Drawing Kafka’s Castle
An experimental expansion of the theory of cognitive realism
We investigated the effects of narrative perspective on mental imagery by comparing responses to an English translation of Franz Kafka’s Das Schloß (The Castle) in the published version (narrated in the third person) versus an earlier (first-person) draft. We analysed participants’ pencil drawings of their imaginative experience for presence/absence of specific features (K. and the castle) and for image entropy (a proxy for image unpredictability). We also used word embeddings to perform cluster analysis of participants’ verbal free-response testimony, generating thematic clusters independently of experimenter expectations. We found no effects of text version on feature presence or overall entropy, but an effect on entropy variance, which was higher in the third-person condition. There was also an effect of text version on free responses: Readers of the third-person version were more likely to use words associated with mood and atmosphere. We offer conclusions on “Kafkaesque” aesthetics, cognitive realism, and the future of experimental literary studies.
Article outline
- Introduction: Descriptive style, cognitive realism, and narrative perspective
- Hypotheses, methods, measures
- Hypotheses and research questions
- Participants
- Procedure
- Test material and independent variable
- Dependent variables
- Dependent variable 1: Local drawing features
- Dependent variable 2: Global image entropy
- Dependent variable 3: Qualitative drawing analysis
- Dependent variable 4: Word embedding clusters for free text responses
- Results
- Drawing measures: The castle and K
- Image entropy
- Cluster analysis of free verbal responses
- Discussion
- The drawings
- The verbal descriptions of differences between drawing and imagining
- Reader versus text variables, and cognitive realism
- Statement on code
- Acknowledgements
-
References
References (63)
Allington, D.
(
2011) “
It actually painted a picture of the village and the sea and the bottom of the sea”: Reading groups, cultural legitimacy, and description in narrative (with reference to John Steinbeck’s The Pearl).
Language and Literature,
20
(4), 317–332.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Andersen, S. M., & Schwartz, A. H.
(
1992)
Intolerance of ambiguity and depression: A cognitive vulnerability factor linked to hopelessness.
Social Cognition,
10
(3), 271–298.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bardi, A., Guerra, V. M., & Ramdeny, G. S. D.
(
2009)
Openness and ambiguity intolerance: Their differential relations to well-being in the context of an academic life transition.
Personality and Individual Differences,
47
(3), 219–223.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Block, N.
(
1981)
Imagery. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bortolussi, M., & Dixon, P.
(
2003)
Psychonarratology: Foundations for the empirical study of literary response. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Brown, M. B., & Forsythe, A. B.
(
1974)
Robust tests for the equality of variances.
Journal of the American Statistical Association,
69
(346), 364–367.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bryant, D. J., Tversky, B., & Franklin, N.
(
1992)
Internal and external spatial frameworks for representing described scenes.
Journal of memory and language,
31
(1), 74–98.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Budner, S.
(
1962)
Intolerance of ambiguity as a personality variable.
Journal of Personality,
30
(1), 29–50.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bulmer, M. G.
(
1979)
Principles of statistics (2nd ed.). New York: Dover.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Carney, J.
(
2020)
The role of aesthetic style in alleviating anxiety about the future. In
J. Carroll,
M. Clasen, &
E. Jonsson (Eds),
Evolutionary perspectives on imaginative culture (pp. 141–159). Cham: Springer.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Clark, A.
(
2016)
Surfing uncertainty: Prediction, action, and the embodied mind. New York: Oxford University Press.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cohn, D.
(
1968)
K. enters The Castle: On the change of person in Kafka’s manuscript.
Euphorion,
62
1, 28–43.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cohn, D.
(
1978)
Transparent minds: Narrative modes for presenting consciousness in fiction. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Davis, F. C., Neta, M., Kim, M. J., Moran, J. M., & Whalen, P. J.
(
2016)
Interpreting ambiguous social cues in unpredictable contexts.
Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience,
11
(5), 775–782.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Foglia, L., & O’Regan, J. K.
(
2016)
A new imagery debate: Enactive and sensorimotor accounts.
Review of Philosophy and Psychology,
7
(1), 181–196.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Frenkel-Brunswick, E.
