Cover not available

Article published In: Scientific Study of Literature
Vol. 8:2 (2018) ► pp.211–238

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
authorization required

Mind-reading motivation

Individual differences in desire to perspective-take influence narrative processing

 | University of Pennsylvania
 | University at Buffalo – The State University of New York
 | University at Buffalo – The State University of New York
Published online: 12 June 2019
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/ssol.18011.car
Abstract
Previous research suggests a link between perspective-taking and the tendency to become immersed in narratives or literature. We extend that research by considering both individual differences and persuasion outcomes. Specifically, Mind-Reading Motivation (MRM) is an individual difference in the willingness to effortfully engage with other people’s perspectives and mental states. Stories may be most influential when readers put themselves in the place of another person, even a fictional other. In Study 1, higher MRM was correlated with more fiction reading but not more nonfiction reading. Studies 2a and 2b demonstrated that higher MRM was associated with greater transportation into a narrative. We replicated this effect in Study 3, showing that MRM was associated with both higher transportation and narrative persuasion. The effect of MRM on persuasion is mediated by connections to the characters. This research helps identify which individuals are most likely to be persuaded by narrative communications.
Article outline
  • Mind-reading motivation
  • Mind-reading motivation and narratives
    • Character identification
    • Social skills
    • Transportation into narrative worlds
  • Mind-reading motivation and outgroup perspectives
  • Overview and hypotheses
  • Study 1
    • Methods
      • Ethics approval and statistical software
      • Participants
    • Materials
      • Motivation for Mind-Reading (MRM) scale
      • Reading preferences and tendencies
      • Dispositional transportation scale
    • Results
      • Reading tendencies and transportation
    • Discussion
  • Studies 2a and 2b
    • Methods
      • Participants and procedure
    • Materials
      • Narrative
      • MRM
      • Transportation
      • Recall check
    • Results
      • Recall check
      • MRM
    • Discussion
  • Study 3
    • Methods
      • Participants and procedure
    • Materials
      • Narrative
      • Attitude items
      • Prejudice
      • Connection to protagonist
      • Transportation
      • Empathy (IRI) and Mind-Reading Motivation scales
      • Political ideology
    • Results
      • Mind-Reading Motivation
      • Story outcomes
      • Mediation models
      • Political ideology
    • Discussion
  • General discussion
    • Limitations and future directions
    • Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
References (57)
References
Appel, M., Gnambs, T., & Maio, G. R. (2012). A short measure of the need for affect. Journal of Personality Assessment, 94(4), 418–426. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Appel, M., & Richter, T. (2010). Transportation and need for affect in narrative persuasion: A mediated moderation model. Media Psychology, 13(2), 101–135. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bäckström, M., & Björkland, F. (2007). Structural model of generalized prejudice: The role of social dominance, authoritarianism, and empathy. Journal of Individual Differences, 281, 10–17. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Baesler, E. J., & Burgoon, J. K. (1994). The temporal effects of story and statistical evidence on belief change. Communication Research, 211, 582–602. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bal, P. M., & Veltkamp, M. (2013). How does fiction reading influence empathy? An experimental investigation on the role of emotional transportation. PLoS ONE, 8(1): e55341. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
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. The Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines, 42(2), 241–251. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Black, J. E., & Barnes, J. L. (2015). The effects of reading material on social and non-social cognition. Poetics, 521, 32–43. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Braverman, J. (2008). Testimonials versus informational persuasive messages: The moderating effect of delivery mode and personal involvement. Communication Research, 351, 666–694. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Busselle, R., & Bilandzic, H. (2009). Measuring narrative engagement. Media Psychology, 12(4), 321–347. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Camerer, C. F., Dreber, A., Holzmeister, F., Ho, T. H., Huber, J., Johannesson, M., … & Altmejd, A. (2018). Evaluating the replicability of social science experiments in Nature and Science between 2010 and 2015. Nature Human Behaviour, 2(9), 637–644. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Carpenter, J. M., Green, M. C., & Vacharkulksemsuk, T. (2016). Beyond perspective-taking: Mind-reading motivation. Motivation and Emotion, 40(3), 358–374. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Carpenter, J. M., Green, M. C., & LaFlam, J. (2011). People or profiles: Individual differences in online social networking use. Personality and Individual Differences, 501, 538–541. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cohen, J. (2001). Defining identification: A theoretical look at the identification of audiences with media characters. Mass Communication & Society, 41, 245–264. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dahlstrom, M. F. (2014). Using narratives and storytelling to communicate science with nonexpert audiences. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(Supplement 4), 13614–13620. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dal Cin, S., Zanna, M., & Fong, G. (2004). Narrative persuasion and overcoming resistance. In E. Knowles & J. Linn (Eds.), Resistance and Persuasion (pp. 175–191). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Davis, M. H. (1980). A multidimensional approach to individual differences in empathy. JSAS Catalog of Selected Documents in Psychology, 10, 85.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1983). Measuring individual differences in empathy: Evidence for a multidimensional approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 441, 113–126. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
De Mulder, H. N., Hakemulder, F., van den Berghe, R., Klaassen, F., & van Berkum, J. J. (2017). Effects of exposure to literary narrative fiction. Scientific Study of Literature, 7(1), 129–169. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
