Cover not available

Article published In: Scientific Study of Literature
Vol. 10:1 (2020) ► pp.64–97

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

Fiction effects on social cognition

Varying narrative engagement with cognitive load

 | Kingston University
 | Kingston University
Published online: 9 December 2020
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/ssol.19008.tur
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 (N = 11), a manipulation pilot (N = 29) and full experiment (N = 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.
Article outline
  • Literary and popular fiction
  • Narrative engagement processes
    • Transportation
    • Affective empathy
    • Identification
  • Narrative engagement and social cognition
  • Multidimensionality
  • The present study
  • Text selection pretest
    • Participants
    • Materials
      • Fictional stories
      • Narrative engagement
      • Dispositional fantasy
    • Procedure
    • Results
  • Cognitive load manipulation pilot
    • Participants
    • Materials and procedure
    • Results and discussion
      • Moving forward
  • Full experiment: Effects of narrative engagement on social cognition
    • Method
      • Participants
      • Materials
        • Fictional story
        • Narrative engagement
        • Social cognition
        • Demographic and control questions
        • Fiction-exposure
      • Procedure
        • Data analysis
    • Results and discussion
      • Group and gender differences
      • Data distribution
      • Inter-scale correlations
      • Manipulation check
      • Exploratory analysis: Effect of fiction-reading on social cognition
        • Yoni test
        • SST
  • General discussion
    • Narrative engagement and social cognition
    • Fiction-reading and social cognition
      • Fiction-exposure
      • Fiction-reading versus no-reading
    • Limitations and future directions
    • Summary and conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
References (98)
References
Appel, M., & Richter, T. (2007). Persuasive effects of fictional narratives increase over time. Media Psychology, 101, 113–134.
Bal, P. M., & Veltkamp, M. (2013). How does fiction reading influence empathy? An experimental investigation of the role of emotional transportation. PLOS ONE, 81, 1–12. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
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, 341, 163–175. 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. Child Psychology and Psychiatry, and Allied Disciplines, 421, 241–251. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
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, 71, 105–118. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Batson, C. D., & Shaw, L. (1991). Evidence for altruism: Toward a pluralism of prosocial motives. Psychological Inquiry, 21, 107–122. 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
Black, J. E., Capps, S. C., & Barnes, J. L. (2018). Fiction, genre exposure and moral reality. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity and the Arts, 121, 328–340. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
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, 61, 646–652. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Busselle, R., & Bilandzic, H. (2008). Fictionality and perceived realism in experiencing stories: A model of narrative comprehension and engagement. Communication Theory, 181, 255–280. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2009). Measuring narrative engagement. Media Psychology, 121, 321–347. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
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 logo with link to Google Scholar
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, 21, 637–644. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Castano, E. (2012). Anti-social behavior in individuals and groups: An empathy-focused approach. In K. Deux & M. Snyder (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of personality and social psychology (pp. 419–445). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chaiken, S. (1987). The heuristic model of persuasion. In M. P. Zanna, J. M. Olson, & C. P. Herman (Eds.), Social influence: The Ontario symposium, 51. (pp. 3–39). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2001). Defining identification: A theoretical look at the identification of audiences with media characters. Mass Communication and Society, 41, 245–264. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Constanzo, M., & Archer, D. (1993). The Interpersonal Perception Task-15 (IPT-15): A guide for researchers and teachers. Unpublished Manual.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Davis, M. (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
Davis, M. H. (1980). A multidimensional approach to individual differences in empathy. JSAS Catalog of Selected Documents in Psychology, 101, 1–19. [URL]
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, 671, 469–503. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
de Graaf, A., Hoeken, H., Sanders, J., & Beentjes, W. J. (2012). Identification as a mechanism of narrative persuasion. Communication Research, 391, 802–823. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
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, 71, 129–169. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Djikic, M., & Oatley, K. (2014). The art in fiction: From indirect communication to changes in the self. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity and the Arts, 81, 498–505. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
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, 81, 1–14. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
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, 1471, 1713–1727. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Duval, C., Piolino, P., Bejanin, A., Eustache, F., & Desgranges, B. (2010). Age effects on different components of theory of mind. Consciousness and Cognition 201, 627–642. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
