Scientific Study of Literature - Volume 1, Issue 2, 2011

This study focuses on the relationship between cognitive effort and aesthetic-emotional evaluation in the processing of conventional and non-conventional metaphors. We postulate that an increased cognitive load — which is normally perceived as stressful — is evaluated positively when processing non-conventional metaphors. We have called this contradictory suspense ‘aesthetic paradox’. The aesthetic paradox was tested in two studies that differed in degree of processing demand. In study 1 (low processing demand) participants (N = 40) read (non-)conventional metaphors, judged the adequacy of two metaphor paraphrases and assessed their own interpretation process. In study 2 (high processing demand) the same procedure was applied with the exception that participants (N = 40) evaluated the appropriateness of one metaphor paraphrase. The results of both experiments confirm that non-conventional metaphors require longer reading and longer processing times than conventional metaphors, and they confirm the postulated paradoxical effect: the increase of cognitive effort in processing non-conventional metaphors is evaluated positively, provided that a satisfactory interpretation is found.

The current study aimed to explore the mechanisms of the therapeutic function of literature for non-clinical subjects. It was hypothesized that narrative feelings (identification with the character and feeling absorbed in the narrative world) and aesthetic feelings (attention to and appreciation of stylistic features) would have a positive impact on feelings of catharsis and insight after reading. An online survey was conducted, asking non-clinical respondents (N = 55) of two different age groups (18–35 and 55–80) to report on a literary work that helped them to get through a difficult time in their lives. For age group, no relevant significant differences were found. Results indicate that while narrative feelings have a positive impact on both catharsis and insight, aesthetic feelings do not. Aesthetic feelings correlate with absorption and with experiencing more thoughts during reading. Responses to the open questions indicate that for a subgroup within the sample (N = 6), comfort in aesthetic beauty was the most important therapeutic feature. Responses to the open questions furthermore indicated the importance of being able to relativize one’s own problems through reading literature.

Three experiments were conducted on how properties of the text control one aspect of the process of identifying with the central character in a story. In particular, we were concerned with textual determinants of character transparency, that is, the extent to which the character’s actions and attitudes are clear and understandable. In Experiment 1, we hypothesized that the narrator in first-person narratives is transparent because narratorial implicatures (analogous to Grice’s (1975) notion of conversational implicatures) lead readers to attribute their own knowledge and experience to the narrator. Consistent with our predictions, the results indicated that stating the inferred information explicitly leads readers to rate the narrator’s thoughts and actions as more difficult to understand. In Experiment 2, we assessed whether this effect could be explained by differences in style between the original and modified versions of the text. The results demonstrated that there was no effect of adding text when the material was unrelated to narratorial implicatures. In Experiment 3, we hypothesized that transparency of the central character in a third-person narrative can be produced when the consistent use of free-indirect speech produces a close association between the narrator and the character; in this case, readers may attribute knowledge and experience to the character as well as the narrator. As predicted, the central character’s thoughts and actions were rated as more difficult to understand when the markers for free-indirect speech were removed. We argue that transparency may be produced through the use of what are essential conversational processes invoked in service of understanding the narrator as a conversational participant.

This contribution focuses on three reader characteristics that potentially influence the ways in which men and women become engaged during reading: a reader’s gender, empathy and ability to critically and constructively perceive reality. These traits (in addition to biological sex) were assessed as part of an experimental reading study, and subsequently used to predict the variation in engagement during reading. Eighty-eight readers (50% female) took part in the study and read one of four narratives randomly assigned to them. Reader traits and reading engagement were assessed by questionnaire. Regression analyses showed that the relationship between biological sex and reading engagement is considerably more complex than mostly assumed: contrary to expectation, gender did not impact reading engagement in significant ways. In line with the hypothesis, however, higher levels of empathy, of critical thinking about mediated contents, and of constructively adopting narrative contents to one’s own life, significantly related to higher degrees of the reading engagement of men and women. Biological sex turned out to be significant for reading engagement only in combination with the other reader traits.