It is easy enough to theorize about the impact of literary reading on empathic reactions, but to empirically prove such effects is more difficult. This article provides a concise overview of the theoretical and empirical evidence that literary reading has an effect on empathy (in its multiple forms), distinguishing between the effects of literariness, narrativity and fictionality. Subsequently, it discusses the results of 2 recently conducted studies into reading and empathic understanding. As will become clear, we are still quite a long way from knowing when and how (literary) reading has an effect on empathy for others. Suggestions are offered how future studies can tackle this issue.
AckermanR., & GoldsmithM. (2011). Metacognitive regulation of text learning: On screen versus on paper. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 17, 18–32. 10.1037/a0022086
2.
AltmannU., BohrnI. C., LubrichO., MenninghausW., & JacobsA. M. (2014). Fact vs fiction—how paratextual information shapes our reading processes. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 9, 22–29. 10.1093/scan/nss098
3.
AndringaE. (1996). Effects of “narrative distance” on readers’ emotional involvement and response. Poetics, 23, 431–452. 10.1016/0304-422X(95)00009-9
4.
BalP. M., & VeltkampM. (2013). How does fiction reading influence empathy? An experimental investigation on the role of emotional transportation. PLoS ONE, 8, e55341. 10.1371/journal.pone.0055341
5.
Baron-CohenS. (1991). Precursors to a Theory of Mind: Understanding attention in others. In WhitenA. (), Natural theories of mind: Evolution, development and simulation of everyday mindreading (pp. 233–251). Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell.
6.
Baron-CohenS., WheelwrightS., HillJ., RasteY., & PlumbI. (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, 241–251. 10.1111/1469-7610.00715
7.
BatsonC. D., ChangJ., OrrR., & RowlandJ. (2002). Empathy, attitudes, and action: Can feeling for a member of a stigmatized group motivate one to help the group?Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 1656–1666. 10.1177/014616702237647
8.
BatsonC. D., PolycarpouM. P., Harmon-JonesE., ImhoffH. J., MitchenerE. C., BednarL. L., … HighbergerL. (1997). Empathy and attitudes: Can feeling for a member of a stigmatized group improve feelings toward the group?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 105–118. 10.1037/0022-3514.72.1.105
9.
BekkersR., & WiepkingP. (2011). A literature review of empirical studies of philanthropy: Eight mechanisms that drive charitable giving. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 40, 924–973. 10.1177/0899764010380927
10.
BilskyW. (1989). Angewandte Altruismusforschung: Analyse und Rezeption von Texten über Hilfeleistung [Applied research in altruism: Analysis and reception of texts about helping others]. Bern, Switzerland: Huber.
11.
BlackJ. E., & BarnesJ. L. (2015). The effects of reading material on social and non-social cognition. Poetics, 52, 32–43. 10.1016/j.poetic.2015.07.001
12.
BoothW. (1988). The company we keep: An ethics of fiction. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
13.
BreithauptF. (2012). A three-person model of empathy. Emotion Review, 4, 84–91. 10.1177/1754073911421375
CoplanA. (2004). Empathic engagement with narrative fictions. The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 62, 141–152. 10.1111/j.1540-594X.2004.00147.x
16.
CupchikG. C. (2001). Theoretical integration essay: Aesthetics and emotion in entertainment media. Media Psychology, 3, 69–89. 10.1207/S1532785XMEP0301_04
17.
CupchikG. C. (2002). The evolution of psychical distance as an aesthetic concept. Culture & Psychology, 8, 155–187. 10.1177/1354067X02008002437
18.
DavisM. H. (1980). A multidimensional approach to individual differences in empathy. Catalog of Selected Documents in Psychology, 10, 85–104.
19.
DavisM. H. (1983). Measuring individual differences in empathy: Evidence for a multidimensional approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 113–126. 10.1037/0022-3514.44.1.113
20.
De BottonA. (1997). How Proust can change your life. New York, NY: Pantheon Books.
21.