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, 391, 175–191. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fiske, S. T., & Taylor, S. E. (2013). Social cognition: From brains to culture. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage publications. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
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, 71, 370–376. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gerrig, R. (1993). Experiencing narrative worlds. On the psychological activities of reading. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gilbert, D. T. (1991). How mental systems believe. American Psychologist, 461, 107–119. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gilbert, D. T., & Hixon, J. G. (1991). The trouble of thinking: Activation and application of stereotypic beliefs. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 601, 509–517. 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: Transportation-imagery model of narrative persuasion. In M. 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 logo with link to Google Scholar
Green, M. C., Garst, J., & Brock, T. C. (2004). The power of fiction: Determinants and boundaries. In L. J. Shrum (Ed.) Blurring the lines between entertainment and persuasion (pp. 161–176). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hakemulder, J. F. (2004). Foregrounding and its effect on readers’ perception. Discourse Processes, 381, 193–218. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
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, 231, 90–99. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hauser, D. J., & Schwarz, N. (2016). Attentive Turkers: MTurk participants perform better on attention checks than do subject pool participants. Behavior Research Methods, 481, 400–407. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hemingway, E. (1988). The end of something. In Hemingway, E. In our time (pp. 42–46). London, England: Vintage.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
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, 251, 1356–1361. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ickes, W. (Ed.). (1997). Empathic accuracy. New York, NY: Guilford Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Iguarta, J. -J. (2010). Identification with characters and narrative persuasion through fictional feature films. Communications, 351, 347–373. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Joyce, R. (2012). The unlikely pilgrimage of Harold Fry. London, England: Random House.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
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. NeuroImage 1221, 6–19. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Keen, S. (2007). Empathy and the novel. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kidd, D. C., & Castano, E. (2013). Reading literary fiction improves theory of mind. Science, 3421, 377–380. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2017a). Different stories: How levels of familiarity with literary and genre-fiction relate to mentalizing. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity and the Arts, 111, 474–486. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2017b). Panero et al. (2016): Failure to replicate methods caused failure to replicate results. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1121, 1–4. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2018a). Reading literary fiction can improve theory of mind. Nature Human Behavior, 21, 604, Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2018b). Reading literary fiction and theory of mind: Three preregistered replications and extensions of Kidd and Castano (2013). Social Psychological and Personality Science, 201, 1–10. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kidd, D. C., Ongis, M., & Castano, E. (2016). On literary fiction and its effects on theory of mind. Scientific Study of Literature, 61, 42–58. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Koopman, E. M. (2015). Empathic reactions after reading: The role of genre, personal factors and affective responses. Poetics, 501, 62–79. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2016). Effects of “literariness” on emotions and on empathy and reflection after reading. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity and the Arts, 101, 82–98. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Koopman, E. M., & Hakemulder, F. (2015). Effects of literature on empathy and self-reflection: A theoretical-empirical framework. Journal of Literary Theory, 91, 79–111. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kumkale, G. T., & Albarracín, D. (2004). The sleeper effect in persuasion: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 1301, 143–172. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
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, 21, 137–152. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
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, 101, 1–18. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mar, R. A. (2018a). Stories and the promotion of social cognition. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 271, 257–262. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2018b). Evaluating whether stories can promote social cognition: Introducing the Social Processes and Content Entrained by Narrative (SPaCEN) framework. Discourse Processes, 551, 454–479. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mar, R. A., & Oatley, K. (2008). The function of fiction is the abstraction and simulation of social experience. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 31, 173–192. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mar, R. A., Oatley, K., Djikic, M., & Mullin, J. (2011). Emotion and narrative fiction: Interactive influences before, during and after reading. Cognition and Emotion, 251, 818–833. 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. Research in Personality, 401, 694–712. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
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
