Cover not available
Article published In:
Transdisciplinary Approaches to Literature and Empathy
Edited by Paul Sopčák, Massimo Salgaro and J. Berenike Herrmann
[Scientific Study of Literature 6:1] 2016
► pp. 87–130

Mood-empathic and aesthetic responses in poetry reception

A model-guided, multilevel, multimethod approach

| Department of Education and Psychology, Freie Universität Berlin, Germany
| Center for Cognitive Neuroscience Berlin (CCNB), Berlin
| Dahlem Institute for Neuroimaging of Emotion (D.I.N.E.), Berlin
| Department of Philosophy & Humanities, Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| Department of Cognitive, Social and Organizational Psychology, Universidad de La Laguna, Spain
In the present study we investigate factors shaping poetry reception at multiple levels of analysis. We use both qualitative and quantitative means for describing structural aspects of poems, scales for assessing subjective dimensions, as well as behavioral and peripheral-physiological measures. Applying such mixed analyses we tested three hypotheses derived from the Neurocognitive Poetics Model of literary reading (Jacobs, 2011, 2015a, 2015b): (a) the multilevel hypothesis stating that textual features at four relevant levels of textual analysis (supralexical, interlexical, lexical and sublexical) affect empathic/immersive and aesthetic-liking processes of poetry reception at all three levels of measurement (experiential, peripheral-physiological, and behavioral); (b) the mood empathy hypothesis stating that poems expressing moods of persons, atmospheres, situations, or objects should engage readers to mentally simulate and affectively resonate with the depicted state of affairs (see also Lüdtke et al., 2014); and (c) the aesthetic trajectory hypothesis stating that poems with a high amount of foregrounding facilitate aesthetic liking responses. The results are in line with all three hypotheses and raise a number of questions for future research on poetry reception.
Keywords: mood empathy hypothesis, Neurocognitive Poetics Model, aesthetic trajectory, BAWL, foregrounding, backgrounding, poetry reception questionnaire, Emophon
Published online: 21 December 2016
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ssol.6.1.06jac
References (124)
Altmann, U., Bohrn, I. C., Lubrich, O., Menninghaus, W., & Jacobs, A. M. (2012). The power of emotional valence: From cognitive to affective processes in reading. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 6(192). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2014). Fact vs fiction: How paratextual information shapes our reading processes. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 91, 22–29. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Aryani, A., Jacobs, A. M., and Conrad, M. (2013). Extracting salient sublexical units from written texts: “Emophon,” a corpus-based approach to phonological iconicity. Frontiers in Psychology, 4(654). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Aryani, A., Kraxenberger, M., Ullrich, S., Jacobs, A. M., & Conrad, M. (2015). Measuring the basic affective tone of poems via phonological saliency and iconicity. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 10(2), 191–204. DOI logo.Google Scholar
Auracher, J. (2007) ... wie auf den allmächtigen Schlag einer magischen Rute – Psychophysiologische Messungen zur Textwirkung. (Psychophysiological measurement of textual effects on readers). Baden-Baden: Deutscher WissenschaftsverlagGoogle Scholar
Berlyne, D. E. (1971). Aesthetics and Psychobiology. New York, NY: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
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(204). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bohrn, I. C., Altmann, U., Lubrich, O., Menninghaus, W., and Jacobs, A. M. (2013). When we like what we know – a parametric fMRI analysis of beauty and familiarity. Brain and Language, 1241, 1–8. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bransford, J. D. and Frank, J. J. (1976). Toward a framework for understanding learning. In G. H. Bower (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (p. 10). New York, NY: Academic Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Braun, K., & Cupchik, I. G. C. (2001). Phenomenological and quantitative analyses of absorption in literary passages. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 19(1), 85–109. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Briesemeister, B. B., Kuchinke, L., & Jacobs, A. M. (2011a). Discrete emotion norms for nouns- Berlin Affective Word List (DENN-BAWL). Behavior Research Methods, 431, 441–448. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2011b). Discrete emotion effects on lexical decision response times. PLoS ONE 6:e23743). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2012). Emotional valence–A bipolar continuum or two independent dimensions? SAGE Open, 21, 1–12, DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2014a). Emotion word recognition: Discrete information effects first, continuous later? Brain Research, 15641, 62–71. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Briesemeister, B. B., Kuchinke, L., Jacobs, A. M., & Braun, M. (2014b). Emotions in reading: Dissociation of happiness and positivity. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 151, 287–298. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Burke, M. (2011). Literary reading, cognition and emotion: An exploration of the oceanic mind. New York, NY: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2013). The rhetorical neuroscience of style: On the primacy of style elements during literary discourse processing. Journal of Literary Semantics, 421, 199–215. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2015). The neuroaesthetics of prose fiction: Pitfalls, parameters and prospects. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 9(442). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chen, Q., Zhang, J., Xu, X., Scheepers, C., Yang, Y., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (2016). Prosodic expectations in silent reading: ERP evidence from rhyme scheme and semantic congruence in classic Chinese poems. Cognition, 1541, 11–21. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dixon, P., Bortolussi, M., Twilley, L. C., & Leung, A. (1993). Literary processing and interpretation: Towards empirical foundations. Poetics, 221, 5–33. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dixon, P., Bortolussi, M. (2016). Measuring Literary Experience: Comment on Jacobs (2015). Scientific Study of Literature, 5(2), 178–182. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Epstein, R. (2004). Consciousness, art and the brain: Lessons from Marcel Proust. Consciousness and Cognition, 131, 213–240. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fechner, G. T. (1876). Vorschule der Ästhetik. [Preschool of aesthetics]. Hildesheim: Olms.Google Scholar
Forgács, B., Bohrn, I. C., Baudewig, J., Hofmann, M. J., Pléh, C., & Jacobs, A. M. (2012). Neural correlates of combinatorial semantic processing of literal and figurative noun-noun compound words. Neuroimage, 631, 1432–1442. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Graf, R., Nagler, M., & Jacobs, A. M. (2005). Factor analysis of 57 variables in visual word recognition. Z. Psychol, 2131, 205–218. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hanauer, D. (1997). Poetic text processing. Journal of Literature & Science, 261, 157–172.Google Scholar
(1998a). Reading poetry: An empirical investigation of formalist, stylistic and conventionalist claims. Poetics Today, 191, 565–580. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1998b). The effects of three literary educational methods on the development of genre knowledge. Journal of literary semantic, 271, 43–57.Google Scholar
Hakemulder, F. (2013). Travel experiences: A typology of transportation and other absorption states in relation to types of aesthetic responses. In M. Baisch, A. Degen, & J. Lüdtke, J. (Eds.), Wie gebannt: Ästhetische Verfahren der affektiven Bindung von Aufmerksamkeit (As If Spellbound: Affective Attention Fixation in Aesthetic Practice) (pp. 163–182). Freiburg: Rombach.Google Scholar
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 logoGoogle Scholar
Hofmann, M. J., and Jacobs, A. M. (2014). Interactive activation and competition models and semantic context: from behavioral to brain data. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews. 461, 85–104. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hogan, P. C. (2003). Cognitive Science, Literature and the Arts. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Holenstein, E. (1983). Five Jakobsonian principles of poetics. American Journal of Semiotics, 21, 23–34. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hoover, D. L., Culpeper, J., & O’Halloran, K. (2014). Digital literary studies: Corpus approaches to poetry, prose, and drama. New York, NY: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hsu, C. -T., Conrad, M., & Jacobs, A. M. (2014). Fiction feelings in Harry Potter: Haemodynamic response in the mid-cingulate cortex correlates with immersive reading experience. Neuroreport, 251, 1356–1361. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hsu, C. -T., Jacobs, A. M., & Conrad, M. (2015a). Can Harry Potter still put a spell on us in a second language? An fMRI study on reading emotion-laden literature in late bilinguals. Cortex, 631, 282–295. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hsu, C. -T., Jacobs, A. M., Citron, F., & Conrad, M. (2015b). The emotion potential of words and passages in reading Harry Potter: An fMRI study. Brain and Language, 1421, 96–114. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hsu, C. -T., Jacobs, A. M., Altmann, U., & Conrad, M. (2015c). The magical activation of left amygdala when reading Harry Potter: An fMRI study on how descriptions of supra-natural events entertain and enchant. PLoS ONE, 101:e0118179. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jacobs, A. M. (2011). “Neurokognitive Poetik: elemente eines modells des literarischen lesens (Neurocognitive poetics: elements of a model of literary reading).” In R. Schrott & A. M. Jacobs (Eds.), Gehirn und Gedicht: Wie Wir Unsere Wirklichkeiten Konstruieren (Brain and Poetry: How We Construct Our Realities) (pp. 492–520). München: Carl Hanser Verlag.Google Scholar
(2014). Affektive und ästhetische Prozesse beim Lesen: Anfänge einer neurokognitiven Poetik (Affective and aesthetic processes in reading: towards a neurocognitive poetics). In G. Gebauer & M. Edler, Sprachen der Emotion (Languages of Emotion) (pp. 134–154). Frankfurt, Campus.Google Scholar
(2015a). Towards a neurocognitive poetics model of literary reading. In R. Willems, Towards a cognitive neuroscience of natural language use (pp. 135–159). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2015b). Neurocognitive poetics: methods and models for investigating the neuronal and cognitive-affective bases of literature reception. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 9(186). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jacobs, A. (2015c). The scientific study of literary experience: Sampling the state of the art. Scientific Study of Literature, 5(2), 139–170. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jacobs, A.M. (2016). The scientific study of literary experience and neuro-behavioral responses to literature. Reply to commentaries. Scientific Study of Literature, 6:1 (2016), 173–183. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jacobs, A. M., & Lüdtke, J. (in press). Immersion into narrative and poetic worlds: A neurocognitive poetics perspective. In M. Kuipers & F. Hakemulder (Eds.), The Handbook of Narrative Absorption.
Jacobs, A. M., Lüdtke, J., & Meyer-Sickendiek, B. (2013). “Bausteine einer neurokognitiven Poetik: foregrounding/backgrounding, lyrische Stimmung und ästhetisches Gefallen” (Elements of a neurocognitive poetics: foregrounding/backgrounding, lyrical mood and aesthetic pleasure). In B. Meyer-Sickendiek & F. Reents (Eds.), Stimmung und Methode (Mood and Method) (pp. 63–94). Tübingen, Mohr Siebeck.Google Scholar
Jacobs, A. M., Võ, M. L. -H., Briesemeister, B. B., Conrad, M., Hofmann, M. J., Kuchinke L., Lüdtke, J., & Braun, M. (2015). 10 years of BAWLing into affective and aesthetic processes in reading: What are the echoes? Frontiers in Psychology. 6(714). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jakobson, R. (1960). Closing statement: linguistics and poetics. In T. A. Sebeok (Ed.), Style in Language (pp. 350–377). Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.Google Scholar
(1979). Hölderlin, Klee, Brecht: Zur Wortkunst dreier Gedichte. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
Jakobson, R., & Lévi-Strauss, C. (1962). Les Chats de Charles Baudelaire. L’Homme, 21, 5–21. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jockers, M. L. (2013). Macroanalysis: Digital methods and literary history. Urbana: University of Illinois Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Juhasz, B. J., Yap, M. J., Dicke, J., Taylor, S. C., & Gullick, M. M. (2011). Tangible words are recognized faster: The grounding of meaning in sensory and perceptual systems. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 641, 1683–1691. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kennedy, A., Pynte, J., & Ducrot. S. (2002). Parafoveal-on-foveal interactions in word recognition. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology A, 55(4),1307–1337. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Keidel, J. L., Davis, P. M., Gonzalez-Diaz, V., Martin, C. D., & Thierry, G. (2013). How Shakespeare tempests the brain: Neuroimaging insights. Cortex, 49(4), 913e919. DOI logo.Google Scholar
Killy, W. (1972). Elemente der Lyrik [Elements of lyricism]. München, Germany: Beck.Google Scholar
