Research Design
Table of Studies (four representative examples)
Literariness denotes relation to questions of literariness: I: Illuminates; D: Degree of literariness; C: Contrasts literary and non-literary.
Level denotes kind of response, where appropriate: I: Information-driven; S: Story-driven; P: Point-driven; R: Relevance to self.
Empirical topic: CD Cultural difference; EX expert readers; F feeling; LC literary causation; LF literary frame; RE reader empathy; S story aspects.
Dimension Authors Miall & Kuiken 1994 Seilman & Larsen 1989 Zwaan 1991 Cupchik, Oatley, & Vorderer 1998 Text Modernist stories Story and expository text 6 newspaper and novel extracts Story excerpts Text variable Foregrounding Character emotion vs. descriptive Situation variable Newspaper or literary perspective Spectator vs. identification set Reader variable Literary competence Measures Reading times, ratings for strikingness, feeling Remindings, and questionnaire Reading times; recognition memory Questionnaire on emotions Example finding High foregrounded passages take longer to read Twice as many actor-role remindings elicited by story Literary perspective enhanced memory for surface features Fresh emotions more frequent than emotion memories, and occur later in story Categories Literariness I I, C C I Level of response R S, R Empirical topic LC RE LF F
Literariness denotes relation to questions of literariness: I: Illuminates; D: Degree of literariness; C: Contrasts literary and non-literary.
Level denotes kind of response, where appropriate: I: Information-driven; S: Story-driven; P: Point-driven; R: Relevance to self.
Empirical topic: CD Cultural difference; EX expert readers; F feeling; LC literary causation; LF literary frame; RE reader empathy; S story aspects.
Research Design: Examples
Decide on a text feature or condition of reading (the independent variable). Hypothesize what effect this may have on readers (the dependent variable); predict the nature of the effect; decide on a model for collection and analysis of data (predict outcome in each of the empty cells in the tables below). What data would actually be examined in each cell?
Seilman & Larsen 1989. Comparison of influence of two texts on type of reminding.
dependent v / independent > Literary text Non-literary text actor self remindings observer self remindings communicated remindings Miall & Kuiken, 1994. Effect of embedded text features on segment reading times and ratings.
dependent v / independent > phonetic grammatical semantic Foregrounding reading times strikingness ratings feeling ratings Note also: 3rd dimension given by experienced / non-experienced readers.
Analysis: Are you:
- contrasting data sets (the mean of these responses is higher/lower than the mean of those responses)
- comparing data for similarity (this data set correlates with that data set; may indicate a causal relationship)
Kuiken & Miall, 2001. Analysis of think-aloud protocols of readers (Miall, Literary, 30-31). Not an "experimental" study.
< analysed / emergent v reading resistance emotional engagement story-line uncertainty aesthetic coherence
Document prepared February 8th 2007