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, 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, 111, 109–120. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nell, V. (1988). The psychology of reading for pleasure: Needs and gratifications. Reading Research Quarterly, 231, 6–50. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Norman, G. (2010). Likert scales, levels of measurement and the “laws” of statistics. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 151, 625–632. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nowicki, S. (2010). A manual for diagnostic analysis of nonverbal accuracy 21. Unpublished manuscript. Department of Psychology, Emory University.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
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, 1251, 818–823. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Oatley, K. (1999). Why fiction may be twice as true as fact: Fiction as cognitive and emotional simulation. Review of General Psychology, 31, 101–117. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2012). The cognitive science of fiction. WIREs Cognitive Science, 31, 425–430. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Paal, T., & Bereczkei, T. (2007). Adult theory of mind, cooperation, Machiavellianism: The effect of mindreading on social relations. Personality and Individual Differences, 431, 541–551. 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, 1111, 46–54. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(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, 1121, 5–8. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Penner, L. A., Fritzsche, B. A., Craiger, J. P., & Freifeld, T. R. (1995). Measuring the prosocial personality. In J. Butcher & C. D. Spielberger (Eds.), Advances in personality assessment (Vol. 101) (pp. 147–163). Hillsdale, NJ: LEA.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). Communication and persuasion: Central and peripheral routes to attitude change. New York, NY: Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pino, M. C., & Mazza, M. (2016). The use of “literary fiction” to promote mentalizing ability. PlOS ONE 111, 1–14. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Richter, D., Dietzel, C., & Kunzmann, U. (2010). Age differences in emotion recognition: The task matters. The Journals of Gerontology, 66B, 48–55. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rocklage, M. D., Rucker, D. D., & Nordgren, L. F. (2018). Persuasion, emotion, and language: The intent to persuade transforms language via emotionality. Psychological Science, 291, 749–760. 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, 321, 130–144. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Shamay-Tsoory, S. G., & Aharon-Peretz, J. (2007). Dissociable prefrontal networks for cognitive and affective theory of mind: A lesion study. Neuropsychologia, 451, 3054–3067. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Singer, T., & Lamm, C. (2009). The social neuroscience of empathy. New York Academy of Sciences, 11561, 81–96. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Slater, M. D. (2002). Entertainment education and the persuasive impact of narratives. In M. 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 logo with link to Google Scholar
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, 201, 989–999. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (1989). Exposure to print and orthographic processing. Reading Research Quarterly, 241, 402–433. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Teding van Berkhout, E., & Malouff, J. M. (2016). The efficacy of empathy training: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Counselling Psychology, 631, 32–41. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tormala, Z. L., & Petty, R. E. (2004). Source credibility and attitude certainty: A metacognitive analysis of resistance to persuasion. Consumer Psychology, 141, 427–442. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
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, 81, 47. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2018). Relationships between fiction media, genre, and empathic abilities. Scientific Study of Literature, 81, 261–292. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Turner, R. & Vallée-Tourangeau, F. (2020). Narrative engagement and social cognition [Data set]. Open Science Framework. [URL]
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. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
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, 81, 1324. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
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, 1191, 221–225. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Walter, H. (2012). Social cognitive neuroscience of empathy: Concepts, circuits and genes. Emotion Review, 41, 9–17. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zemborain, M. R., & Johar, G. V. (2007). Attitudinal ambivalence and openness to persuasion: A framework for interpersonal influence. Journal of Consumer Research, 331, 506–514. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zunshine, L. (2006). Why we read fiction: Theory of mind and the novel. Columbus, OH: Ohio State University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (4)

Cited by four other publications

Turner, Rose & Frédéric Vallée‐Tourangeau
2023. Challenges of measuring empathic accuracy: A mentalizing versus experience‐sharing paradigm. British Journal of Social Psychology 62:2 ► pp. 972 ff. DOI logo
Gustafsson, Anna W, Per Johnsson, Kajsa Järvholm, Katarina Bernhardsson, Torbjörn Forslid & Anders Ohlsson
2022. An intricate dance of intersubjectivity. Scientific Study of Literature 12:1-2 ► pp. 103 ff. DOI logo
Noon, Edward John & Rose Turner
2022. The European Federation of Psychology Students’ Associations Junior Researcher Programme: A Reflection from two Research Project Supervisors. PsyPag Quarterly 1:122 ► pp. 44 ff. DOI logo
Alber, Jan
2021. Review of Małecki, Sorokowski, Pawłowski & Cieński (2019): Human minds and animal stories: How narratives make us care about other species. Scientific Study of Literature 11:1 ► pp. 142 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