Kintsch, W., & van Dijk, T. A. (1978). Toward a model of text comprehension and production. Psychological Review, 851, 363–394. #x202f; DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Klein, W. (2005). Wie ist eine exakte Wissenschaft von der Literatur möglich? Zeitschrift für Literaturwissenschaft und Linguistik, 1371, 80–100. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kuchinke, L., Trapp, S., Jacobs, A. M., & Leder, H. (2009). Pupillary responses in art appreciation: Effects of aesthetic emotions. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts 31, 156–163. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kuijpers, M. M., Hakemulder, F., Tan, E. S. & Doicaru, M. M. (2014). Exploring absorbing reading experiences: Developing and validating a self-report scale to measure story world absorption. Scientific Study of Literature, 4(1), 89–122. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kuiken, D. (2008). A theory of expressive reading. In S. Zyngier, M. Bortolussi, A. Chesnokova, & J. Auracher (Eds.), Directions in Empirical Literary Studies (pp. 49–73). Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kuiken, D., & Miall, D. S. (2001). Numerically aided phenomenology: Procedures for investigating categories of experience. Forum Qualitative Forschung Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 2(1). Retrieved from [URL]
Kuiken, D., Campbell, P., & Sopcák, P. (2012). The experiencing questionnaire: Locating exceptional reading moments. Scientific Study of Literature, 21, 243–272. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kuzmicová, A. (2014). Literary narrative and mental imagery: A view from embodied cognition. Style, 481, 275 – 293.Google Scholar
(2015). Does it matter where you read? Situating narrative in physical environment. Communication Theory, 26(3), 290–308. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lamping, D. (1989). Das lyrische Gedicht: Definitionen zu Theorie und Geschichte der Gattung [The lyrical poem: Definitions about theory and history of genres]. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.Google Scholar
Larsen, S. E, & Seilman, U. (1988). Personal remindings while reading literature. Text, 81, 411–429. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leder, H., Belke, B., Oeberst, A., & Augustin, D. (2004). A model of aesthetic appreciation and aesthetic judgments. British Journal of Psychology, 951, 489–508. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leder, H., Gerger, G., Dressler, S. G., Schabmann, A. (2012). How art is appreciated. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 61, 2–10. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leder, H., & Nadal, M. (2014). Ten years of a model of aesthetic appreciation and aesthetic judgments: The aesthetic episode – developments and challenges in empirical aesthetics. British Journal of Psychology, 1051, 443–64. DOI logo.Google Scholar
Lehne, M., Engel, P., Rohrmeier, M., Menninghaus, W., Jacobs, A. M., & Koelsch, S. (2015). Reading a suspenseful literary text activates brain areas related to social cognition and predictive inference. PLoS ONE, 101:e0124550. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Liu, S., Erkkinen, M. G., Healey, M. L., Xu, Y., Swett, K. E., Chow, H. -M., & Braun, A. R. (2015). Brain activity and connectivity during poetry composition: Toward a multidimensional model of the creative process. Human Brain Mapping, 361, 3351–3372 DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lüdtke, J. (2013). Eine Frage der Empirie: Zum emotionalen Erleben bei der Rezeption von Stimmungsgedichten (An empirical question: On emotional experience in poetry reception). In B. Meyer-Sickendiek & F. Reents (Eds.), Stimmung und Methode (Mood and Method) (pp. 119–138). Tübingen, Mohr Siebeck.Google Scholar
Lüdtke, J., Meyer-Sickendiek, B., & Jacobs, A. M. (2014). Immersing in the stillness of an early morning: Testing the mood empathy hypothesis in poems. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 81, 363–377. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lüdtke, J., & Jacobs, A. M. (2015). The emotion potential of simple sentences: Additive or interactive effects of nouns and adjectives? Frontiers in Psychology, 6(1137). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mangan, B. (1993). Taking phenomenology seriously: The “fringe” and its implications for cognitive research. Consciousness and Cognition, 21, 89–108. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2008). Representation, rightness and the fringe. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 151, 75–82.Google Scholar
Mangen, A., & Kuiken, D. (2014). Lost in an iPad: Narrative engagement on paper and tablet. Scientific Study of Literature, 4(2), 150–177. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mar, R. M., Oatley, K., Djikic, M., & Mullin, J. (2011). Emotion and narrative fiction: Interactive influences before, during, and after reading. Cognition & Emotion, 251, 818–833. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Martindale, C. (1978). The evolution of English poetry. Poetics, 71, 231–248. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1988). Cognition, psychobiology, and aesthetics. In F. H. Farley & R. W. Neperud (Eds.), The Foundation of Aesthetics, Art and Art Education (pp. 7–42). New York, NY: Praeger.Google Scholar
