The role of processing foregrounding in empathic reactions in literary reading

IF 2.1 2区心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL

Discourse Processes Pub Date : 2023-05-01 DOI:10.1080/0163853X.2023.2198813

Giulia Scapin, Cristina Loi, F. Hakemulder, K. Bálint, E. Konijn

引用次数: 0

Abstract

ABSTRACT A considerable body of research has examined the age-old assertion that reading literature enhances empathy, however, mixed results have been found. The present study attempts to clarify such disparities, investigating the role of foregrounding in possible differences in readers’ processing of literary texts and its connection with readers’ empathic reactions. We asked participants (N = 78) to mark parts of the text they considered as “foregrounding” (i.e., deviating from “normal” discourse), and we analyzed how they processed these stylistic aspects. Participants’ open responses to one of two selected texts were categorized as either Shallow, Failed, Partial, or Full Processing of Foregrounding. Full processing was associated with higher Comprehensive State Empathy Scale scores than Failed Processing. Stylistic analysis of word combinations that participants marked as “striking” suggests that, rather than stylistic devices per se, readers’ depth of processing may enhance state empathy.

查看原文本刊更多论文

加工前景在文学阅读共情反应中的作用

大量的研究对阅读文学作品能增强同理心这一古老的论断进行了检验，然而，结果却喜忧参半。本研究试图澄清这种差异，探讨前景在读者对文学文本加工的可能差异中的作用及其与读者共情反应的联系。我们要求参与者(N = 78)标记他们认为是“前景”(即偏离“正常”话语)的文本部分，并分析他们如何处理这些风格方面。参与者对两个选定文本之一的公开回应被分类为前景处理浅、失败、部分或完全。完整加工比失败加工的综合状态共情量表得分更高。对被参与者标记为“引人注目”的单词组合的文体分析表明，读者的深度处理可能会增强状态同理心，而不是文体手段本身。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Discourse Processes Multiple-

CiteScore

4.30

自引率

4.50%

发文量

期刊介绍： Discourse Processes is a multidisciplinary journal providing a forum for cross-fertilization of ideas from diverse disciplines sharing a common interest in discourse--prose comprehension and recall, dialogue analysis, text grammar construction, computer simulation of natural language, cross-cultural comparisons of communicative competence, or related topics. The problems posed by multisentence contexts and the methods required to investigate them, although not always unique to discourse, are sufficiently distinct so as to require an organized mode of scientific interaction made possible through the journal.