Cover not available
Part of
Scientific Methods for the Humanities
Willie van Peer, Frank Hakemulder and Sonia Zyngier
[Linguistic Approaches to Literature 13] 2012

Bibliography

Aaftink, C. 2004. Pivotal reading: Reading related to pivotal life experiences. Utrecht University: Unpublished M.A. thesis.Google Scholar
American Psychological Association (1994). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association, 4th (ed.) Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
Andringa, E. 1986. Perspektivierung und Perspektivenübernahme: Zur Wahrnehmung literarischer Figuren. Spiel, 5, 135–146.Google Scholar
Bailey, K. M. 1990. The use of diary studies in teacher education programs. In J. C. Richards & D. Nunan (Eds), Second language teacher education (pp. 215–226). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Baker, R. & Wright, H. 1955. Midwest and its children. Evanston, IL: Row, Peterson.Google Scholar
Bales, R. & Cohen, S. 1979. SYMLOG: A system for multiple level observation of groups. New York, NY: Free Press.Google Scholar
Bandura, A., Ross, D. & Ross, S. A. 1963. Imitation of film-mediated aggressive models. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 66, 3–11. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Barros, H. S. 2003. Desfamiliarização ou Preferência? O Estranhamento na Cidade de Deus. Caderno de Letras 20, 121–127.Google Scholar
Bechtel, R. 1967. Hodometer research in museums. Museum News, March, 23–5.Google Scholar
Bechtel, R. B. & Zeisel, J. 1987. Observation: The world under a glass. In R. B. Bechtel, R. W. Marans & W. M. Michelson (Eds.), Methods in environmental and behavioral research (pp. 11–40). New York, NY: Van Nostrand Reinhold.Google Scholar
Berlyne, D. E. 1971. Aesthetics and Psychobiology. New York, NY: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
Birdwhistell, R. 1970. Kinesics in context: Essays on body motion communication. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Bourg, T., Risden, K., Thompson, S. & Davis, E. C. 1993. The effects of an empathy-building strategy on 6th graders’ causal inferencing in narrative text comprehension. Poetics, 22, 117–133. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bower, G. H. 1978. Experiments on story comprehension and recall. Discourse Processes, 1, 211–231. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brace, N., Kemp, R. & Snelgar, R. 2003. SPSS for Psychologists; A guide to data analysis using SPSS for Windows. New York, NY: Palgrave.Google Scholar
Bronowski, J. 1976. The Ascent of Man. London: BBC.Google Scholar
Cantor, J., Ziemke, D. & Sparks, G. 1984. The effect of forewarning on emotional responses to a horror film. Journal of Broadcasting, 28, 21–31. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Carp, F. M. & Carp, A. 1981. The validity, reliability and generalizability of diary data. Experimental Aging Research, 7, 281–296. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Conrad, F. G. & Schrober, M. F. 2000. Clarifying question meaning in a household telephone survey. Public Opinion Quarterly, 64(1), 1–28. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cook, Th. & Campbell, D. T. 1979. Quasi-experimentation: Design and analysis issues for field settings. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
Cousins, N. 1985. Anatomy of an illness as perceived by the patient: Reflections on healing and regeneration. New York: Bantam Books.Google Scholar
Davis, S. & Andringa, E. 1995. Narrrative structure and emotional response. In G. Rusch (Ed.), Empirical approaches to literature (pp. 50–60). Siegen: Lumis.Google Scholar
Dawkins, R. 2006. The God delusion. London: Random House.Google Scholar
Denscombe, M. 2010. The good research guide: For small-scale social research projects. Columbus, OH: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Descartes, R. 1637 [2006]. A discourse on the method. New York, NY: Oxford University Press 2006.Google Scholar
Dilthey, W. 1985. Poetry and experience. Selected works, vol. V. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
1994. The hermeneutics of the human sciences. In K. Mueller-Vollmer (Ed.), The hermeneutics reader: texts of the German tradition from the enlightenment to the present. New York, NY: Continuum.Google Scholar
Earthman, E. A. 1992. Creating the virtual work: Readers’ processes in understanding literary texts. Research in the Teaching of English, 26, 351–384.Google Scholar
Field, A. 2005. Discovering statistics using SPSS. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Flerx, V. C., Filder, D. S. & Rogers, R. W. 1976. Sex role stereotypes: Developmental aspects and early intervention. Child Development, 47, 998–1007. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Flower, L. S. & Hayes, J. R. 1981. A cognitive process theory of writing. College Composition and Communication, 32(4), 365–387. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Freud, S. 1975. The psychopathology of everyday life. In J. Strachey (Ed. & Transl.). The Pelican Freud Library, vol. 5, Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar
1979. On psychopathology. In J. Strachey (Ed, & Transl.). The Pelican Freud Library, vol. 10, Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar
1984. On metapsychology: The theory of psychoanalysis. In J. Strachey (Ed, & Transl.). The Pelican Freud Library, vol. 11, Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar
Frost, W. 1969. The development of a technique for TV programme assessment. Journal of the Market Research Society, 11, 25–44.Google Scholar
Gadamer, H. G. 1975. Truth and method. New York, NY: Continuum.Google Scholar
Gerrig, R. J. & Prentice, D. A. 1991. The representation of fictional information. Psychological Science, 2¸ 336–340. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gibbs, A. (n.d.). Focus Groups. Retrieved December 28, 2004, ([URL]).