McQuarrie, E. F., & Mick, D. G. (1996). Figures of rhetoric in advertising language. Journal of Consumer Research, 191, 424–438. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McQuire, M., McCollum, L., & Chatterjee, A. (2016). Aptness and beauty in metaphor. Language and Cognition. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Meade, A. W., & Craig, S. B. (2012). Identifying careless responses in survey data. Psychological Methods, 171, 437–455. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Menninghaus, W., Bohrn, I. C., Altmann, U., Lubrich, O., & Jacobs, A. M. (2014). Sounds funny? Humor effects of phonological and prosodic figures of speech. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 81, 71–76. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Menninghaus, W., Bohrn, I. C., Knoop, C., Kotz, S. A., Schlotz, W., & Jacobs, A. M. (2015). Rhetorical features facilitate prosodic processing while handicapping ease of semantic comprehension. Cognition, 1431, 48–60. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Meyer-Sickendiek, B. (2011). Lyrisches Gespür: Vom Geheimen Sensorium Moderner Poesie [The lyrical sense of feeling. About the secret sensorium of modern poetry]. Paderborn: Fink.Google Scholar
Nell, V. (1988). Lost in a book: The psychology of reading for pleasure. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nijhof, A. D., & Willems, R. M. (2015). Simulating fiction: individual differences in literature comprehension revealed with fMRI. PLoS One, 101:e0116492. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Oatley, K. (1999). Why fiction may be twice as true as fact: Fiction as cognitive and emotional simulation. Review of General Psychology, 31, 101–117. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
O’Sullivan, N., Davis, P., Billington, J., Gonzalez-Diaz, V., & Corcoran, R. (2015). “Shall I compare thee”: The neural basis of literary awareness, and its benefits to cognition, Cortex, 731, 144–157. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Panksepp, J. (1998). Affective neuroscience: The foundations of human and animal emotions. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
(2008). The power of the word may reside in the power of affect. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 421, 47–55. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pexman, P. M., Hargreaves, I. S., Siakaluk, P. D., Bodner, G. E., & Pope, J. (2008). There are many ways to be rich: Effects of three measures of semantic richness on visual word recognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 151, 161–167. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Reber, R., Schwartz, N., & Winkielman, P. (2004). Processing fluency and aesthetic pleasure: Is beauty in the perceiver’s processing experience? Personality and Social Psychology Review, 81, 364–382. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Riese, K, Bayer, M., Lauer, G., & Schacht, A., (2014). In the eye of the recipient. Pupillary responses to suspense in literary classics. Scientific Study of Literature 4(2), 211–232. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rumelhart, D. E. (1977). Understanding and summarizing brief stories. In D. LaBerge & S. J. Samuels (Eds.), Basic processes in reading: Perception and comprehension (pp. 265–303). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Schrott, R., & Jacobs, A. M. (2011). Gehirn und Gedicht: Wie wir unsere Wirklichkeiten konstruieren (Brain and Poetry: How We Construct Our Realities). München: Hanser.Google Scholar
Scheepers, C., Mohr, S., Fischer, M. H., & Roberts, A. M. (2013). Listening to limericks: A pupillometry investigation of perceivers’ expectancy. PLoS One, 8:e74986. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Siakaluk, P. D., Pexman, P. M., Sears, C. R., Wilson, K., Locheed, K., & Owen, W. J. (2008). The benefits of sensorimotor knowledge: body-object interaction facilitates semantic processing. Cognitive Science, 321, 591–605. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shimron, J. (1980). Psychological processes behind the comprehension of a poetic text. Instructional Science, 91, 43–66. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Simonton, D. K. (1990). Lexical choices and aesthetic success: A computer content analysis of 154 Shakespeare sonnets. Computers and the Humanities, 241, 254–261.Google Scholar
Sopcák, P. (2007). “Creation from nothing”: A foregrounding study of James Joyce’s drafts for Ulysses. Language and Literature, 161, 183–196. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sopčák, P., Salgaro, M., & Herrmann, J. B. (in press). Transdisciplinary approaches to literature and empathy. Scientific Study of Literature.