(
1949)
Intolerance of ambiguity as emotional and perceptual personality variable.
Journal of Personality,
18
(1), 108–143.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Grillon, C., Baas, J. P., Lissek, S., Smith, K., & Milstein, J.
(
2004)
Anxious responses to predictable and unpredictable aversive events.
Behavioral Neuroscience,
118
(5), 916–924.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hakemulder, J., & Koopman, E.
(
2010)
Readers closing in on immoral characters’ consciousness: Effects of free indirect discourse on response to literary narratives.
Journal of Literary Theory,
4
(1), 41–62.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Haralick, R. M., Shanmugam, K., & Dinstein, I. H.
(
1973)
Textural features for image classification.
IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics,
6
1, 610–621.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hartung, F., Burke, M., Hagoort, P., & Willems, R. M.
(
2016)
Taking perspective: Personal pronouns affect experiential aspects of literary reading.
PLOS ONE,
11
(5), e0154732.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Huth, A. G., De Heer, W. A., Griffiths, T. L., Theunissen, F. E., & Gallant, J. L.
(
2016)
Natural speech reveals the semantic maps that tile human cerebral cortex.
Nature,
532
(7600), 453–458.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Ingarden, R.
(
1965) (3rd ed.)
Das literarische Kunstwerk. Mit einem Anhang: Von den Funktionen der Sprache im Theaterschauspiel. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Jach, H. K., & Smillie, L. D.
(
2019)
To fear or fly to the unknown: Tolerance for ambiguity and Big Five personality traits.
Journal of Research in Personality,
79
1, 67–78.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kafka, F.
(
1925/1982)
Das Schloß. Ed.
M. Pasley. New York: Schocken 1982.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kaiser, D. H., & Deaver, S.
(
2009)
Assessing attachment with the Bird’s Nest Drawing: A review of the research.
Art Therapy,
26
(1), 26–33.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kotovych, M., Dixon, P., Bortolussi, M., & Holden, M.
Krippendorff, K.
(
1986)
Information theory: Structural models for qualitative data. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kuzmičová, A.
(
2012)
Presence in the reading of literary narrative: A case for motor enactment.
Semiotica,
189
1, 23–48.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lakoff, G.
(
1987)
Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Levin, D. T., Momen, N., Drivdahl IV, S. B., & Simons, D. J.
(
2000)
Change blindness blindness: The metacognitive error of overestimating change-detection ability.
Visual Cognition,
7
(1–3), 397–412.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Liao, H. I., Yeh, S. L., & Shimojo, S.
(
2011)
Novelty vs. familiarity principles in preference decisions: Task-context of past experience matters.
Frontiers in Psychology,
2
1, 431.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Löfstedt, T., Brynolfsson, P., Asklund, T., Nyholm, T., & Garpebring, A.
(
2019)
Gray-level invariant Haralick texture features.
PLOS ONE,
14
(2), e0212110.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Marks, D. F.
(
1973)
Visual imagery differences in the recall of pictures.
British Journal of Psychology,
64
(1), 17–24.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Millis, K. K.
(
1995)
Encoding discourse perspective during the reading of a literary text.
Poetics,
23
(3), 235–253.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Myin, E., & Degenaar, J.
(
2014)
Enactive vision. In
L. Shapiro (Ed.),
Routledge handbook of embodied cognition (pp. 90–98). Abingdon: Routledge.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Noë, A.
(
2004)
Action in perception. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Noë, A.
(
2005)
Real presence.
Philosophical Topics,
33
(1), 235–264.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Pascal, R.
(
1977)
The dual voice: Free indirect speech and its functioning in the nineteenth-century European novel. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Pearson, J., & Kosslyn, S. M.
(
2015)
The heterogeneity of mental representation: Ending the imagery debate.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,
112
(33), 10089–10092.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Proulx, T., & Heine, S. J.
(
2009)
Connections from Kafka: Exposure to meaning threats improves implicit learning of an artificial grammar.
Psychological Science,
20
(9), 1125–1131.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Pylyshyn, Z. W.