de Wit, J. B. F., Das, E., & Vet, R. (2008). What works best: Objective statistics or a personal testimonial? An assessment of the persuasive effects of different types of message evidence on risk perception. Health Psychology, 27(1), 110–115. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fletcher, G. J. O., Danilovics, P., Fernandez, G., Peterson, D., & Reeder, G. D. (1986). Attributional complexity: An individual differences measure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 511, 875–884. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Galinsky, A., Ku, G., & Wang, C. (2005). Perspective-taking and self-other overlap: Fostering social bonds and facilitating social coordination. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 81, 109–124. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Galinsky, A. D., & Moskowitz, G. B. (2000). Perspective-taking: Decreasing stereotype expression, stereotype accessibility, and in-group favoritism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78(4), 708–724. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gerrig, R. J. (1993). Experiencing narrative worlds. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Giles, D. C. (2002). Parasocial interaction: A review of the literature and a model for future research. Media Psychology, 41, 279–302. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Green, M. C., & Brock, T. C. (2000). The role of transportation in the persuasiveness of public narratives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 791, 701–721. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2002). In the mind’s eye: Imagery and transportation into narrative worlds. In M. C. Green, J. J. Strange, & T. C. Brock (Eds.), Narrative Impact: Social and Cognitive Foundations (pp. 315–341). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hakemulder, F., Kuijpers, M. M., Tan, E. S., Balint, K., & Doicaru, M. M. (Eds.) (2017). Narrative Absorption. Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Johnson, M., Brems, C., & Alford-Keating, P. (1997). Personality correlates of homophobia. Journal of Homosexuality, 341, 57–69. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kaufman, G. F., & Libby, L. K. (2012). Changing beliefs and behavior through experience-taking. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1031, 1–19. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kaufman, E. A., Xia, M., Fosco, G., Yaptangco, M., Skidmore, C. R., & Crowell, S. E. (2016). The Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale Short Form (DERS-SF): Validation and replication in adolescent and adult samples. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 38(3), 443–455. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kidd, D. C., & Castano, E. (2013). Reading literary fiction improves theory of mind. Science, 342(6156), 377–380. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kidd, D., Ongis, M., & Castano, E. (2016). On literary fiction and its effects on theory of mind. Scientific Study of Literature, 6(1), 42–58. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kuijpers, M. M., Hakemulder, F., Tan, E. S., & Doicaru, M. M. (2014). Exploring absorbing reading experiences. Scientific Study of Literature, 4(1), 89–122. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mar, R. A. (in press). Evaluating whether stories can promote social cognition: Introducing the social processes and content entrained by narrative (SPaCEN) framework. Discourse Processes.
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, 341, 407–428. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
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. Journal of Research in Personality, 401, 694–712. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mastro, D., & Tukachinsky, R. (2011). The influence of exemplar versus prototype-based media primes on racial/ethnic evaluations. Journal of Communication, 61(5), 916–937. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mazzocco, P., Green, M., Sasota, J. & Jones, N. (2010). This story is not for everyone: Transportability and narrative persuasion. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 11, 361–368. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mumper, M. L., & Gerrig, R. J. (2017). Leisure reading and social cognition: A meta-analysis. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 11(1), 109–120. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Oatley, K. (2002). Emotions and the story worlds of fiction. In M. C. Green, J. J. Strange, & T. C. Brock (Eds.), Narrative impact: Social and cognitive foundations (pp. 39–69). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Oliver, M. B., Dillard, J. P., Bae, K., & Tamul, D. J. (2012). The effect of narrative news format on empathy for stigmatized groups. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 89(2), 205–224. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
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(5), e46–e54. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 401, 879–891. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Premack, D., & Woodruff, G. (1978). Does the chimpanzee have a theory of mind? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 1(4), 515–526. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
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(1), 1–15. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schiappa, E., Gregg, P. B., & Hewes, D. E. (2006). Can one TV show make a difference? Will & Grace and the parasocial contact hypothesis. Journal of Homosexuality, 51(4), 15–37. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sestir, M., & Green, M. C. (2010). You are who you watch: Identification and transportation effects on temporary self-concept. Social Influence, 5(4), 272–288. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Singhal, A., Cody, M. J., Rogers, E. M., & Sabido, M., Eds. (2004). Entertainment-education and social change: History, research, and practice. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Slater, M. D., & Rouner, D. (2002). Entertainment-education and elaboration likelihood: Understanding the processing of narrative persuasion. Communication Theory, 12(2), 173–191. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Van Laer, T., de Ruyter, K., Visconti, L. M., & Wetzels, M. (2014). The extended transportation-imagery model: A meta-analysis of the antecedents and consequences of consumers’ narrative transportation. Journal of Consumer Research, 401, 797–817. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wallentin, M., Simonsen, A., & Nielsen, A. H. (2013). Action speaks louder than words: Empathy mainly modulates emotions from theory of mind-laden parts of a story. Scientific Study of Literature, 3(1), 137–153. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Whalen, D. H., Zunshine, L., Ender, E., Kelbert, E., Tougaw, J., Barsky, R. F., Steiner, P. & Holquist, M. (2017). Validating judgments of perspective embedding. Scientific Study of Literature, 6(2), 278–297. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Whalen, D., Zunshine, L., & Holquist, M. (2012). Theory of Mind and embedding of perspective: A psychological test of a literary “sweet spot.” Scientific Study of Literature, 2(2), 301–315. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zunshine, L. (2006). Why we read fiction: Theory of mind and the novel. Columbus: The Ohio State University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2008). Theory of mind and fictions of embodied transparency. Narrative, 161, 65–92. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (10)