Sopory, P. (2005). Metaphor and affect. Poetics Today, 261, 433–458. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Steyer, R., Schwenkmezger, P., Notz, P., & Eid, M. (1997). Der mehrdimensionale Befindlichkeitsfragebogen (MDBF). Handanweisung [The Multidimensional Affect Rating Scale (MDBF). Manual]. Göttingen, Hogrefe.Google Scholar
Sylvester, T., Braun, M., Schmidtke, D., & Jacobs, A. M. (2016) The Berlin Affective Word List for Children (kidBAWL): Exploring processing of affective lexical semantics in the visual and auditory modalities. Frontiers in Psychology, 7(969). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tellenbach, H. (1968). Geschmack und Atmosphäre, Medien menschlichen Elementarkontaktes (Taste and atmosphere, media of elementary human contact). Salzburg.Google Scholar
Ullrich, S., Aryani, A., Kraxenberger, M., Jacobs, A. M., & Conrad, M. (2016). Where are emotions in a poem? Sub-lexical iconicity, lexical surface features and dynamic inter-lexical shifts. Frontiers in Psychology. in revision.Google Scholar
Van Dijk, T. A. (1979). Advice on theoretical poetics. Poetics, 81, 569–608. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van Peer, W., Hakemulder, J., & Zyngier, S. (2007). Lines on feeling: foregrounding, aesthetics and meaning. Language and Literature, 161, 197–213. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Võ, M. L. H., Jacobs, A. M., & Conrad, M. (2006). Cross-validating the Berlin affective word list. Behavior Research Methods, 381, 606–609. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Võ, M. L. H., Conrad, M., Kuchinke, L., Hartfeld, K., Hofmann, M. J., & Jacobs, A. M. (2009). The Berlin Affective Word List reloaded (BAWL-R). Behavior Research Methods, 411, 534–539. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wallentin, M., Nielsen, A. H., Vuust, P., Dohn, A., Roepstorff, A., & Lund, T. E. (2011). Amygdala and heart rate variability responses from listening to emotionally intense parts of a story. Neuroimage, 581, 963–973. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Westbury, C. F., Shaoul, C., Hollis, G., Smithson, L., Briesemeister, B. B., Hofmann, M. J., Jacobs, A. M. (2013). Now you see it, now you don’t: On emotion, context, and the algorithmic prediction of human imageability judgments. Frontiers in Psychology, 4(991). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Westbury, C., Keith, J., Briesemeister, B. B., Hofmann, M. J., & Jacobs, A. M. (2014). Avoid violence, rioting and outrage; Approach celebration, delight, and strength: Using large text corpora to compute valence, arousal, and the basic emotions. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 111, 1599–1622. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Whissell, C. (1996). Traditional and emotional stylometric analysis of the songs of Beatles Paul McCartney and John Lennon. Computers in Human Behavior, 301, 257–265. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Willems, R., & Jacobs, A. M. (2016). Caring about Dostoyevsky: The untapped potential of studying literature. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 201, 243–245. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Yap, M. J., Pexman, P. M., Wellsby, M., Hargreaves, I. S., & Huff, M. (2012). An abundance of riches: Cross-task comparisons of semantic richness effects in visual word recognition. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 6(72). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Yaron, I. (2002). Processing of obscure poetic texts: Mechanism of selection. Journal of Literary Semantics, 31(2), 133–170.
 DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2008). What is a “difficult” poem? Towards a definition. Journal of Literary Semantics, 37(2), 129–150. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Yekovich, F. R., & Walker, C. H. (1986). Retrieval of scripted concepts. Journal of Memory and Language, 251, 627–644. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zeman, A., Milton, F., Smith, A., & Rylance, R. (2013). By heart: An fMRI study of brain activation by poetry and prose. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 201, 132–158.Google Scholar