(
2003)
Seeing and visualizing: It’s not what you think. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Reddy, L., Tsuchiya, N., & Serre, T.
(
2010)
Reading the mind’s eye: Decoding category information during mental imagery.
Neuroimage,
50
(2), 818–825.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Rosch, E.
(
1975)
Cognitive representations of semantic categories.
Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,
104
(3), 192–233.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Roth, N., Lev-Wiesel, R., & Shochat, T.
(
2019) “
How do you sleep?” Sleep in self-figure drawings of young adolescents in residential care facilities – An exploratory study.
Sleep Medicine,
60
1, 116–122.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Salem, S., Weskott, T., & Holler, A.
(
2017)
Does narrative perspective influence readers’ perspective-taking? An empirical study on free indirect discourse, psycho-narration and first-person narration.
Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics,
2
(1), 61.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Sato, M., Sakai, H., Wu, J., & Bergen, B.
(
2012)
Towards a cognitive science of literary style: Perspective-taking in processing omniscient versus objective voice. In
Proceedings of the 34th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, 959–964.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Seriès, P., & Seitz, A.
(
2013)
Learning what to expect (in visual perception).
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience,
7
1, 668.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Shannon, C. E.
(
1951)
Prediction and entropy of printed English. In
Bell System Technical Journal,
30
(1), 50–64.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Simons, D. J., & Rensink, R. A.
(
2005)
Change blindness: Past, present, and future.
Trends in cognitive sciences,
9
(1), 16–20.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Swami, V., Stieger, S., Pietschnig, J., & Voracek, M.
(
2010)
The disinterested play of thought: Individual differences and preference for surrealist motion pictures.
Personality and Individual Differences,
48
(7), 855–859.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Thomas, N. J. T.
(
2014)
Mental imagery. In
E. N. Zalta (Ed.),
The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Fall 2020 Ed.).
[URL]
Troscianko, E. T.
(
2010)
Kafkaesque worlds in real time.
Language and Literature,
19
(2), 151–171.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Troscianko, E.T.
(
2012)
The cognitive realism of memory in Flaubert’s Madame Bovary
.
Modern Language Review, 1071, 772–795.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Troscianko, E. T.
(
2013)
Reading imaginatively: The imagination in cognitive science and cognitive literary studies.
Journal of Literary Semantics,
42
(2), 181–198.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Troscianko, E. T.
(
2014a)
Kafka’s cognitive realism. Abingdon: Routledge.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Troscianko, E. T.
(
2014b)
Reading Kafka enactively.
Paragraph,
37
(1), 15–31.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Van Lissa, C. J., Caracciolo, M., van Duuren, T., & van Leuveren, B.
(
2016)
Difficult empathy: The effect of narrative perspective on readers’ engagement with a first-person narrator.
Diegesis,
5
(1), 43–63.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
van Peer, W., & H. Pander Maat
(
1996)
Perspectivation and sympathy: Effects of narrative point of view. In
R. J. Kruez &
M. S. MacNeally (Eds),
Empirical approaches to literature and aesthetics (pp. 143–156). New York: Ablex.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
van Peer, W., & Pander Maat, H.
(
2001)
Narrative perspective and the interpretation of characters’ motives.
Language and Literature,
10
1, 229–241.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Walton, Kendall L.
(
1990)
Mimesis as make-believe: On the foundations of the representational arts. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Wilson, D., & Sperber, D.
(
2004)
Relevance theory. In
L. R. Horn &
G. L. Ward (Eds),
The handbook of pragmatics (pp. 607–632). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Wittchen, H. U., & Hoyer, J.
(
2001)
Generalized anxiety disorder: Nature and course.
Journal of Clinical Psychiatry,
62
(11), 15–21.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cited by (1)
Cited by 1 other publications
Riestra-Camacho, Rocío, James Carney & Emily Troscianko
2024.
Can Narrative Bibliotherapy Reduce Vulnerability to Eating Disorders? Evidence from a Reading Experiment.
Empirical Studies of the Arts 42:2
► pp. 303 ff.
![DOI logo](//benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
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.