DijkstraK., VerkoeijenP., Van KuijkI., Yee ChowS., BakkerA., & ZwaanR. (2015). Leidt het lezen van literaire fictie tot meer empathie? Een replicatiestudie. Psycholoog, 50, 10–21.
22.
DjikicM., OatleyK., & MoldoveanuM. (2013). Reading other minds: Effects of literature on empathy. Scientific Study of Literature, 3, 28–47. 10.1075/ssol.3.1.06dji
23.
EnquistA. (2010). Counterpoint (RingoldJ. K.,). Crawley, Australila: University of Western Australia Publishing. (Original work published 2008)
24.
FrijdaN. H. (1986). The emotions. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
25.
GreenM. C. (2004). Transportation into narrative worlds: The role of prior knowledge and perceived realism. Discourse Processes, 38, 247–266. 10.1207/s15326950dp3802_5
26.
GreenM. C., & BrockT. C. (2000). The role of transportation in the persuasiveness of public narratives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 701–721. 10.1037/0022-3514.79.5.701
27.
HakemulderF. (2000). The moral laboratory: Experiments examining the effects of reading literature on social perception and moral self-concept. Amsterdam, the Netherlands: Benjamins. 10.1075/upal.34
28.
HakemulderJ. (2004). Foregrounding and its effects on readers’ perception. Discourse Processes, 38, 193–218. 10.1207/s15326950dp3802_3
29.
HakemulderJ. (2008). Imagining what could happen: Effects of taking the role of a character on social cognition. In ZyngierS., BortolussiM., ChesnokovaA., & AuracherJ. (), Directions in empirical literary studies (pp. 139–153). Amsterdam, the Netherlands: Benjamins. 10.1075/lal.5.13hak
30.
HanichJ., WagnerV., ShahM., JacobsonT., & MenninghausW. (2014). Why we like to watch sad films. The pleasure of being moved in aesthetic experiences. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 8, 130–143. 10.1037/a0035690
31.
HatfieldE., CacioppoJ. T., & RapsonR. L. (1994). Emotional contagion. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
32.
HuntR. A., & VipondD. (1985). Crash-testing a transactional model of literary reading. Reader: Essays in Reader-Oriented Theory, Criticism, and Pedagogy, 14, 23–39.
33.
IserW. (1988). The reading process: A phenomenological approach. In LodgeD. (), Modern criticism and thought: A reader. London, UK: Longman.
34.
IzardC. E. (2009). Emotion theory and research: Highlights, unanswered questions, and emerging issues. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 1–25. 10.1146/annurev.psych.60.110707.163539
35.
JohnsonD. R. (2012). Transportation into a story increases empathy, prosocial behavior, and perceptual bias toward fearful expressions. Personality and Individual Differences, 52, 150–155. 10.1016/j.paid.2011.10.005
36.
JohnsonD. R. (2013). Transportation into literary fiction reduces prejudice against and increases empathy for Arab-Muslims. Scientific Study of Literature, 3, 77–92. 10.1075/ssol.3.1.08joh
37.
KeenS. (2006). A theory of narrative empathy. Narrative, 14, 207–236. 10.1353/nar.2006.0015
38.
KeenS. (2007). Empathy and the novel. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195175769.001.0001
39.
KiddD. C., & CastanoE. (2013). Reading literary fiction improves theory of mind. Science, 342, 377–380. 10.1126/science.1239918
40.
KneepkensE. W. E. M., & ZwaanR. A. (1994). Emotions and literary text comprehension. Poetics, 23, 125–138. 10.1016/0304-422X(94)00021-W
41.
KogutT., & RitovI. (2005). The “identified victim” effect: An identified group, or just a single individual?Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 18, 157–167. 10.1002/bdm.492
42.
KoopmanE. M. (2011). Predictors of insight and catharsis among readers who use literature as a coping strategy. Scientific Study of Literature, 1, 241–259. 10.1075/ssol.1.2.04koo
43.
KoopmanE. M. (2015). Empathic reactions after reading. The role of genre, personal factors and affective responses. Poetics, 50, 62–79. 10.1016/j.poetic.2015.02.008
44.