Zwaan, R. A., & Radvansky, G. A. (1998). Situation models in language comprehension and memory. Psychological Bulletin, 123(2), 162e185. DOI logo.Google Scholar
Cited by (22)

Cited by 22 other publications

Xue, Shuwei, Ye Jun Son, Lianrui Yang & Shifa Chen
2024. Effects of Prior Knowledge and Peer Assessment on the Quality of English as a Foreign Language Poetry Writing. Empirical Studies of the Arts 42:2 ► pp. 331 ff. DOI logo
Johnson-Laird, Philip N. & Keith Oatley
2022. How poetry evokes emotions. Acta Psychologica 224 ► pp. 103506 ff. DOI logo
Papp-Zipernovszky, Orsolya, Anne Mangen, Arthur Jacobs & Jana Lüdtke
2022. Shakespeare sonnet reading: An empirical study of emotional responses. Language and Literature: International Journal of Stylistics 31:3 ► pp. 296 ff. DOI logo
Hugentobler, Katharina Gloria & Jana Lüdtke
2021. Micropoetry Meets Neurocognitive Poetics: Influence of Associations on the Reception of Poetry. Frontiers in Psychology 12 DOI logo
Pianzola, Federico, Giuseppe Riva, Karin Kukkonen & Fabrizia Mantovani
2021. Presence, flow, and narrative absorption: an interdisciplinary theoretical exploration with a new spatiotemporal integrated model based on predictive processing. Open Research Europe 1 ► pp. 28 ff. DOI logo
Pianzola, Federico, Giuseppe Riva, Karin Kukkonen & Fabrizia Mantovani
2021. Presence, flow, and narrative absorption: an interdisciplinary theoretical exploration with a new spatiotemporal integrated model based on predictive processing. Open Research Europe 1 ► pp. 28 ff. DOI logo
Jacobs, Arthur M., Berenike Herrmann, Gerhard Lauer, Jana Lüdtke & Sascha Schroeder
2020. Sentiment Analysis of Children and Youth Literature: Is There a Pollyanna Effect?. Frontiers in Psychology 11 DOI logo
Postarnak, Svetlana, São Luís Castro & Susana Silva
2020. The role of linguistic prosody in the responses to recited poetry. Scientific Study of Literature 10:2 ► pp. 228 ff. DOI logo
Usée, Franziska, Arthur M. Jacobs & Jana Lüdtke
2020. From Abstract Symbols to Emotional (In-)Sights: An Eye Tracking Study on the Effects of Emotional Vignettes and Pictures. Frontiers in Psychology 11 DOI logo
Xue, Shuwei, Arthur M. Jacobs & Jana Lüdtke
2020. What Is the Difference? Rereading Shakespeare’s Sonnets —An Eye Tracking Study. Frontiers in Psychology 11 DOI logo
Aryani, Arash
2019. On the crucial role of “Arousal” and “Saliency” in affective iconicity. Scientific Study of Literature 9:2 ► pp. 240 ff. DOI logo
Bruhn, Mark J.
2018. Citation analysis. Scientific Study of Literature 8:1 ► pp. 77 ff. DOI logo
Jacobs, Arthur M. & Roel M. Willems
2018. The Fictive Brain: Neurocognitive Correlates of Engagement in Literature. Review of General Psychology 22:2 ► pp. 147 ff. DOI logo
Jacobs, Arthur M. & Annette Kinder
2017. “The Brain Is the Prisoner of Thought”: A Machine-Learning Assisted Quantitative Narrative Analysis of Literary Metaphors for Use in Neurocognitive Poetics. Metaphor and Symbol 32:3 ► pp. 139 ff. DOI logo
Jacobs, Arthur M. & Annette Kinder
2018. What makes a metaphor literary? Answers from two computational studies. Metaphor and Symbol 33:2 ► pp. 85 ff. DOI logo
Jacobs, Arthur M. & Jana Lüdtke
2017. Chapter 4. Immersion into narrative and poetic worlds. In Narrative Absorption [Linguistic Approaches to Literature, 27], ► pp. 69 ff. DOI logo
Jacobs, Arthur M., Sarah Schuster, Shuwei Xue & Jana Lüdtke
2017. What’s in the brain that ink may character ….. Scientific Study of Literature 7:1 ► pp. 4 ff. DOI logo
Jacobs, Arthur M.
2015. The scientific study of literary experience. Scientific Study of Literature 5:2 ► pp. 139 ff. DOI logo
Jacobs, Arthur M.
2016. The scientific study of literary experience and neuro-behavioral responses to literature. Scientific Study of Literature 6:1 ► pp. 164 ff. DOI logo
Jacobs, Arthur M.
2018. The Gutenberg English Poetry Corpus: Exemplary Quantitative Narrative Analyses. Frontiers in Digital Humanities 5 DOI logo
Jacobs, Arthur M.
2018. (Neuro-)Cognitive poetics and computational stylistics. Scientific Study of Literature 8:1 ► pp. 165 ff. DOI logo
Jacobs, Arthur M.
2019. Sentiment Analysis for Words and Fiction Characters From the Perspective of Computational (Neuro-)Poetics. Frontiers in Robotics and AI 6 DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 27 september 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.