Cover not available

Article published In: Scientific Study of Literature
Vol. 6:2 (2016) ► pp.278–297

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

Validating judgments of perspective embedding

Further explorations of a new tool for literary analysis

 | City University of New York, USA | Haskins Laboratories, New Haven, CT USA | Yale University, USA
 | University of Kentucky, USA
 | Johns Hopkins University, USA
 | Universität Passau, Germany
 | Queens College, USA
 | Vanderbilt University, USA
 | University of Pennsylvania, USA
 | Yale University, USA | Deceased
Published online: 30 March 2017
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/ssol.6.2.05wha
Abstract
Previous work (Whalen, D. H., 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) has shown that perspective embedding ("she thought I left" embedding her perspective on "I left") affects reading times for short vignettes. With increasing levels of embedment 1–5, reading times rose almost linearly. Level 0 was as slow as 3–4. Embedment level was determined by the authors, but validation by others is desirable. In Experiment 1, we trained 12 literature students to make embedment judgments. Their judgments correlated highly with ours (.94 on average) and agreed exactly in the majority of cases (74.5%); almost all were within one (94.2%). In Experiment 2, judgments of the first three paragraphs of "To Kill a Mockingbird" (Lee, H. (1960). To kill a mockingbird. Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott and Co.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar) yielded a lower level of agreement; literature uses subtle means for introducing perspective embedment, and individuals differ about including them. Assessment of perspective embedding, and exploration of sources of disagreements, provide new tools for analyzing literature.
Article outline
  • Experiment 1
    • Method
      • Participants
      • Stimuli
      • Procedure
    • Results
    • Discussion
  • Experiment 2
    • Method
      • Participants
      • Stimuli
      • Procedure
    • Results
    • Discussion
  • General discussion
  • Acknowledgements
  • References
References (33)
References
Bakhtin, M. M. (1981). The dialogic imagination (C. Emerson & M. Holquist, Trans. M. Holquist Ed.). Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bowes, A., & Katz, A. (2015). Metaphor creates intimacy and temporarily enhances theory of mind. Memory and Cognition, 431, 953–963. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brooks, P. (1992). Reading for the plot: Design and intention in narrative. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cohen, J. (1960). A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychosocial Measurement, 201, 37–46. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dunbar, R. I. (1996). Grooming, gossip, and the evolution of language. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fleiss, J. L., & Chilton, N. W. (1983). The measurement of interexaminer agreement on periodontal disease. Journal of Periodontal Research, 181, 601–606. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hakemulder, F., & Van Peer, W. (2015). Empirical stylistics The Bloomsbury Companion to Stylistics. London: Bloomsbury Academic.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hirschfeld, L. A. (2013). The myth of mentalizing and the primacy of folk sociology. In M. Banaji & S. Gelman (Eds.), Navigating the social world: What infants, children, and other species can teach us (pp. 101–106). New York: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hogan, P. C. (2003). The mind and its stories: Narrative universals and human emotion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Just, M. A., Carpenter, P. A., & Woolley, J. D. (1982). Paradigms and processes in reading comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 1111, 228–238. 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
Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33(1), 159–174. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lee, H. (1960). To kill a mockingbird. Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott and Co.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Miall, D. S. (2006). Literary reading: Empirical and theoretical studies. New York: Peter Lang Publishing.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Miall, D. S., & Kuiken, D. (2001). Shifting perspectives: Readers’ feelings and literary response. In W. van Peer & S. Chatman (Eds.), New perspectives on narrative perspective (pp. 289–301). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Oatley, K. (2012). The passionate muse: Exploring emotion in stories. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Palmer, A. (2010). Social minds in the novel. Columbus, OH: Ohio State University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rabinowitz, P. J. (1987). Before reading: Narrative conventions and the politics of interpretation. The theory and interpretation of narrative series. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rabinowitz, P. J., & Bancroft, C. (2014). Euclid at the core: Recentering literary education. Style, 48(1), 1–34.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schneider, R. (2001). Toward a cognitive theory of literary character: The dynamics of mental-model construction. Style, 351, 607–639.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2013). The cognitive theory of character reception: An updated proposal. Anglistik, 24(2), 117–134.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Scholes, R., Phelan, J., & Kellogg, R. (2006). The nature of narrative (Revised and expanded, 40th anniversary edition ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sperber, D., & Wilson, D. (2002). Pragmatics, modularity and mindreading. Mind and Language, 171, 3–23. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
van Duijn, M. J., Sluiter, I., & Verhagen, A. (2015). When narrative takes over: The representation of embedded mindstates in Shakespeare’s Othello. Language and Literature, 24(2), 148–166. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
van Peer, W., Hakemulder, F., & Zyngier, S. (2007). Lines on feeling: foregrounding, aesthetics and meaning. Language and Literature, 16(2), 197–213. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Whalen, D. H., 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
(2015). Perspective embedding affects reading time: Implications for the reading of literature. Frontiers in Psychology, 6(1778), 1–9.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zunshine, L. (2006). Why we read fiction: Theory of mind and the novel. Columbus: Ohio State University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2011). Style brings in mental states. Style, 451, 349–356.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2014). Theory of Mind as a pedagogical tool. Interdisciplinary Literary Studies, 161, 89–109. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2015a). From the social to the literary: Approaching Cao Xueqin’s The Story of the Stone (紅樓夢) from a cognitive perspective. In L. Zunshine (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of cognitive literary studies (pp. 176–196). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2015b). The secret life of fiction. PMLA, 1301, 724–731. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Carpenter, Jordan M., Melanie C. Green & Kaitlin Fitzgerald
2018. Mind-reading motivation. Scientific Study of Literature 8:2 ► pp. 211 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