KoopmanE. M. (2016a). Effects of “literariness” on emotions and on empathy and reflection after reading. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 10, 82–98. 10.1037/aca0000041
45.
KoopmanE. M. (2016b). Reading suffering: An empirical inquiry into empathic and reflective responses to literary narratives. Rotterdam, the Netherlands: Erasmus Research Centre for Media, Communication and Culture.
46.
KoopmanE. M., & HakemulderF. (2015). Effects of literature on empathy and self-reflection: A theoretical-empirical framework. Journal of Lie Theory, 9, 79–111.
47.
KoopmanE. M., HilscherM., & CupchikG. C. (2012). Reader responses to literary depictions of rape. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 6, 66–73. 10.1037/a0024153
48.
KotovychM., DixonP., BortolussiM., & HoldenM. (2011). Textual determinants of a component of literary identification. Scientific Study of Literature, 1, 260–291. 10.1075/ssol.1.2.05kot
49.
LitcherJ. H., & JohnsonD. W. (1969). Changes in attitudes toward Negroes of white elementary school students after use of multiethnic readers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 60, 148–152. 10.1037/h0027081
50.
LoewensteinG., & SmallD. A. (2007). The scarecrow and the tin man: The vicissitudes of human sympathy and caring. Review of General Psychology, 11, 112–126. 10.1037/1089-2680.11.2.112
51.
MangenA., & KuikenD. (2014). Lost in an iPad. Narrative engagement on paper and tablet. Scientific Study of Literature, 4, 150–177. 10.1075/ssol.4.2.02man
52.
MarR. A., & OatleyK. (2008). The function of fiction is the abstraction and simulation of social experience. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 3, 173–192. 10.1111/j.1745-6924.2008.00073.x
53.
MarR. A., OatleyK., DjikicM., & MullinJ. (2011). Emotion and narrative fiction: Interactive influences before, during, and after reading. Cognition and Emotion, 25, 818–833. 10.1080/02699931.2010.515151
54.
MarR. A., OatleyK., HirshJ., dela PazJ., & PetersonJ. 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, 694–712. 10.1016/j.jrp.2005.08.002
55.
MarR. A., OatleyK., & PetersonJ. B. (2009). Exploring the link between reading fiction and empathy: Ruling out individual differences and examining outcomes. Communications: The European Journal of Communication, 34, 407–428. 10.1515/COMM.2009.025
56.
MarloweM., & MaycockG. (2001). Using literary texts in teacher education to promote positive attitudes toward children with disabilities. Teacher Education and Special Education, 24, 75–83. 10.1177/088840640102400202
57.
MenninghausW., WagnerV., HanichJ., WassiliwizkyE., KuehnastM., & JacobsenT. (2015). Towards a psychological construct of being moved. PLoS ONE, 10(6), e0128451. 10.1371/journal.pone.0128451
58.
MiallD. S. (2000). On the necessity of empirical studies of literary reading. Frame, 14, 43–59.
59.
MiallD. S., & KuikenD. (1994). Foregrounding, defamiliarization, and affect: Response to literary stories. Poetics, 22, 389–407. 10.1016/0304-422X(94)00011-5
60.
MiallD. S., & KuikenD. (1999). What is literariness? Three components of literary reading. Discourse Processes, 28, 121–138. 10.1080/01638539909545076
61.
MiallD. S., & KuikenD. (2002). A feeling for fiction: Becoming what we behold. Poetics, 30, 221–241. 10.1016/S0304-422X(02)00011-6
62.
MukařovskýJ. (1976). On poetic language (BurbankJ. & SteinerP.,). Lisse, the Netherlands: De Ridder Press.
63.
MumperM. L., & GerrigR. J. (2017). Leisure reading and social cognition: A meta-analysis. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 11, 109–120. 10.1037/aca0000089
64.
NathansonA. I. (2003). Rethinking empathy. In BryantJ., Roskos-EwoldsenD., & CantorJ. (), Communication and emotion—essays in honor of Dolf Zillmann (pp. 107–130). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
65.
NussbaumM. C. (1990). Love's knowledge: Essays on philosophy and literature. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
66.