Gibson, R., Aust, C. F. & Zillmann, D. 2000. Loneliness of adolescents and their choice and enjoyment of love-celebrating versus love-lamenting popular music. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 18(1), 43–48. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goss, J. D. & Leinbach, T. R. 1996. Focus groups as alternative research practice. Area, 28(2), 115–123.Google Scholar
Hakemulder, J. 2000. The moral laboratory. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Harris, S. 2010. The moral landscape. How science can determine human values. New York, NY: Free Press.Google Scholar
Hawkes, D. L. 1990. Communicating your results: A guide for postgraduates. Pontypridd: The Polytechnic of Wales.Google Scholar
Hess, R. G. & Lieger, L. H. (2004). Creating effective poster presentations. Retrieved June 6, 2005 from [URL]
Holland, N. 1975. Five readers reading. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Hunt, M. 1993. History of psychology. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
Iser, W. 1975. Die Appellstruktur der Texte. In R. Warning (Ed.), Rezeptionsästhetik – Theorie und Praxis (pp. 228–52). München: Fink.Google Scholar
1978. The Act of Reading: A Theory of Aesthetic Response. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Kelle, U. (Ed.). 1995. Computer-aided qualitative data analysis: Theory, methods and practice. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Kinkade, R. G. 1974. Thesaurus of psychological index terms. Washington, DC: APA.Google Scholar
Kitzinger, J. 1995. Introducing focus groups. British Medical Journal, 311, 299–302. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kreuger, R. A. 1988. Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Lachenmann, J. 1999. Interviews mit Lesenden. Wirkungen von Literatur auf Musiker und Mediziner. [Interviews with readers. Effects of literature on musicians and physicians]. Unpublished MA-thesis, University of Munich.Google Scholar
Limbert, W. M. & Polzella, D. J. 1998. Influence of music style on observers’ perception of representational and abstract paintings. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 16(1), 33–39. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Martindale, C. 1990. The clockwork muse. New York, NY: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Mattos, M. J. & Mendes, M. 2002. Grupo de Enfoque na Ciência Empírica da Literatura: Atitude dos alunos em relação à literatura. Paper presented at the III ECEL (Encontro de Ciência Empírica da Literatura) in Rio de Janeiro.
McInerney, D. M. 2001. Publishing your psychology research: A guide to writing for journals in psychology and related fields. London: Sage.Google Scholar
McNamara, C. (n.d.). Basics of Conducting Focus Groups. Retrieved December 28, 2004, from [URL]
Mendes, M. & Menezes, D. 2003. The influence of authorial prestige on Brazilian students. Paper Presented at the IV ECEL (Encontro de Ciência Empírica da Literatura) in Rio de Janeiro.
