Cover not available
Part of
Style and Reader Response: Minds, media, methods
Edited by Alice Bell, Sam Browse, Alison Gibbons and David Peplow
[Linguistic Approaches to Literature 36] 2021
► pp. 101–122

Chapter 6
“Why do you insist that Alana is not real?”

Visitors’ perceptions of the fictionality of Andi and Lance Olsen’s ‘there’s no place like time’ exhibition

| Sheffield Hallam University
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction: There’s no artist like Alana Olsen
  • 2.Fictionality and empirical Research: There’s no reality like fiction
    • 2.1The development of fiction/reality distinctions
    • 2.2Factors effecting fiction/reality judgment and processing
    • 2.3Summary of fictionality and empirical research
  • 3.Modelling cognition in museums: There’s no methodology like cognitive stylistics
  • 4.Exhibition style: There’s no place like time
  • 5.Questionnaire response: There’s no data like qualitative answers
    • 5.1Is Alana Olsen real enough to meet?
    • 5.2Retrospective disbelief
    • 5.3Belief in the auto/biographical retrospective and emotional response
    • 5.4Personal relevance and reality creating fiction
  • 6.Conclusion: There’s no felt experience like referentiality
  • Data
  • Acknowledgements
  • Note
  • Bibliography
Published online: 8 February 2021
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/lal.36.06gib
References (62)
Bibliography
Abraham, A. 2013. The world according to me: Personal relevance and the media prefrontal cortext. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 7: 1–4. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Abraham, A. & von Cramon, D. Y. 2009. Reality=relevance? Insights from spontaneous modulations of the brain’s default network when telling apart reality from fiction. PLoS One 4(3): 1–9. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Abraham, A., von Cramon, D. Y. & Schubotz, R. I. 2008. Meeting George Bush versus meeting Cinderella: The neural response when telling apart what is real from what is fictional in the context of our reality. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 20(6): 965–976. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Altmann, U., Bohrn, I. C., Lubrich, O., Menninghaus, W. & Jacobs, A. M. 2014. Fact vs fiction – How paratextual information shapes our reading process. SCAN 9: 22–29.Google Scholar
Bal, M. 1996. Double Exposures: The Subject of Cultural Analysis. New York; London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Bitgood, S. 2011. Social Design in Museums: The Psychology of Visitor Studies: Collected Essays Volume One. Edinburgh: MuseumsEtc.Google Scholar
Browse, S., Gibbons, A. & Hatavara, M. 2019. Real fictions: Fictionality, factuality, and narrative strategies in contemporary storytelling. Narrative Inquiry 29(2): 245–267. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bunce, L. & Harris, P. L. 2014 Is it real? The development of judgments about authenticity and ontological status. Cognitive Development 32: 110–119. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cohn, Dorrit. 1999. The Distinction of Fiction. Baltimore; London: The John Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Consoli, G. 2018. Preliminary steps towards a cognitive theory of fiction and its effects. Journal of Cultural Cognitive Science 2: 85–100. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cook, C. & Sobel, D. M. 2011. Children’s beliefs about the fantasy/reality status of hypothesized machines. Developmental Science 14:1–8. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Corriveau, K. H. & Harris, P. L. 2015. Children’s developing realization that some stories are true: Links to understanding of beliefs and signs. Cognitive Development 34: 76–87. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Corriveau, K. H., Kim, A. L., Schwalen, C. E. & Harris, P. L. 2009. Abraham Lincoln and Harry Potter: Children’s differentiation between historical and fantasy characters. Cognition 112: 213–225. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Eakin, P. J. 1992. Touching the World: Reference in Autobiography. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fludernik, M. 2018. The fiction of the rise of fictionality. Poetics Today 39(1): 67–92. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gavins, J. 2007. Text World Theory: An introduction. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gibbons, A. 2012. Multimodality, Cognition, and Experimental Literature. London; New York: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2019a. Entropology and the end of nature in Lance Olsen’s Theories of Forgetting . Textual Practice 33(2): 280–299. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2019b. Using Life and abusing life in the trial of Ahmed Naji: Text World Theory, Adab, and the Ethics of Reading. Journal of Language and Discrimination 3(1): 4–31. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
forthcoming 2021. Interpreting fictionality and ontological blurrings in and between Lance Olsen’s Theories of Forgetting and there’s no place like time . Style 55 (2).Google Scholar
Gilbert, D. T. 1991. How mental systems believe. American Psychologist 46(2): 107–119. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gilbert, D. T., Malone, P. S. & Krull, D. S. 1993. Unbelieving the unbelievable: Some problems in the rejection of false information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 59(4): 601–613. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gilbert, D. T., Tafarodi, R. W. & Malone, P. S. 1990. You can’t unbelieve everything you read. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 65(2): 221–233. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gorman, D. 2005. Fiction, Theories of. In Routledge Encyclopedia of Narrative Theory, D. Herman, M. Jahn & M.-L. Ryan (eds), 163–167. London; New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Green, M. 2004. Transportation into narrative worlds: The role of prior knowledge and perceived realism. Discourse Processes 38(3): 247–266. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Green, M. & Brock, T. C. 2000. The role of transportation in the persuasiveness of public narratives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 79(5): 701–721. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Green, M., Chatham, C. & Sestir, M. A. 2012. Emotion and transportation into fact and fiction. Scientific Study of Literature 2(1): 37–59. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Green, M., Garst, J., Brock, T. C. & Chung, S. 2006. Fact versus fiction labeling: Persuasion parity despite heightened scrutiny of fact. Media Psychology 8: 267–285. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hartung, F., Withers, P., Hagoort, P. & Willems, R. M. 2017. When fiction is just as real as fact: No difference in reading behavior between stories believed to be based on true or fictional events. Frontiers in Psychology 8 (article 1618):1–14.Google Scholar
