Article published in:
Empirical Studies of Literariness
Edited by Massimo Salgaro and Paul Sopčák
[Scientific Study of Literature 8:1] 2018
► pp. 77113


Allington, D.
(2012) Private experience, textual analysis, and institutional authority: The discursive practice of critical interpretation and its enactment in literary training. Language and Literature, 21(2), 211–225. Crossref link
Attridge, D.
(2013) Moving words: Forms of English poetry. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Crossref link
Bálint, K., Hakemulder, F., Kuijpers, M., Doicaru, M., & Tan, E. S.
(2016) Reconceptualizing foregrounding: Identifying response strategies to deviation in absorbing narratives. Scientific Study of Literature, 16(2), 176–207. Crossref link
Beatty, A.
(1922) William Wordsworth: His doctrine and art in their historical relations. Madison: University of Wisconsin Studies in Language and Literature 17.
Blohm, S., Menninghaus, W., & Schlesewsky, M.
(2017) Sentence-level effects of literary genre: Behavioral and electrophysical evidence. Frontiers in Psychology, 8. Crossref link
Bohrn, I. C., Altmann, U., Lubrich, O., Menninghaus, W., & Jacobs, A. M.
(2012) Old proverbs in new skins – An fMRI study on defamiliarization. Frontiers in Psychology, 3, 1–18. Crossref link
(2013) When we like what we know – A parametric fMRI analysis of beauty and familiarity. Brain & Language, 124, 1–8. Crossref link
Bourdieu, P.
(1993) The field of cultural production: Essays on art and literature. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
Brooke, S. A.
(1920) Naturalism in English poetry. London, United Kingdom: J. M. Dent.
Bruhn, M. J.
(2017) ‘The history and science of feeling’: Wordsworth’s affective poetics, then and now. In Wehrs, D. R., & Blake, T. (Eds.), The Palgrave handbook of affect studies and textual criticism (pp. 671–693). Cham, Switzerland: Springer. Crossref link
(in progress). Philosophy, methodology, and theory development in the scientific study of literary response, experience, and interpretation.
Coleridge, S. T.
(2000) The major works, including Biographia Literaria. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
[ p. 111 ]
Dolin, S.
(1993) Enjambment and the erotics of the gaze in Williams’s poetry. American Imago, 50(1). Retrieved from http://​www​.press​.jhu​.edu​.dml​.regis​.edu
Fialho, O., Zyngier, S. & Miall, D. S.
(2011) Interpretation and experience: Two pedagogical interventions observed. English in Education, 45(3), 236–253. Crossref link
Fish, S.
(1980) Is there a text in this class? The authority of interpretive communities. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Fowler, A.
(1991) The two histories. In Perkins, D. (Ed.), Theoretical issues in literary history (pp. 114–130). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Fowler, R.
(1966) ‘Prose rhythm’ and ‘meter’. In Fowler, R. (Ed.), Essays on Style and Language (pp. 82–99). New York, NY: Humanities Press.
Freeman, D. C.
(1968) On the primes of metrical style. Language and Style, 1, 63–101.
Golomb, H.
(1979) Enjambment in poetry: Language and verse in interaction. Tel Aviv, Israel: Porter Institute.
Hanauer, D. I.
(1998) Reading poetry: An empirical investigation of formalist, stylistic, and conventionalist claims. Poetics Today, 19(4), 565–580. Crossref link
(2011) The scientific study of poetic writing. Scientific Study of Literature, 1(1), 79–87. Crossref link
Heiden, B.
(2014) Narrative in poetry: A problem of narrative theory. Narrative, 22(2), 269–283. Crossref link
Heller, J. R.
(1977) Enjambment as a metrical force in romantic conversation poems. Poetics, 6, 15–25. Crossref link
Hogan, P. C.
(2011) Affective narratology: The emotional structure of stories. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press. Crossref link
Hollander, J.
(1975) Vision and resonance: Two senses of poetic form. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Jacobs, A. M.
(2015a) The scientific study of literary experience: Sampling the state of the art. Scientific Study of Literature, 5(2), 139–170. Crossref link
(2015b) Neurocognitive poetics: methods and models for investigating the neuronal and cognitive-affective bases of literature reception. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 9. Crossref link
(2015c) Towards a neurocognitive poetics model of literary reading. In Williams, R. M. (Ed.), Cognitive Neuroscience of Natural Language Use (pp. 135–159). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press. Crossref link
Jacobs, A. M., Lüdtke, J., Aryani, A., Meyer-Sickendieck, B., & Conrad, M.
