911421379 [Google Scholar]
  97. Zemborain, M. R., & Johar, G. V.
    (2007) Attitudinal ambivalence and openness to persuasion: A framework for interpersonal influence. Journal of Consumer Research, 33, 506–514. doi:  10.1086/510224
    https://doi.org/10.1086/510224 [Google Scholar]
  98. Zunshine, L.
    (2006) Why we read fiction: Theory of mind and the novel. Columbus, OH: Ohio State University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/ssol.19008.tur
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/ssol.19008.tur
Loading

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