NussbaumM. C. (1995). Poetic justice: The literary imagination and public life. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.
67.
NussbaumM. C. (1997). Cultivating humanity: A classical defense of reform in liberal education. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
68.
NussbaumM. C. (2001). Upheavals of thought: The intelligence of emotions. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511840715
69.
NussbaumM. C. (2010). Not for profit. Why democracy needs the humanities. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
70.
OatleyK. (1995). A taxonomy of the emotions of literary response and a theory of identification in fictional narrative. Poetics, 23, 53–74. 10.1016/0304-422X(94)P4296-S
71.
OatleyK. (1999). Meetings of minds: Dialogue, sympathy, and identification, in reading fiction. Poetics, 26, 439–454. 10.1016/S0304-422X(99)00011-X
72.
OatleyK. (2002). Emotions and the story worlds of fiction. In GreenM. C., StrangeJ. J., & BrockT. C. (), Narrative impact: Social and cognitive foundations (pp. 39–69). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
73.
OatleyK. (2008). The science of fiction. New Scientist, 198, 42–55. 10.1016/S0262-4079(08)61619-X
74.
OatleyK. (2016). Fiction: Simulation of social worlds. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 20, 618–628. 10.1016/j.tics.2016.06.002
75.
PaneroM. E., WeisbergD. S., BlackJ., GoldsteinT. R., BarnesJ. L., BrownellH., & WinnerE. (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, e46–e54. 10.1037/pspa0000064
76.
PinkerS. (2011). The better angels of our nature. The decline of violence in history and its causes. New York, NY: Viking.
77.
PinoM. C., & MazzaM. (2016). The use of “literary fiction” to promote mentalizing ability. PLoS One, 11(8), e0160254. 10.1371/journal.pone.0160254
78.
PremackD. G., & WoodruffG. (1978). Does the chimpanzee have a theory of mind?Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 1, 515–526. 10.1017/S0140525X00076512
79.
RortyR. (1989). Contingency, irony, and solidarity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511804397
80.
ScarryE. (1999). On beauty. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
81.
Shamay-TsooryS. G., & Aharon-PeretzJ. (2007). Dissociable prefrontal networks for cognitive and affective theory of mind: A lesion study. Neuropsychologia, 45, 3054–3067. 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2007.05.021
82.
ShapiroJ., MorrisonE., & BokerJ. (2004). Teaching empathy to first year medical students: Evaluation of an elective literature and medicine course. Education for Health (Abingdon), 17, 73–84. 10.1080/13576280310001656196
83.
ShklovskyV. (1965). Art as technique. In LemonL. T. & ReisM. J. (), Russian formalist criticism: Four essays (pp. 3–24). Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.
84.
SprengR. N., McKinnonM. C., MarR. A., & LevineB. (2009). Scale development and initial validation of a factor-analytic solution to multiple empathy measures. Journal of Personality Assessment, 91, 62–71. 10.1080/00223890802484381
85.
StanovichK. E., & WestR. F. (1989). Exposure to print and orthographic processing. Reading Research Quarterly, 24, 402–433. 10.2307/747605
86.
Van PeerW. (1986). Stylistics and psychology: Investigations of foregrounding. London, UK: Croom Helm.
87.
WestR. F., StanovichK. E., & MitchellH. R. (1993). Reading in the real world and its correlates. Reading Research Quarterly, 28, 34–50. 10.2307/747815
88.
WiepkingP., & BekkersR. (2012). Who gives? A literature review of predictors of charitable giving. Part Two: Gender, family composition and income. Voluntary Sector Review, 3, 217–245. 10.1332/204080512X649379
89.
WitteE., & ScholtzA. (2015). Rapportage boekenbranche meting 33. Tweede reguliere meting van 2015 naar het kopen, lezen en lenen van boeken [Report on the book industry, measurement 33. Second regular measurement of 2015 into buying, reading and borrowing books]. Stichting Marktonderzoek Boekenvak/GfK. Retrieved fromhttp://www.kvb.nl/feiten-en-cijfers/consumentenonderzoek/jul-2015
