Cover not available

Article published In: Scientific Study of Literature
Vol. 10:2 (2020) ► pp.167–192

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

Fact or fiction?

Clarifying the relationship between reading and the improvement of social skills

 | Villanova University
 | George Mason University
 | Villanova University
Published online: 19 March 2021
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/ssol.20007.chl
Abstract
Many studies have claimed to find that reading fiction leads to improvements in social cognition. But this work has left open the critical question of whether any type of narrative, fictional or nonfictional, might have similar effects. To address this question, as well as to test whether framing a narrative as fiction matters, the current studies presented participants (N = 268 in Study 1; N = 362 in Study 2) with literary fiction texts, narrative nonfiction texts, expository nonfiction texts, or no texts. We tested their theory-of-mind abilities using the picture-based Reading the Mind in the Eyes task and a text-based test of higher-order social cognition. Reading anything was associated with higher scores compared to reading nothing, but the effects of framing and text type were inconsistent. These results suggest that prior claims regarding positive effects of reading fiction on mentalizing should be seen as tenuous; other mechanisms may be driving previously published effects.
Article outline
  • The current studies
  • Study 1
    • Methods
      • Participants
      • Materials
        • Fiction texts
        • Nonfiction texts
        • Non-narrative texts
        • Theory of mind measures
        • Other measures
      • Procedure
    • Results
      • Coding and preliminary analyses
      • Reading something vs. nothing
      • Reading narrative vs. non-narrative texts
      • Effects of both story type and presentation type
    • Discussion
  • Study 2
    • Methods
      • Participants
      • Materials
        • Texts
        • Measures
      • Procedure
    • Results
      • Reading something vs. nothing
      • Effects of both story type and presentation type
    • Discussion
    • General discussion
  • Acknowledgements
  • References
References (56)
References
Altmann, U., Bohrn, I. C., Lubrich, O., Menninghaus, W., & Jacobs, A. M. (2014). Fact vs fiction – How paratextual information shapes our reading processes. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 9(1), 22–29. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Appel, M., Gnambs, T., Richter, T., & Green, M. C. (2015). The Transportation Scale–Short Form (TS–SF). Media Psychology, 18(2), 243–266. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Argo, J. J., Zhu, R., & Dahl, D. W. (2008). Fact or fiction: An investigation of empathy differences in response to emotional melodramatic entertainment. Journal of Consumer Research, 34(5), 614–623. 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
Baron-Cohen, S., Wheelwright, S. J., 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. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 42(2), 241–251. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Black, J. B., Turner, T. J., & Bower, G. H. (1979). Point of view in narrative comprehension, memory, and production. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 18(2), 187–198. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Black, J., & Barnes, J. L. (2015). Fiction and social cognition: The effect of viewing award-winning television dramas on theory of mind. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 9(4), 423–429. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Camerer, C. F., Dreber, A., Holzmeister, F., Ho, T.-H., Huber, J., Johannesson, M., … Wu, H. (2018). Evaluating the replicability of social science experiments in Nature and Science between 2010 and 2015. Nature Human Behaviour. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Converse, B. A., Lin, S., Keysar, B., & Epley, N. (2008). In the mood to get over yourself: Mood affects theory-of-mind use. Emotion, 81, 725–730. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Coplan, A. (2004). Empathic engagement with narrative fictions. Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 621, 141–152. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2006). Caring about characters: Three determinants of emotional engagement. Film and Philosophy, 101, 1–19. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
De Mulder, H. N. M., Hakemulder, F., van den Berghe, R., Klaassen, F., & van Berkum, J. J. A. (2017). Effects of exposure to literary narrative fiction. Scientific Study of Literature, 7(1), 129–169. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Djikic, M., & Oatley, K. (2014). The art in fiction: From indirect communication to changes of the self. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 8(4), 498–505. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Djikic, M., Oatley, K., & Carland, M. (2012). Genre or artistic merit?: The effect of literature on personality. Scientific Study of Literature, 21, 25–36. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Djikic, M., Oatley, K., & Moldoveanu, M. C. (2013). Reading other minds: Effects of literature on empathy. Scientific Study of Literature, 31, 28–47. 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, 147(11), 1713–1727. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Einstein, G. O., McDaniel, M. A., Owen, P. D., & Coté, N. C. (1990). Encoding and recall of texts: The importance of material appropriate processing. Journal of Memory and Language, 29(5), 566–581. 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, 7(4), 370–376. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gabriel, S., & Young, A. F. (2011). Becoming a vampire without being bitten: The narrative collective-assimilation hypothesis. Psychological Science, 221, 990–994. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goldstein, T. R. (2009). The pleasure of unadulterated sadness: Experiencing sorrow in fiction, nonfiction, and “in person.” Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 3(4), 232–237. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goldstein, T. R., & Winner, E. (2012). Enhancing empathy and theory of mind. Journal of Cognition and Development, 13(1), 19–37. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Green, M. C., Chatham, C., & Sestir, M. A. (2012). Emotion and transportation into fact and fiction. Scientific Study of Literature, 2(1), 37–59. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Green, M. C., Garst, J., Brock, T. C., & Chung, S. (2006). Fact versus fiction labeling: Persuasion parity despite heightened scrutiny of fact. Media Psychology, 81, 267–285. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Greene, J. P., Hitt, C., Kraybill, A., & Bogulski, C. A. (2015). Learning from live theater: Students realize gains in knowledge, tolerance, and more. Education Next, 15(1), 55–61.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hendersen, D. J. O., & Clark, H. H. (2007). Retelling narratives as fiction or nonfiction. In D. S. McNamara & J. G. Trafton (Eds.), Proceedings of the 29th Annual Cognitive Science Society (pp. 353–358).Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Johnson, D. R. (2012). Transportation into a story increases empathy, prosocial behavior, and perceptual bias toward fearful expressions. Personality and Individual Differences, 521, 150–155. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Keen, S. (2007). Empathy and the novel. New York: 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, 342(6156), 377–380. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2019). Reading literary fiction and theory of mind: Three preregistered replications and extensions of Kidd and Castano (2013). Social Psychological and Personality Science, 10(4), 522–531. 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, 6(1), 42–58. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kinderman, P., Dunbar, R., & Bentall, R. P. (1998). Theory-of-mind deficits and causal attributions. British Journal of Psychology, 89(2), 191–204. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Koopman, E. M. E. (2016). Effects of “literariness” on emotions and on empathy and reflection after reading. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 10(1), 82–98. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mar, R. A. (2011). The neural bases of social cognition and story comprehension. Annual Review of Psychology, 621, 103–134. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2018). Evaluating whether stories can promote social cognition: Introducing the Social Processes and Content Entrained by Narrative (SPaCEN) framework. Discourse Processes, 55(5–6), 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, 3(3), 173–192. 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, 40(5), 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
Mar, R. A., Tackett, J. L., & Moore, C. (2010). Exposure to media and theory-of-mind development in preschoolers. Cognitive Development, 251, 69–78. 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
Murphy, S. T. (1998). The impact of factual versus fictional media portrayals on cultural stereotypes. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 5601, 165–178. Retrieved from [URL]
Nussbaum, M. (2003). Upheavals of thought: The intelligence of emotions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.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, 3(2), 101–117. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2012). The cognitive science of fiction. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, 31, 425–430.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
(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(3), e5–e8. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Peterson, E., & Miller, S. F. (2012). The eyes test as a measure of individual differences: How much of the variance reflects verbal IQ? Frontiers in Psychology, 31, 220. 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, 11(8), e0160254. 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), 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
Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (1989). Exposure to print and orthographic processing. Reading Research Quarterly, 24(4), 402–433. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tager-Flusberg, H., & Sullivan, K. (2000). A componential view of theory of mind: Evidence from Williams syndrome. Cognition, 76(1), 59–90. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vezzali, L., Stathi, S., & Giovannini, D. (2012). Indirect contact through book reading: Improving adolescents’ attitudes and behavioral intentions toward immigrants. Psychology in the Schools, 49(2), 148–162. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vezzali, L., Stathi, S., Giovannini, D., Capozza, D., & Trifiletti, E. (2015). The greatest magic of Harry Potter: Reducing prejudice. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 45(2), 105–121. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Weisberg, D. S., Hirsh-Pasek, K., Golinkoff, R. M., & McCandliss, B. D. (2014). Mise en place: Setting the stage for thought and action. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 18(6), 276–278. 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
Zwaan, R. A. (1994). Effect of genre expectations on text comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 201, 920–933. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (6)

Cited by six other publications

Appel, Markus, Juliane Gabel, Lena Wimmer, Marieke Klöppel & Tobias Richter
2025. Can fictional stories beat the congeniality bias? Selective exposure to fiction and non-fiction. Human Communication Research DOI logo
Lapierre, Matthew A. & Eunjoo Choi
2025. Theory of Mind, Empathy, and Eudaimonic Media Preferences. Media Psychology ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Phillips, Louise H., Louisa Lawrie, Zuzana Suchomelova, Sara Heinämaa, Amy O'Dwyer & Min Hooi Yong
2025. Age and cultural differences in the relationship between reading and theory of mind. Poetics 109 ► pp. 101984 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
Wimmer, Lena, Gregory Currie, Stacie Friend & Heather J. Ferguson
2021. The effects of reading narrative fiction on social and moral cognition. Scientific Study of Literature 11:2 ► pp. 223 ff. 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