Miall, D. S. 1990. Readers’ response to narrative: Evaluating, relating, anticipating. Poetics, 19, 323–339. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Miall, D. S. & Kuiken, D. 1995. Aspects of literary response: A new questionnaire. Research in the Teaching of English, 29, 37–58.Google Scholar
Morgan, D. L., Kreuger, R. A. & King, J. A. 1998. The focus group kit. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Morris, D. 1977. Manwatching: A field guide to human behavior. London: Cape.Google Scholar
Patton, M. Q. 1990. Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Newsbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Piaget, J. 1948. The moral judgment of the child. M. Gabain, (Transl.). Glencoe, IL: Free Press.Google Scholar
Plato. 1906. The trial and death of Socrates. F. J. Church (Transl.), New York, NY: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Powell, R. A. & Single, H. M. 1996. Focus groups. International Journal of Quality in Health Care, 8(5), 499–504. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Radway, J. A. 1984. Reading the romance; Women, patriarchy, and popular literature. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press.Google Scholar
Riessman, C. K. 1993. Narrative analysis. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Rogers, E. M. & Shoemaker, F. F. 1971. Communication of innovations: A cross-cultural approach. New York, NY: Free Press.Google Scholar
Rose, J. 2001. The intellectual life of the British working classes. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Saris, W. & Stronkhorst, H. 1984. Causal modelling in nonexperimental research. Amsterdam: Sociometric Research Foundation.Google Scholar
Schreier, M. 2001. Qualitative methods in studying text reception. In D. Schram & G. Steen (Eds), The psychology and sociology of literature (pp. 35–56). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shaughnessy, J. J. & Zechtmeister, E. B. 1985. Research methods in psychology. New York: Knopf.Google Scholar
Sheets-Johnstone, M. 1999. The primacy of movement. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shklovsky, V. (1917/1965). Art as technique. In L. T. Lemon & M. Reis (Eds), Russian Formalist Criticism (pp. 3–24). Lincoln, NB: University of Nebraska Press.Google Scholar
Sinclair, J. McH. (Ed.). 1987. Looking up. London: Collins ELT.Google Scholar
Skaife, A. M. 1967. The role of deviation and complexity in changing musical taste. Proceedings of the American Psychological Association, Vol. 2, pp. 25–26.Google Scholar
Slater, A., Quinn, P. C., Hayes, R. & Brown, E. 2000. The role of facial orientation in newborn infants’ preference for attractive faces. Developmental Science, 3(2), 181–185. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Snow, C. P. (1959/1993). The two cultures. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Stern, D. 2010. Forms of vitality. Exploring dynamic experience in psychology, the arts, psychotherapy, and development. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J. 1988. The Psychologist’s Companion: A guide to scientific writing for students and researchers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Stolnitz, J. 1991. On the historical triviality of art. The British Journal of Aesthetics, 31, 195–202. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van Peer, W. 2001. Justice in Perspective. In W. Van Peer & S. Chatman (Eds), New perspectives on narrative perspective, (pp. 325–38). Albany, NY: SUNY Press.Google Scholar
Van Peer, W. & Stöger, I. 2001. Psycho-analysts and day-dreaming. In G. Steen & D. Schram (Eds), The Psychology and Sociology of Literature (pp. 185–200). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van Peer, W., Zyngier, S. & Hakemulder, F. 2007. Foregrounding: Past, present, future. In D. Hoover (Ed.), Prospect and retrospect. Papers from the poetics and linguistics association international conference, New York, 2004. Amsterdam: Rodopi West. DOI logo
West, R. F., Stanovich, K. E. & Mitchell, H. R. 1993. Reading in the real world and its correlates. Reading Research Quarterly, 28(1), 34–50. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Windelband, W. 1894. Geschichte und Naturwissenschaft. Straßburg: Straßburger Rektoratsrede.Google Scholar
Zill, N. & Winglee, M. 1990. Who reads literature? Cabin John, MD: Seven Locks Press.Google Scholar
Zillmann, D. & Bryant, J. 1975. Viewer’s moral sanction of retribution in the appreciation of dramatic presentations. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 11, 572–582. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zwaan, R. A. 1991. Some parameters of literary and news comprehension: Effects of discourse-type perspective on reading rate and surface structure representation. Poetics, 20, 139–156. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zyngier, S., Chesnokova, A., & Viana, V. (Eds.), 2007. Acting and connecting: Cultural approaches to language and literature. Berlin: LIT Verlag.Google Scholar
Zyngier, S., van Peer, W. & Hakemulder, J. 2007. Complexity and foregrounding: in the eye of the beholder? Poetics Today 28, 653–682. DOI logoGoogle Scholar