Leslie, A. M. 2001. Theory of Mind. In International Encylopedia of the Social & Behavioural Sciences, N. J. Smelser & P. B. Baltes (eds), 15652–15656. Pergamon. Online. DOI logoGoogle 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. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Martarelli, C. S., Mast, F. W., Läge, D. & Roebers, C. M. 2015. The distinction between real and fictional worlds: Investigating individual differences in fantasy understanding. Cognitive Development 36: 111–126. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nielsen, H. S., Phelan, J. & Walsh, R. 2015. Ten theses about fictionality. Narrative 23(1): 61–73. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Olsen, A. & Olsen, L. 2018. There’s no place like time [exhibition]. Snite Museum of Art , University of Notre Dame, South Bend, IL, 1 September–1 December 2018.
Olsen, L. 2014. Theories of Forgetting. Tuscaloosa, AL: The University of Alabama Press.Google Scholar
2016. There’s no place like time. Lake Forest, IL: Now Books.Google Scholar
Pettersson, T. 2016. Fictionality and the empirical study of literature. CLCWeb: Comparative Literature and Culture 18(2). <[URL]> (19 November 2019).Google Scholar
Phelan, J. 2009. Cognitive narratology, rhetorical narratology, and interpretive disagreement: A response to Alan Palmer’s Analysis of Enduring Love . Style 43(3): 309–321.Google Scholar
Prentice, D. A. & Gerrig, R. J. 1999. Exploring the boundary between fiction and reality. In Dual-Process Theories in Social Psychology, S. Chaiken & Y. Trope (eds), 529–546. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Samuels, A. & Taylor, M. 1994. Children’s ability to distinguish fantasy events from real-life events. British Journal of Developmental Psychology 12(4): 417–427. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sayfan, L. & Lagattut, K. H. 2008. Grownups are not afraid of scary stuff, but kids are: Young children’s and adult’s reasoning about children’s, infant’s, and adult’s fears. Child Development 79: 821–835. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schaeffer, J-M. 2012. Fictional vs. factual narration. In The Living Handbook of Narratology, P. Hühn, J. Pier, W. Schmid & J. Schönert (eds). Hamburg: Hamburg University <[URL]> (19 November 2019).Google Scholar
Scharine, A. A. & McBeath, M. K. 2002. Right-handers and Americans favor turning to the right. Human Factors 44(1): 248–256. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sharron, T. & Woolley, J. D. 2004. Do monsters dream? Young children’s understanding of the fantasy/reality distinction. British Journal of Developmental Psychology 22: 293–310. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shtulman, A. & Carey, S. A. 2007. Improbable or impossible: How children reason about the possibility of extraordinary events. Child Development 78: 1015–1032. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Skolnick. D. & Bloom, P. 2006. What does Batman think about SpongeBob? Children’s understanding of the fantasy/reality distinction. Cognition 101(1): B9–B18. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sperduti, M., Arcangeli, M., Makowski, D., Wantzen, P., Zalla, T., Lemaire, S., Dokic, J., Pelletier, J. & Piolino, P. 2016. The paradox of fiction: Emotional response toward fiction and the modulatory role of self-relevance. Acta Psychologica 165: 53–59. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stockwell, P. 2009. Texture: A Cognitive Aesthetics of Reading. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
2016. The texture of authorial invention. In World-Building: Discourse in the Mind, J. Gavins & E. Lahey (eds), 147–163. London, New York: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Van Reet, J., Pinkham, A. M. & Lillard, A. S. 2015. The effect of realistic context on ontological judgments of novel entities. Cognitive Development 34: 88–98. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Werth, P. 1999. Text Worlds: Representing Conceptual Space in Discourse. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Whiteley, S. & Canning, P. 2017. Reader response research in stylistics. Language and Literature 26(2): 71–87. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Woolley, J. D., Cornelius, C. A. & Lacy, W. 2011. Developmental changes in the use of supernatural explanations for unusual events. Journal of Cognition and Culture 11: 311–337. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Woolley, J. D. & Cox, V. 2007. Development of beliefs about storybook reality. Developmental Science 10: 681–693. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Woolley, J. D. & Ghossaint, M. E. 2013. Revisiting the fantasy-reality distinction: Children as naïve skeptics. Child Development 84(5): 1495–1510. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Woolley, J. D., Ma, L. & Lopez-Mobilia, G. 2011. Development of the use of conversational cues to assess reality status. Journal of Cognition and Development 12: 537–555. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Woolley J. D. & van Reet, J. 2006. Effects of context on judgments concerning the reality status of novel entities. Child Development 77(6): 1778–1793. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wright, J. C., Huston, A. L., Reitz, A. L. & Piemyat, S. 1994. Young children’s perceptions of television reality: Determinants and developmental differences. Developmental Psychology 30: 229–239. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Yang, J. & Xue, J. 2014. Distinguishing different fictional worlds during sentence comprehension: ERP evidence. Psychophysiology 51: 42–51. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2015. Reality/fiction distinction and fiction/fiction distinction during sentence comprehension. Universal Journal of Psychology 3(6): 165–175. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zwaan, R. A. 1994. Effect of genre expectations on text comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition 20: 920–933.Google Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Effe, Alexandra & Alison Gibbons
2022. A Cognitive Perspective on Autofictional Writing, Texts, and Reading. In The Autofictional [Palgrave Studies in Life Writing, ], ► pp. 61 ff. DOI logo
Price, Hazel
2022. The year’s work in stylistics 2021. Language and Literature: International Journal of Stylistics 31:4 ► pp. 519 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 july 2024. 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.