(2016) Mood-empathic and aesthetic responses in poetry reception: A model-guided, multilevel, multimethod approach. Scientific Study of Literature, 6(1), 87–130. Crossref link
Jacobs, A. M., Schuster, S., Xue, S., and Lüdtke, J.
(2017) What’s in the brain that ink may character …: A quantitative narrative analysis of Shakespeare’s 154 sonnets for use in (Neuro-)cognitive poetics. Scientific Study of Literature, 7(1), 4–51. Crossref link
Koops van’t Jagt, R., Hoeks, J. C. J., Dorleijn, G., & Hendriks, P.
(2014) Look before you leap: How enjambment affects the processing of poetry. Scientific Study of Literature, 4(1), 3–24. Crossref link
[ p. 112 ]
Kraxenberger, M., & Menninghaus, W.
(2016) Emotional effects of poetic phonology, word positioning and dominant stress peaks in poetry reading. Scientific Study of Literature, 6(2), 298–313. Crossref link
Kuiken, D.
(2015) The implicit erasure of “literary experience” in empirical studies of literature: Comment on “The scientific study of literary experience: Sampling the state of the art” by Arthur Jacobs. Scientific Study of Literature, 15(2), 171–177. Crossref link
Leech, G. N.
(1969) A linguistic guide to English poetry. London, United Kingdom: Longman.
Logan, J. V.
(1961) Wordsworthian criticism: A guide and bibliography. Columbus: Ohio State University Press.
Margolin, U.
(2008) Studying literature and being empirical: A multifaceted conjunction. In Zyngier, S., Bortolussi, M., Chesnokova, A., & Auracher, J. (Eds.), Directions in empirical literary studies (pp. 8–19). Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins. Crossref link
McCarthy, K. S.
(2015) Reading beyond the lines: A critical review of cognitive approaches to literary interpretation and comprehension. Scientific Study of Literature, 5(1), 99–128. Crossref link
Menninghaus, W., Bohrn, I. C., Knoop, C. A., Kotz, S. A., Schlotz, W., & Jacobs, A. M.
(2015) Rhetorical features facilitate prosodic processing while handicapping ease of semantic comprehension. Cognition, 143, 48–60. Crossref link
Miall, D. S.
(2006) Literary reading: Empirical and theoretical studies. New York, NY:
Peter Lang.
(2011) Science in the perspective of literariness. Scientific Study of Literature, 1(1), 7–14. Crossref link
Miall, D. S., & Kuiken, D.
(1994) Foregrounding, defamiliarization, and affect: Response to literary stories. Poetics, 22, 389–407. Crossref link
(1999) What is literariness? Three components of literary reading. Discourse Processes, 28(2), 121–138. Crossref link
Salgaro, M.
(2015) How literary can literariness be? Methodological problems in the study of foregrounding. Scientific Study of Literature, 5(2), 229–249. Crossref link
Simonton, D. K.
(1989) Shakespeare’s sonnets: The case of and for single-case historiometry. Journal of Personality, 57(3), 695–721. Crossref link
(1990) Lexical choices and aesthetic success: A computer content analysis of 154 Shakespeare sonnets. Computers and the Humanities, 24(4), 251–264.
van Peer, W.
(1986) Stylistics and psychology: Investigations of foregrounding. London, United Kingdom: Croom Helm.
(2007) Introduction to foregrounding: A state of the art. Language and Literature, 16(2), 99–104. Crossref link
van Peer, W., Hakemulder, F., & Zyngier, S.
(2007) Lines on feeling: Foregrounding, aesthetics and meaning. Language and Literature, 16(2), 197–213. Crossref link
van Peer, W., Hakemulder, F. & Zyngier, S.
(2012) Scientific methods for the humanities. Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins. Crossref link
Williams, W. C.
(1923) Spring and all. Dijon, France: Robert McAlmon.
Wordsworth, W.
(1983) Poems, in two volumes, and other poems, 1800–1807. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
[ p. 113 ]
(1992) Lyrical ballads, and other poems, 1797–1800. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Wuescher, H. J.
(1980) Liberty, equality, fraternity in Wordsworth, 1791–1800. Stockholm, Sweden: Uppsala University.
Zöllner, K.
(1990) “Quotation analysis” as a means of understanding comprehension processes of longer and more difficult texts. Poetics, 19, 293–322. Crossref link
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(2) 139–156. Crossref link
(1993) Aspects of literary comprehension. Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins. Crossref link
Cited by

Cited by other publications

Kuiken, Don & Shawn Douglas
2018. Living metaphor as the site of bidirectional literary engagement. Scientific Study of Literature 8:1  pp. 47 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 02 june 2020. 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.