Cited by ten other publications

Ayhan, Serengeti & Seçil Gönültaş
2024. Bystander responses in five‐steps: Paving road to prosocial intervention to social exclusion through social‐cognition. British Journal of Developmental Psychology 42:4 ► pp. 517 ff. DOI logo
Eekhof, Lynn S. & Raymond A. Mar
2024. Does reading about fictional minds make us more curious about real ones?. Language and Cognition 16:1 ► pp. 176 ff. DOI logo
Martínez, María-Ángeles
2024. Creative writing and storyworld possible selves. New Writing 21:4 ► pp. 403 ff. DOI logo
Öncel, Püren, Shu Hu, Heather Ness-Maddox, Laura K. Allen & Joseph P. Magliano
2024. Exploring the affordances of text and picture stories. Discourse Processes 61:4-5 ► pp. 203 ff. DOI logo
Lenhart, Jan, Tobias Richter, Markus Appel & Raymond A. Mar
2023. Adolescent leisure reading and its longitudinal association with prosocial behavior and social adjustment. Scientific Reports 13:1 DOI logo
Smith, Rachel A., Edward L. Fink, Deborah A. Cai & Carolyn E. Montagnolo
2023. Accidents and Attributions: Differential Consequences for Religious Bias. Asian Communication Research 20:1 ► pp. 48 ff. DOI logo
Nicholes, Justin
2020. Science fiction prototyping’s features and impact on college students’ perceptions of writing. Scientific Study of Literature 10:1 ► pp. 98 ff. DOI logo
Green, Melanie C., Kaitlin Fitzgerald & Melissa M. Moore
2019. Archetypes and Narrative Processes. Psychological Inquiry 30:2 ► pp. 99 ff. DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2022. Creative Writing Across the Curriculum [Linguistic Approaches to Literature, 40], DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2024. Narrative transportation: How stories shape how we see ourselves and the world [Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 70], ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 4 december 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue