Cover not available
Part of
Transformative Reading
Olivia Fialho
[Linguistic Approaches to Literature 42] 2024
► pp. 225–245

References

Abbott, H. P. 2002. The Cambridge Introduction to Narrative. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
ABTE. 2003. Report by the Associação Brasileira de Tecnologia Educacional [Report by the Brazilian Association of Educational Technology]. 〈[URL] and [URL]〉 (25 November 2009)
. 2004. Report by the Associação Brasileira de Tecnologia Educacional [Report by the Brazilian Association of Educational Technology]. [URL]; [URL] (25 November 2009)
Aldenderfer, M. S., & Blashfield, R. K. 1984. Cluster Analysis. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Andringa, E. 1990. Verbal data on literary understanding: A proposal for protocol analysis on two levels. Poetics 19: 231–57. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Arbib, M. A., Billard, A., Iacoboni, M., & Oztop, E. 2000. Synthetic brain imaging: Grasping, mirror neurons and imitation. Neural Networks 13: 975–97. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Archer, D., & Culpeper, J. 2009. Identifying key sociophilological usage in plays and trial proceedings (1640–1760): An empirical approach via corpus annotation. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 10(2): 286–309. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Aristotle. 1984. Poetics. In The Complete Works of Aristotle, J. Barnes (ed.), Vol. II. Princeton: Bollingen Series LXXI.2, Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Armstrong, P. 2013. How Literature Plays with the Brain: The Neuroscience of Reading and Art. Baltimore, MA: Johns Hopkins University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Arzouan, Y., Goldstein, A., & Faust, M. 2007. ‘Brain Waves are Stethoscopes’: ERP correlates of novel metaphor comprehension. Brain Research 1160: 69–81. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Atwood, M. 1995. Me, She, and It. In Who’s Writing This? Notations on the Authorial I with Self-Portraits, D. Halpern (ed.), 16–18. Hogewell: Ecco Press.Google Scholar
Auracher, J. 2006. Biological Correlates of Suspense: an Empirical Investigation. 10th IGEL Conference (International Society for the Empirical Study of Literature and Media) (pp.5–9 Aug.). Chiemsee, Germany: Conference Presentation.Google Scholar
Aurell, C. G. 1989. Man’s triune conscious mind. Perceptual and Motor Skills 68(3): 747–54. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bachmann, T. 2000. Microgenetic Approach to the Conscious Mind. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bailey, K. D. 1975. Cluster analysis. In Sociological Methodology, D. R. Heise (ed.), 59–128. San Francisco: Jossey-Bas. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1994. Typologies and Taxonomies: An Introduction to Classification Techniques. Sage University Papers Series Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences. Thousand Oaks: Sage. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Barthes, R. 1977[1968]. The death of the author. In Roland Barthes: Image Music Text, S. Heath (trans.), 142–149. London: Fontana Press.Google Scholar
Bartsch, A., Kalch, A., & Oliver, M. B. 2014. Moved to think: The role of emotional media experiences in stimulating reflective thoughts. Journal of Media Psychology: Theories, Methods, and Applications, 26(3): 125–40. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Becker, H. 1940. Constructive typology in the social sciences. In Contemporary Social Theory, H. E. Barnes, H. Becker & F. B. Becker (eds.). New York: D. Appleton Century.Google Scholar
Beckner, M. 1959. The Biological Way of Thought. New York, NY: Columbia University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ben-Ze’ev, A. 2000. The Subtlety of Emotions. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bergen, B. K., & Chang, N. C. 2005. Embodied construction grammar in simulation-based language understanding. In M. Fried & J. Östman (eds.), Construction Grammar(s): Cognitive and Cross-Language Dimensions, 147–190. [Constructional Approaches to Language 2]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bergsma, A. 2008. Do self-help books help?. Journal of Happiness Study 9: 341–60. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Berlina, A. 2016. Viktor Shklovsky: A Reader. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Blair, H. 1762[2005]. Lectures on Rhetoric and Belles Lettres, L. Ferreira-Buckley & M. S. Halloran (eds.). Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.Google Scholar
Bortolussi, M., & Dixon, P. 2003. Psychonarratology: Foundations for the Empirical Study of Literary Response. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bowen, E. 1956. A living writer. Cornhill Magazine, 169: 120–34.Google Scholar
Bridgman, R. 1966. The Colloquial Style in America. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Brunyé, T. T., Ditman, T., Mahoney, C. R., Augustyn, J. S., & Taylor, H. A. 2009. When You and I share perspectives: Pronouns modulate perspective taking during narrative comprehension. Psychological Science, 20(1): 27–32. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Burke, M., Fialho, O., & Zyngier, S. (eds.). 2016. Scientific Approaches to Literature in Learning Environments. [Linguistic Approaches to Literature 24]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Burke, M., & Troscianko, E. T. 2017. Cognitive Literary Science: Dialogues Between Literature and Cognition. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Butler, C. 1985. Systemic Linguistics: Theory and Applications. London: Batsford Academic and Educational.Google Scholar
Caracciolo, M., Guédon, C., Kukkonen, K., & Müller, S. 2017. The promise of an embodied narratology: Integrating cognition, representation and interpretation. In Emerging Vectors of Narratology. P. K. Hansen, J. Pier, P. Roussin, & W. Schmid (eds.), 435–459. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Caracciolo, M., & Van Duuren, T. 2015. Changed by literature? A critical review of psychological research on the effects of reading fiction. Interdisciplinary Literary Studies, 17(4): 517–539. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Carnap, R. 1963. The philosopher replies. In The Philosophy of Rudolf Carnap, P. A. Schilpp (ed.), 859–1013. Illinois: Open Court.Google Scholar
Carter, R. 1999. Common language: Corpus, creativity and cognition. Language and Literature, 8(3): 195–216. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2004. Language and Creativity: The Art of Common Talk. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Carter, R., & McRae, J. 1996. Language, Literature and the Learner: Creative Classroom Practice. London & New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Carter, R., & Nash, W. 1990. Seeing through Language: A Guide to Styles of English Writing. Oxford; Cambridge, MA: B. Blackwell.Google Scholar
Carvalho, M. M. 2001. Ler por prazer/ler por estudo: Uma dicotomia viável? In Conhecimento e Imaginação: Coletânia dos Trabalhos do I ECEL, S. Zyngier, P. Pinheiro, & R. Figueiredo (eds.), 150–166. Rio de Janeiro: Serviço de Publicações Faculdade de Letras da UFRJ.Google Scholar
Chace, W. M. 2009. The decline of the English department: How it happened and what could be done to reverse it. American Scholar, 78(4), 〈[URL]〉
Channell, J. 1994. Vague Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Coady, R. J., & Johannessen, J. 2006. The Book that Changed my Life: 71 Remarkable Writers Celebrate the Books that Matter Most to Them. New York: Gotham Books.Google Scholar
Cohen, T. 1999. Identifying with metaphor: Metaphors of personal identification. Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 57: 399–409. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Coleridge, S. T. 1817[1907]. Biographia Literaria, E. J. Shawcross (ed.) Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Collini, S. 2013. Introduction. In The Two Cultures, C. Snow. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Connell, L., & Lynott, D. 2011. Modality switching costs emerge in concept creation as well as retrieval. Cognitive Science 35: 763–778. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cook, G. 1994. Discourse and Literature. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Cooper, R. K., & Sawaf, A. 2003. Emotional Intelligence in Leadership. Istanbul, Turkey: Sistem Press.Google Scholar
Copeland, R. 2021. Emotion and the History of Rhetoric in the Middle Ages. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Corson, H. 1896. The Voice and Spiritual Education. New York: Macmillan Co.Google Scholar
Crowne, D. P., & Marlowe, D. 1964. The Approval Motive: Studies in Evaluative Dependence. New York: WiIey.Google Scholar
Csikszentmihalyi, M. 1990. Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
Cuijpers, P. 1997. Bibliotherapy in unipolar depression: A meta-analysis. Journal of Behavior Therapy & Experiential Psychiatry 28: 139–147. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Culler, J. 1975. Structuralist Poetics: Structuralism, Linguistics and the Study of Literature. London: Routledge & K. Paul. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1981. The Pursuit of Signs: Semiotics, Literature, Deconstruction. Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Culpeper, J. 2009. Keyness: Words, parts-of-speech and semantic categories in the character-talk of Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 14(1): 29–59. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cupchik, G. C., & László, J. 1994. The landscape of time in literary reception: Character experience and narrative action. Cognition & Emotion 8(4): 297–312. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cupchik, G. C., Oatley, K., & Vorderer, P. 1998. Emotional effects of reading: Excerpts from short stories by James Joyce. Poetics: Journal of Empirical Research on Culture, the Media and the Arts 25(6): 363–377. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Daiches, D. 1993. Katherine Mansfield and the search for truth. In Critical Essays on Katherine Mansfield, R. B. Nathan (ed.). New York, Maxwell MacMillan International.Google Scholar
Damasio, A. R. 1999. The Feeling of what Happens: Body and Emotion in the Making of Consciousness. New York: Harcourt.Google Scholar
2003. Looking for Spinoza: Joy, Sorrow, and the Feeling Brain. Orlando: Harcourt.Google Scholar
2010. Self Comes to Mind: Constructing the Conscious Brain. New York: Pantheon Books.Google Scholar
de Beaugrande, R. 1985. Poetry and the Ordinary Reader: A Study in Literary Response. Empirical Studies in the Arts 3: 1–21. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
de Certeau, M. 1984. Reading as poaching. In The Practice of Everyday Life, M. de Certeau, & T. S. Rendall, 165–176. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Dehaene, S. 2009. Reading in the Brain. New York: Penguin Viking.Google Scholar
Dennett, D. C. 1991. Consciousness Explained. Boston, MA: Little Brown.Google Scholar
Dimberg, U., & Petterson, M. 2000. Facial reactions to happy and angry facial expressions: Evidence for right hemisphere dominance. Psychophysiology 37(5): 693–696. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dimberg, U., Thunberg, M., & Elmehed, K. 2000. Unconscious facial reactions to emotional facial expressions. Psychological Science: A Journal of the American Psychological Society 11(1): 86–89. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dixon, P., Bortolussi, M., Twilley, L. C., & Leung, A. 1993. Literary processing and interpretation: towards empirical foundations. Poetics 22: 5–33. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
dos Anjos, M. J. F. G. (2024). O Modelo Transformative Reading na Interpretacao de Obras Literarias e na Percepcao de Si e dos Outros: Projeto Artistico Interdisciplinar do 1.o Ciclo – Colegio de Sao Jose – Ramalhao. PhD dissertation, Universidade da Beira Interior.
Dreyfus, H. L. 1972[1992]. What Computers Still Can’t Do: A Critique of Artificial Reason. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Driver, H. E., & Kroeber, A. L. 1932. Quantitative Expression of Cultural Relationships. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Eco, U. 1979. The Role of the Reader: Explorations in the Semiotics of Texts. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Ekman, P., Levenson, R. W., & Friesen, W. V. 1983. Autonomic nervous system activity distinguishes among emotions. Science, NS 221.4616: 1208–1210. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ellis, J. M. 1997. Literature Lost: Social Agendas and the Corruption of The Humanities. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Elo, S., & Kyngas, H. 2008. The qualitative content analysis process. Journal of Advanced Nursing 62(1): 107–115. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Emmott, C. 1997. Narrative Comprehension: A Discourse Perspective. Oxford, New York: Clarendon Press; Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1999. Embodied in a constructed world: Narrative processing, knowledge representation, and indirect anaphora. In Discourse Studies in Cognitive Linguistics, K. van Hoek, A. A. Kibrik, & L. Noordman (eds.), 2–27. [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 176]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Everitt, B., Landau, S., & Leese, M. 2001. Cluster Analysis. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Felski, R. 2008. Uses of Literature. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2009. After suspicion. Profession 2009: 28–35. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ferrari, M., Weststrate, N., & Petro, A. 2013. Stories of wisdom to live by: Developing wisdom in a narrative mode. In Scientific Study of Personal Wisdom: From Contemplative Traditions to Neuroscience, M. Ferrari & N. M. Weststrate (eds.), 137–164. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
Fialho, O. 2002. A influência do professor e do monitor no processo de conscientização literária. In Fatos e Ficções – Estudos Empíricos De Literatura, S. Zyngier & A. C. Valente (eds.), 163–177. Rio de Janeiro: Serviço de Publicações da Faculdade de Letras da UFRJ.Google Scholar
2005. Pelos Caminhos Da Leitura: Estudo Empírico Sobre Refamiliarização e Afeto [Through the Paths of Reading: An Empirical Study of Refamiliarization and Affect]. M.A. Thesis, UFRJ, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro.
2007. Foregrounding and refamiliarization: Understanding readers’ response to literary texts. Special issue on Foregrounding. Language & Literature 16(2): 105–23. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2012. Self-Modifying Experiences in Literary Reading: A Model for Reader Response. PhD Dissertation, University of Alberta. 〈[URL]〉
2016. Transformative reading experiences: A descriptive phenomenological study. Summary paper submitted to the IGEL Conference, Chicago, USA, July 6-9, 2016.
2017. Transformative reading: Literary experience and the awareness of empathy in fiction and in life. Paper presented at the Conference on Literacy, Empathy and Social Sustainability. Halmstad University, Sweden, 7 September 2017.
2018. Deepening readers’ perceptions of self and others: The role of enactment-imagery, resonance, and sympathy. Paper presented at the IGEL Conference, Stavanger, Norway, July 27, 2018.
2019. What is literature for? The role of transformative reading. Cogent Arts and Humanities. Special Issue on The Place of the Cognitive in Literary Studies. Ed. Karin Kukkonen, Anežka Kuzmičová, Steen Ledet Christiansen, Merja Polvinen 6(1): 1692532. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fialho, O., & van Zundert, J. (2023). Reconceptualizing Processes in Transformative Reading. Paper presented at IGEL 2023, Monopoli, Italy, 28–30 September, 2023.
Fialho, O. & Hoeken, H. (in prep.). Transformative reading: An empirical model.
Fialho, O., & Zyngier, S. 2003. Reading preferences: A comparative study. In Pontes & Transgressões: Estudos Empíricos de Processos Culturais, S. Zyngier, P. Pinheiro & R. Figueiredo (eds.), 56–66. Rio de Janeiro: Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro.Google Scholar
Fialho, O., Moffat, C., & Miall, D. S. 2010. An Empirical Study of Students’ Concepts of Literary Education. IGEL Conference (International Society for the Empirical Study of Literature and Media), (7–11 Jul. 2010). Utrecht, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Fialho, O., Zyngier, S., & Miall, D. S. 2011a. Interpretation and experience: Two pedagogical interventions observed. English in Education 45(3): 236–253. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2011b. Pedagogische strategieën voor literaire educatie: Een empirische studie. In De Stralende Lezer: Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek Naar De Invloed Van Het Lezen, F. Hakemulder (ed.), 246–266. Delft: Eburon.Google Scholar
2012. Experiencing or interpreting literature: Wording instructions. In Pedagogical Stylistics: Current Trends in Language, Literature and ELT, M. Burke, S. Csabi, L. Week & J. Zerkowitz (eds.), 58–74. London, New York: Continuum.Google Scholar
Field, T. M., Woodson, R., Greenberg, R., & Cohen, D. 1982. Discrimination and imitation of facial expression by neonates. Science 218.4568: 179–181. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Firth, J. R. 1957. Papers in Linguistics, 1934–1951. London and Toronto: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Fischer, M. H., & Zwaan, R. A. 2006. Embodied language: A review of the role of the motor system in language comprehension. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 61(6): 825–850. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fish, S. E. 1970. Literature in the Reader: Affective Stylistics. New Literary History 2(1): 123–62. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1980. Is there a Text in this Class?: The Authority of Interpretive Communities. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Fitts, K., & Lalicker, W. B. 2004. Invisible hands: A manifesto to resolve institutional and curricular hierarchy in English studies. College English 66(4): 427–51. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fleiss, J. L., & Zubin, J. 1969. On the methods and theory of clustering. Multivariate Behavioral Research 4: 235–250. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fogassi, L., & Ferrari, P. F. 2007. Mirror neurons and the evolution of embodied language. Current Directions in Psychological Science 16(3): 136–141. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Foroni, F., & Semin, G. 2009. Language that puts you in touch with your bodily feelings: The multimodal responsiveness of affective expressions. Psychological Science 20(8): 974–980. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Foucault, M. 1995. What is an Author?. In Authorship: From Plato to the Postmodern, S. Burke (ed.), 233–46. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Freire, P. 1987 [1970]. Pedagogia do Oprimido (33rd edn). Rio de Janeiro: Paz e Terra.Google Scholar
1980. Conscientização: Teoria e Prática da Libertação. São Paulo: Editora Moraes.Google Scholar
Fullbrook, K. 1986. Katherine Mansfield. [Key Women Writers]. Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Galbraith, M. 1995. Deictic shift theory and the poetics of involvement in narrative. In Deixis in Narrative: A Cognitive Science Perspective, J. F. Duchan, G. A. Bruder, & L. E. Hewitt (eds.), 19–59. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Gallagher, S., & Marcel, A. J. 1999. The self in contextualized action. Journal of Consciousness Studies 6(4): 4–30.Google Scholar
Gallagher, S., & Zahavi, D. 2008. The Phenomenological Mind: An Introduction to Philosophy of Mind and Cognitive Science. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Gallese, V. 2006. Intentional attunement: A neurophysiological perspective on social cognition and its disruption in autism. Brain Research 1079: 15–24. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gallese, V., & Goldman, A. 1998. Mirror neurons and the simulation theory of mind reading. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 2(12): 493–501. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gallese, V., & Lakoff, G. 2005. The brain’s concepts: The role of the sensory-motor system in conceptual knowledge. Cognitive Neuropsychology 22(3–4): 455–479. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gallup Organization. 1978. Book Reading and Library Usage: A Study of Habits and Perceptions / Conducted for the American Library Association. Princeton, NJ: Gallup Organization.Google Scholar
Gargano, J. W. 1960. ‘Mansfield’s “Miss Brill”’. The Explicator 19(2, art. n. 10): 25. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Garvin, P. (ed.). 1964. A Prague School Reader on Esthetics, Literary Structure and Style. Washington: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Gendlin, E. T. 1978. Befindlichkeit: Heidegger and the philosophy of psychology. Review of Existential Psychology and Psychiatry 16: 1–3.Google Scholar
1997. Experiencing and the Creation of Meaning: A Philosophical and Psychological Approach to the Subjective. Evanston: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
Gerrig, R. J. 1993. Experiencing Narrative Worlds: On the Psychological Activities of Reading. New Haven: Yale University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gibbs, R. W. 1994. The Poetics of Mind: Figurative Thought, Language, and Understanding. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
2008. The Cambridge Handbook of Metaphor and Thought. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gibbs, R. W., Lima, P., & Francozo, E. 2004. Metaphor is grounded in embodied experience. Journal of Pragmatics 36(7): 1189–1210. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gibson, J. J. 1966. The Senses Considered as Perceptual Systems. Allen and Unwin, London.Google Scholar
1979. The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
Gilbert, S. 1930[1969]. James Joyce’s Ulysses. New York: Penguin.Google Scholar
Giorgi, A. 1985. Phenomenology and Psychological Research. Pittsburgh; NJ: Duquesne University Press.Google Scholar
1992. Description versus interpretation: Competing alternative strategies for qualitative research. Journal of Phenomenological Psychology 23(2): 119–135. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2009. The Descriptive Phenomenological Method in Psychology: A Modified Husserlian Approach. Pittsburgh: Duquesne University Press.Google Scholar
Gold, J. 1990. Read for Your Life: Literature as a Life Support System. Markham, Ont.: Fitzhenry & Whiteside.Google Scholar
Goldie, P. 2000. The Emotions: A Philosophical Exporation. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
Goleman, D. 1998. Working with Emotional Intelligence. Bantam: Bantam Doubleday Dell Publishing Group Inc.Google Scholar
Goleman, D. P. 1995. Emotional Intelligence: Why It Can Matter More than IQ for Character, Health and Lifelong achievement. New York: Bantam Books.Google Scholar
Gottschall, J. 2008a. Literature, Science, and a New Humanities. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2008b. Measure for measure. Boston Globe, 11 May 2008, 〈[URL]〉 (5 June 2011).
Gould, S. J. 2011. The Hedgehog, the Fox and the Magister’s Pox: Mending the Gap Between Science and the Humanities. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Graff, G. 1987. Professing Literature: An Institutional History. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Green, M. C. 2004. Transportation into narrative worlds: The role of prior knowledge and perceived realism. Discourse Processes: A Multidisciplinary Journal 38(2): 247–266. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Green, M. C., & 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
Greenblatt, S. 2003. Introduction. Profession: 7–9. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gribble, J. 1983. Literary Education: A Revaluation. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grodzinsky, Y., & Friederici, A. D. 2006. Neuroimaging of syntax and syntactic processing. Current Opinion in Neurobiology 16(2): 240–246. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grosz, E. A. 1995. Space, Time, and Perversion: Essays on the Politics of Bodies. New York and London: Routledge.Google Scholar
2001. How to make alle menschen brüder: Literature in a multicultural and multiform society. In Psychology and Sociology of Literature, D. Schram & G. J. Steen (eds.), 225–242. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2004. Foregrounding and its effects on readers’ perception. Discourse Processes 38(2): 193–218. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2008. Imagining what could happen: Effects of taking the role of a character on social cognition. In Directions in Empirical Literary Studies, S. Zyngier, M. Bortolussi, A. Chesnokova, & J. Auracher (eds.), 139–160. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hakemulder, F. 2020. Finding meaning through literature: ‘Foregrounding’as an emergent effect. Anglistik 31(1): 91–110. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hakemulder, F. & van Peer, W. 2016. Empirical stylistics. In The Bloomsbury Companion to Stylistics, V. Sotirova (ed.), 189–207. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Hakemulder, F., Fialho, O., & Bal, M. 2016. Learning from literature: Empirical research on readers in schools and at the workplace. In Scientific Approaches to Literature in Learning Environments, M. Burke, O. Fialho, & S. Zyngier (eds.), 19–38. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hakemulder, F., Kuijpers, M. M., Tan, E. S., Balint, K., & Doicaru, M. M. (eds.). 2017. Narrative Absorption [Linguistic Approaches to Literature 27]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hakemulder, F., Janssen, T., Fialho, O., Brokerhof Schrijvers, M., Koek, I., & Rijlaarsdam, G. (in prep.). Wat Kan Je Doen Met Literatuur? Zelfinzicht En Mensenkennis Door Lezen En Groepsactiviteiten In Onderwijs En Op De Werkvloer.
Halasz, L., Short, M., & Varga, Á. 2002. A cross-cultural study of fictional and non-fictional text understanding. Poetics 30(3): 195–219. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hall, G. 2001. The poetics of everyday language. CAUCE: Revista de Filología y su Didáctica 24: 69–86.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. 1970. Functional diversity in language as seen from a consideration of modality and mood in English. Foundations of Language 6(3): 322–361.Google Scholar
1978. Language as Social Semiotic: The Social Interpretation of Languageand Meaning. Baltimore: University Park Press.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A., & Hasan, R. 1976. Cohesion in English. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Hannevik, A. 2001. Fra Litteraturhistorie Til Litteraturvitenskap: Allmenn Litteraturvitenskap Ved Universitetet I Oslo: Skisse Av En Faghistorie. Vol. 2/2001. Skriftserie (Forum for Universitetshistorie: Trykt Utg.). Oslo: Forum for Universitetshistorie, Universitetet I Oslo.Google Scholar
Harker, W. J. 1996. Toward a defensible psychology of literary interpretation. In Empirical Approaches to Literature and Aesthetics, E. R. MacNealy (ed.), 645–658. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Hasan, R. 1984. The nursery tale as a genre. Nottingham Linguistic Circular 13. [Reprinted in Hasan, R. 1996. Ways of Saying: Ways of Meaning – Selected Papers of Ruqaiya Hasan, C. Cloran, D. Butt, & G. Williams (eds.), 51–72. London: Cassell.]Google Scholar
1985. Linguistics, Language and Verbal Art. Geelong, Vic.: Deakin University Press.Google Scholar
Hauk, O., & Pulvermuller, F. 2004. Neurophysiological distinction of action words in the fronto-central cortex. Human Brain Mapping 21(3): 191–201. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hauk, O., Johnsrude, I., & Pulvermuller, F. 2004. Somatotopic representation of action words in human motor and premotor cortex. Neuron 41(2): 301–307. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Henry, M. 1975. Philosophy and Phenomenology of the Body. (T. G. Etzkorn, ed.) The Hague: Nijhoff. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Herman, D. 1994. Textual “you” and double deixis in Edna O’Brien’s “A Pagan Place”. Style 28(3): 378–410.Google Scholar
2002. Story Logic: Problems and Possibilities of Narrative. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.Google Scholar
Hickok, G. 2014. The Myth of Mirror Neurons: The Real Neuroscience of Communication and Cognition. W.W. Norton & Company.Google Scholar
Hoey, M. 1991. Patterns of Lexis in Text. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hogan, P. C. 1997. Literary universals. Poetics Today 18: 223–249. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hogan, R., Curphy, G. J., & Hogan, J. 1994. What we know about leadership: Effectiveness and personality. American Psychologist 49(6): 493–504. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Holland, N. N. 1975. 5 Readers Reading. New Haven and London: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
2003. The willing suspension of disbelief: A neuro-pscychoanalytic view. PsyArt: A Hyperlink Journal for the Psychological Study of the Arts. 22 January 2003, 〈[URL]〉 (19 July 2023).
Huber, M. 2014. Towards a New, Dynamic Concept of Health: Its Operationalisation and Use in Public Health and Healthcare, and in Evaluating Health Effects of Food. PhD Dissertation. Maastricht: Maastricht University.
Husserl, E. 1913[1983]. Ideas Pertaining to a Pure Phenomenology and to a Phenomenological Philosophy. First Book: General Introduction to a Pure Phenomenology (Vol. 1). (F. Kersten, trans.). The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
1931[2012]. Ideas: General Introduction to Pure Phenomenology. Routledge.Google Scholar
1931[1970]. Cartesian Meditations. The Hague: Nijhoff.Google Scholar
1970. The Crisis of European Sciences and Transcendental Phenomenology. (T. D. Evanston, ed.) IL: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
1971[1980]. Ideas Pertaining to a Pure Phenomenology and to a Phenomenological Philosophy. Third Book: Phenomenology and the Foundations of the Sciences (Vol. 3). (T. E. Klein, & W. E. Pohl, trans.) The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
1973[1997)]. Thing and Space: Lectures of 1907. (T. R. Rojcewicz, ed.) Springer Netherlands.Google Scholar
1913[2001]. Logical Investigations (from the Second German Edition of Logische Untersuchungen, 1913). (T. J. Moran, ed.) London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Iacoboni, M. 2005. Neural mechanisms of imitation. Current Opinion in Neurobiology 15: 632–637. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
IDEB. 2011. Índice de Desenvolvimento da Educação Básica [Index of the Development of Basic Education]. INEP. [URL] (10 August 2011)
Ingarden, R. 1973. The Literary Work of Art: An Investigation on the Borderlines of Ontology, Logic, and Theory of Literature. (T. G. Grabowicz, ed.) Evanston: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
1989. The Ontology of the Work of Art. Ohio: Ohio University Press.Google Scholar
Iser, W. 1974. The Implied Reader: Patterns of Communication in Prose Fiction from Bunyan to Beckett. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1980. The Act of Reading: A Theory of Aesthetic Response. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Jacobs, A. M. 2015. Neurocognitive poetics: Methods and models for investigating the neuronal and cognitive-affective bases of literature reception. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 16(9). 16 April 2015 〈 DOI logo〉 (19 July 2023)Google Scholar
Jakobson, R. 1960. Closing statement: Linguistics and poetics. In Style in Language. E. T. Sebeok (ed.), Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.Google Scholar
James, H. 1884, Sept.. The art of fiction. Longman’s Magazine 4.Google Scholar
Jandre, J., & Fialho, O. 2005. Flow + Foregrounding: A possible relation? In Venturas & Desventuras: Coletânea Dos Trabalhos do V ECEL, S. Zyngier, V. Viana, & F. Fausto (eds.), 87–96. Rio de Janeiro: Setor de Publicações Faculdade de Letras, UFRJ.Google Scholar
Jauss, H. R. 1982. Toward an Aesthetic of Reception. (T. Bahti, trans.) Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Jeannerod, M. 1994. The representing brain: Neural correlates of motor intention and imagery. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 17, 1874244. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jeffries, L. 2008. The role of style in reader-involvement: Deictic shifting in contemporary poems. Journal of Literary Semantics 37(1): 69–85. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Johnson, D. 2012. Transportation into a story increases empathy, prosocial behavior, and perceptual bias toward fearful expressions. Personality and Individual Differences 52: 150–155. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jung-Beeman, M. 2005. Bilateral brain processes for comprehending natural language. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 9(11): 512–518. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kaufman, G. F., & Libby, L. K. 2012. Changing beliefs and behavior through experience-taking. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 103(1): 1–19. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Keen, S. 2007. Empathy and the Novel. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kidd, D. C., & Castano, E. 2013. Reading literary fiction improves theory of mind. Science 342(6156): 377–380. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kneepkens, E. W., & Zwaan, R. A. 1994. Emotions and literary text comprehension. Poetics 23: 125–138. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Koopman, E. 2016a. Reading Suffering: An Empirical Enquiry into Empathic and Reflective Responses to Literary Narratives. PhD Dissertation. Rotterdam: Erasmus Universiteit.
Krijnen, A. F. 2007. There Is More (s) in Television: Studying the Relationship between Television and Moral Imagination. PhD Dissertation. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam. DOI logo
Kuijpers, M. M., & Hakemulder, F. 2018. Understanding and appreciating literary texts through rereading. Discourse Processes 55(7): 619–641. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kuijpers, M., & Miall, D. S. 2011. Bodily involvement in literary reading: An experimental study of readers’ bodily experiences during reading. In De Stralende Lezer: Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek Naar De Invloed Van Het Lezen, E. F. Hakemulder (ed.), 160–174. Delft: Eburon.Google Scholar
Kuiken, D. (personal communication). Attitudes Toward Poetry Questionnaire.
Kuiken, D., & Miall, D. S. 2001. Numerically aided phenomenology: Procedures for investigating categories of experience. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research 2(1). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2002. Phenomenological approaches to the temporality of reading experience. Paper presented during the 8th Biannual Conference of the International Society for the Empirical Study of Literature (IGEL), August 21–24. Pécs, Hungary.
Kuiken, D., & Sikora, S. 1993. The impact of dreams on waking thoughts and feelings. In SUNY Series in Dream Studies: The Functions of Dreaming, A. Moffitt, M. Kramer, & R. Hoffman. (eds.), 419–476. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Kuiken, D., Campbell, P., & Sopčák, P. 2012. The experiencing questionnaire: Locating exceptional reading moments. Scientific Study of Literature 2(2): 243–272. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kuiken, D., Carey, R., & Nielsen, T. 1987. Moments of affective insight: Their phenomenon and relations to selected individual differences. Imagination, Cognition and Personality 6: 341–64. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kuiken, D., Miall, D. S., & Sikora, S. 2004. Forms of self-implication in literary reading. Poetics Today 25(2): 171–203. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kuiken, D., Phillips, L., Gregus, M., Miall, D. S., Verbitsky, M., & Tonkonogy, A. 2004. Locating self-modifying feelings within literary reading. Discourse Processes 38(2): 267–86. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kuiken, D., Schopflocher, D., & Wild, T. C. 1989. Numerically aided methods in phenomenology: A demonstration. Journal of Mind and Behavior 10(4): 373–392.Google Scholar
Kukkonen, K. 2019. 4E Cognition and Eighteenth-Century Fiction: How the Novel Found its Feet. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kuperberg, G. R. 2007. Neural mechanisms of language comprehension: Challenges to syntax. Brain Research 1146: 23–49. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. 1980. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
1999. Philosophy in the Flesh: The Embodied Mind and its Challenge to Western Thought. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Larsen, S. F., & Seilman, U. 1988. Personal meanings while reading literature. Text 8: 411–429.Google Scholar
Lauring, J. O. 2014. Literature. In Introduction to Neuroaesthetics: The Neuroscientific Approach to Aesthetic Experience, Artistic Creativity, and Arts Appreciation, S. Martin, & J. O. Lauring (eds.). Copenhagen: Museum Tusculanum Press.Google Scholar
Lazarus, R. S. 1982. Thoughts on the relations between emotion and cognition. American Psychologist, 37(9), 1019–1024. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1984. On the primacy of cognition. American Psychologist 39(2): 124–129. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1991. Emotion and Adaptation. New York: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
LeDoux, J. E. 1996. The Emotional Brain: The Mysterious Underpinnings of Emotional Life. New York: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
Leech, G. N. 1969. A Linguistic Guide to English Poetry. Routledge.Google Scholar
Lehrer, D., Leschke, J., Ihachimi, S., Vasiliu, A., & Weiffen, B. 2007. Negative results in social science. European Political Science 6: 51–68. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leigh, R. D. 1950. The Public Library in the United States: The General Report of the Public Library Inquiry. New York: Columbia University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Link, C. L., & Hopf, H. A. 1946. People and Books: A Study of Reading and Book-Buying Habits. New York: Book Industry Committee, Book Manufacturer’s Institute.Google Scholar
Lloyd, B. F., & Gannon, P. M. 2000. Personality as the predictor of treatment experiences: A combined focus on relaxation and catharsis. Imagination, Cognition and Personality 19: 39–58. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lodge, D. 1977. The Modes of Modern Writing: Metaphor, Metonymy, and the Typology of Modern Literature. Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
1978. The language of modernist fiction: Metaphor and metonymy. In Modernism, 1890–1930, M. Bradbury & J. W. McFarlane (eds.), 481–496. Hassocks: Harvester.Google Scholar
Long, E. 2003. Book Clubs: Women and the Uses of Reading in Everyday Life. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Longden, E., Davis, P., Billington, J., Lampropoulou, S., Farrington, G., Magee, F., Walsh, E., & Corcoran, R. 2015. Shared reading: Assessing the intrinsic value of a literature-based health intervention. Medical Humanities 41: 113–120. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Louw, W. E. 2008. Consolidating Empirical Method in Data-Assisted Stylistics: Towards a Corpus-Attested Glossary of Literary Terms. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Ltd, B. M. 2000. Reading the Situation: Book Reading, Buying and Borrowing Habits in Britain. London: Book Marketing Limited.Google Scholar
Lyons, W. E. 1980. Emotion. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mansfield, K. 1922. Miss Brill. In The Garden-Party and Other Stories, K. Mansfield, 182–189. New York: Alfred J. Knopf Inc.Google Scholar
Mansfield, K., O’Sullivan, V. & Scott, M. S. 1984. The Collected Letters of Katherine Mansfield. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Mar, R. A. 2011. The neural bases of social cognition and story comprehension. Annual Review of Psychology 62(1): 103–134. 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
Martin, J. 2000. Beyond Exchange: Appraisal Systems in English. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Martindale, C. & Dailey, A. 1995. I. A. Richards revisited: Do people agree on their interpretations of literature? Poetics 23: 299–314. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McCarthy, M. & Carter, R. 1994. Language as Discourse: Perspectives for Language Teaching. London and New York: Longman.Google Scholar
McConkey, K. M. & Nogrady, H. 1986. Visual elaboration scale: Analysis of individual and group versions. Journal of Mental Imagery 10: 37–46.Google Scholar
McKinney, J. C. 1966. Constructive Typology and Social Theory. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
McRae, J. 1991. Literature with a Small “L”. London and Baginstoke: Macmillan Publishers Ltd.Google Scholar
Meltzoff, A. N. & Moore, K. M. 1977. Imitation of facial and manual gestures by Human Neonates. Science 198.4312: 75–78. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1989. Imitation in newborn-infants: Exploring the range of gestures imitated and the underlying mechanisms. Developmental Psychology 25(6): 954–962. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1995. Infants’ understanding of people and things: From body imitation to folk psychology. In The Body and the Self, J. L. Bermúdez, A. Marcel & N. Eilan. Cambridge: MIT/Bradford Press.Google Scholar
Merleau-Ponty, M. 1968. The Visible and the Invisible. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
1945 [2002]. Phenomenology of Perception. (T. C. Smith, ed.) London and New York: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Metzinger, T. 2003. Being No One: The Self-Model Theory of Subjectivity. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Miall, D. S. 1988. Affect and narrative: A model of response to stories. Poetics 17: 259–272. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1989. Beyond the schema given: Affective comprehension of literary narratives. Cognition & Emotion 3(1): 55–78. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1996. Empowering the reader: Literary response and classroom learning. Advances in Discourse Processes 52: 463–478.Google Scholar
2006. Literary Reading: Empirical & Theoretical Studies. New York: P. Lang.Google Scholar
2009. Neuroaesthetics of literary reading. In Neuroaesthetics, M. Sko, O. Vartanian, C. Martindale & A. Berleant (eds.), 233–247. Baywood Publishing Company, Inc.Google Scholar
2011a. Science in the perspective of literariness. Scientific Study of Literature 1(1): 7. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2011b. A neurophysiological approach to the elements of literariness. In De Stralende Lezer: Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek Naar De Invloed Van Het Lezen, E. F. Hakemulder (ed.), 148–159. Delft: Eburon.Google Scholar
Miall, D. S. & Kuiken, D. (personal communication). Current Reading Questionnaire.
(personal communication). Reading History Questionnaire.
Miall. D. & Kuiken, D. (1994a). Beyond text theory: Understanding literary response. Discourse Processes 17, 337–352. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Miall, D. S. & Kuiken, D. 1994b. Foregrounding, defamiliarization, and affect: Response to literary stories. Poetics 22: 389–407. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1995. Aspects of literary response: A new questionnaire. Research in the Teaching of English 29(1): 37–58.Google Scholar
Miall, D. & Kuiken, D. 1999. What is literariness? Three components of literary reading. Discourse Processes 28(2): 121–138. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Miall, D. S. & Kuiken, D. 2001. Shifting perspectives: Readers’ feelings and literary response. In New Perspectives on Narrative Perspective, E. W. Chatman (ed.), 289–301. Albany, New York: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Miall, D. S., & Kuiken, D. 2002. A feeling for fiction: Becoming what we behold. Poetics 30(4): 221–241. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mukařovský, J. 1964. Standard Language and Poetic Language. Washington: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Mumper, M. L. & Gerrig, R. J. 2017. Leisure reading and social cognition: A meta-analysis. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts 11(1): 109–120. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
NEA. 2004. Reading at Risk: A Survey of Literary Reading in America. National Endowment for the Arts, NEA.Google Scholar
. 2007. To Read or Not to Read: A Question of National Consequence. Washington D.C.: National Endowment for the Arts, NEA.Google Scholar
. 2009. Reading on the Rise: A New Chapter in American Literacy. Washington: National Endowment for the Arts, NEA.Google Scholar
. 2018. U.S. Trends in Arts Attendance and Literary Reading: 2002–2017. National Endowment for the Arts, NEA.Google Scholar
. 2020. How do we Read? Let’s Count the Ways: Comparing Digital, Audio, and Print-Only Readers. Washington D.C.: National Endowment for the Arts, NEA.Google Scholar
Neary, C. 2010. Negotiating Narrative Empathy in Gandhi’s Life-Writing. PALA 2010 Conference Proceedings, University of Genoa, Italy.
Nell, V. 1988. Lost in a Book: The Psychology of Reading for Pleasure. New Haven: Yale University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nelson, K. 2003. Narrative and the Emergence of a Consciousness of Self. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Newen, A., De Bruin, L. & Gallagher, S. 2018. The Oxford Handbook of 4E Cognition. Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Newton, N. 1993. The sensorimotor theory of cognition. Pragmatics & Cognition 1(2): 267–305. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1996. Foundations of Understanding. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Niedenthal, P. M. 2007. Embodying Emotion. Science 316.5827: 1002–1005. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nishitani, N., & Hari, R. 2000. Temporal Dynamics of Cortical Representation for Action. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 913–918. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nussbaum, M. 2001. Upheavals of Thought: The Intelligence of Emotions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Oatley, K. 1992. Best Laid Schemes: The Psychology of Emotions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
1994. A taxonomy of the emotions of literary response and a theory of identification in fictional narrative. Poetics: Journal for Empirical Research on Literature, the Media and the Arts 23(1–2): 53–74. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1999. Why Fiction may be twice as true as fact: Fiction as cognitive and emotional simulation. Review of General Psychology 3(2): 101–117. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2004. Emotions: A Brief History. Malden, MA: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Oliver, M. B. & Bartsch, A. 2011. Appreciation of entertainment: The importance of meaningfulness via virtue and wisdom. Journal of Media Psychology: Theories, Methods, and Applications 23(1): 29–33. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Oliver, M. B. & Raney, A. A. 2001. Entertainment as pleasurable and meaningful: Identifying hedonic and eudaimonic motivations for entertainment consumption. Journal of Communication 61: 984–1004. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
O Globo Online. 2008. Alunos do ensino fundamental vão mal em matemática e leitura, revela pesquisa da Unesco, 25 June 2008, 〈[URL]〉 (26 November 2009).
Ortony, A. 1991. Value and Emotion. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Osen, D. 2002. The Book that Changed My Life. New York: Modern Library.Google Scholar
O’Shaughnessy, B. 1995. Proprioception and the body image. In Self-Consciousness and the Body: An Interdisciplinary Introduction, J. L. Bermudez, A. J. Marcel & N. M. Eilan, (eds.), 175–203. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Ostrower, F. 1986. Universos Da Arte. Rio de Janeiro: Ed. Campus.Google Scholar
Palmer, B., Walls, M., Burgess, Z. & Stough, C. 2001. Emotional intelligence and effective leadership. Leadership & Organization Development Journal 22 (1): 5–10. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Panksepp, J. 1998. Affective Neuroscience: The Foundations of Human and Animal Emotions. New York: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pattison, R. 1982. On Literacy: The Politics of the Word from Homer to the Age of Rock. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Pennac, D. 1992. Comme un Roman. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
Penne, S. 2013. Elevene, litteraturen og lærebøkene i norsk på ungdomstrinnet. In Læreboka: Studier av Ulike Læreboktekster, N. Askeland, E. Maagerø & B. Aamotsbakken (eds.), 35–47. Trondheim: AkademikaGoogle Scholar
Petrucci, A. 1999. Ler Por Ler: Um Futuro Para a Leitura I. São Paulo: Ática.Google Scholar
Pisa. 2001. Relatório Nacional Pisa 2000. Brasília: Inep.Google Scholar
. 2003. Resumo Técnico Pisa 2003. Brasília: Inep.Google Scholar
. 2010. PISA 2009 Results: What Students Know and can do: Student Performance in Reading, Mathematics and Science. Volume I. OECD.Google Scholar
Pisa, I. 2018. Relatorio Brasil no Pisa 2018. MEC, Ministerio da Educacao do Brasil. 〈[URL]〉 (25 June 2020).
Plato. 1961. Dialogues: The Republic. In The Collected Dialogues of Plato, E. Hamilton & H. Cairns (eds.). Electronic Edition. New York, N.Y.: Bollingen Foundation.Google Scholar
Polvinen, M. 2023. Self-Reflective Fiction and 4E Cognition: An Enactive Approach to Literary Artifice. Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Price, L. 2019. What We Talk About When We Talk About Books: The History and Future of Reading. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Prinz, J. J. 2004. Gut Reactions: A Perceptual Theory of Emotion. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Pulvermuller, F. 2005. Brain mechanisms linking language and action. Nature Reviews Neuroscience 6(7): 576–582. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G. & Svartvik, J. 1972. A Grammar of Contemporary English. London: Longman.Google Scholar
1985. A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Rabinowitz, P. J. 1987. Before Reading: Narrative Conventions and the Politics of Interpretation. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Rader, C. M. & Tellegen, A. 1987. An investigation of synesthesia. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology 52(5): 981–987. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Radway, J. A. 1984. Reading the Romance: Women, Patriarchy, and Popular Literature. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.Google Scholar
2001. On the Socialbility of Reading: Books, Self-fashioning, and the Creation of Communities. Manuscript.Google Scholar
Regel, S., Gunter, T. C. & Friederici, A. D. 2011. Isn’t it ironic? An electrophysiological exploration of figurative language processing. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 23(2): 277–293. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rieger, D., Reinecke, L., Frischlich, L. & Bente, G. 2014. Media entertainment and well-being: Linking hedonic and eudaimonic entertainment experience to media-induced recovery and vitality. Journal of Communication 64: 456–478. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Riffaterre, M. 1959. Criteria for style analysis. Word 15: 154–174. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rizzolatti, G. & Arbib, M. A. 2004. Language within our grasp. Trends in Neuroscience 21(5): 188–194. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rizzolatti, G. & Craighero, L. 2004. The mirror-neuron system. Annual Review of Neuroscience 27: 169–192. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rizzolatti, G., Fogassi, L. & Gallese, V. 2001. Neurophysiological mechanisms underlying the understanding and imitation of action. Nature Reviews Neuroscience 2(9): 661–670. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Robertsen, S. 2014. Lyst Til å Lese? En Undersøkelse Av Foreningen !les TXt-antologier. Master Thesis. Oslo: University of Oslo.
Robinson, J. 2005. Deeper than Reason. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rosenblatt, L. M. 1938[1995]. Literature as Exploration. New York: Modern Language Association of America.Google Scholar
1978. The Reader, the Text, the Poem: The Transactional Theory of The Literary Work. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.Google Scholar
Rosenthal, N. 1995. Speaking of Reading. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.Google Scholar
Ross, C. S., McKechnie, L. & Rothbauer, P. M. 2006. Reading Matters: What the Research Reveals about Reading, Libraries, and Community. Westport: Libraries Unlimited.Google Scholar
Rouse, J. 2004. Review: After Theory, the Next New Thing. College English 66(4): 452–65. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ruas, M. (Trad.). Mukarovsky, J. 1932(1981]. Linguagem-padrao e linguagem-poetica. In Escritos sobre Estetica e Semiotica da Arte, J. Mukarovsky. Lisboa: Editorial Estampa.Google Scholar
Runeson, S. 1974. Constant velocity: Not Perceived as such. Psychological Research 37(1): 3–23. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Saramago, J. 1999. Entre o narrador omnisciente e o monólogo interior: Deveremos voltar ao autor?/ Entre le narrateur omniscient et le monologue interieur: Faut-Il retourner a l’auteur?. In Comparative Literature Now/ La Littérature Comparée L’Heure Actuelle, S. T. Zepetnek, M. V. Dimic & I. Sywenky, 183–193. Paris: Honoré Champion Editeur.Google Scholar
Sartre, J. P. 1956. Being and Nothingness: An Essay on Phenomenological Ontology. New York: Philosophical Library.Google Scholar
Saygin, A. P., McCullough, S., Alac, M. & Emmorey, K. 2010. Modulation of BOLD response in motion-sensitive lateral temporal cortex by real and fictive motion sentences. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 22(11): 2480–2490. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schmidt, S. J. 1980. Grundriß der Empirischen Literaturwissenschaft. 2 vols. Braunschweig: Viewe.Google Scholar
Scholes, R. E. 1998. The Rise and Fall of English: Reconstructing English as a Discipline. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Schrijvers, M. 2019. The Story, The Self, The Other: Developing Insight Into Human Nature in the Literature Classroom. PhD Dissertation. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam.
Schrijvers, M., Janssen, T., Fialho, O. & Rijlaarsdam, G. 2016. The impact of literature education on students’perceptions of self and others: Exploring personal and social learning experiences in relation to teacher approach. Contribution to a special issue The role of writing in literature education, T. Janssen & I. Pieper (eds.) L1 – Educational Studies in Language and Literature 16, 1–37. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2019a. Gaining insight into human nature: A review of literature classroom intervention studies. Review of Educational Research 89(1): 3–45. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2019b. Toward the validation of a literature classroom intervention to foster adolescents’ insights into human nature: An iterative design process. Contribution to the special issue Systematically designed literature classroom interventions: Design principles, development and implementation, M. Schrijvers, K. Murphy & G. Rijlaarsdam (eds.). L1 – Educational Studies in Language and Literature. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schrijvers, M., Janssen, T., Fialho, O., De Maeyer, S., & Rijlaarsdam, G. 2019c. Transformative dialogic literature teaching fosters adolescents’ insight into human nature. Learning and Instruction 63, 1–15. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schulkind, J. 1976. Moments of Being: Unpublished Autobiographical Writings. Virginia Woolf. London: Chatto and Windus for Sussex University Press.Google Scholar
Scott, M. 1999. WordSmith Tools. Version 3. 〈[URL]〉
Seilman, U. & Larsen, S. F. 1989. Personal resonance to literature: A study of remindings while reading. Poetics 18, 165–177. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Šklovsky, V. 1917[1965]. Art as technique. In Russian Formalist Criticism: Four Essays, L. T. Lemon & M. J. Reis (trans.). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.Google Scholar
Short, M. 1996. Exploring the Language of Poems, Plays, and Prose. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Siemens, D. 2010. Numerically Aided Phenomenology: Methodological Developments in an Empirical Investigation of Reader Response. Paper completed in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the course Psychology 498: University of Alberta.
Sikora, S., Kuiken, D. & Miall, D. S. (26–29 Aug, 1998). Enactment Versus Interpretation: A Phenomenological Study of Readers’ Responses to Coleridge’s ‘The Rime of the Ancient Mariner’. Sixth Biannual Conference of the IGEL (International Society for the Empirical Study of Literature). Utrecht: Conference presentation.Google Scholar
2011. Expressive reading: A phenomenological study of readers’ experience of Coleridge’s the Rime of the Ancient Mariner. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts 5(3): 258–268. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Simpson, P. 1993. Language, Ideology and Point of View. London and New York: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2004. Stylistics: A Resource Book For Students. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
2014. 2nd edition. Stylistics: A Resource Book for Students. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Sinclair, J. M. 1991. Corpus, Concordance, Collocation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Skjerdingstad, K. I. & Tangerås, T. M. 2019. Shared reading as an affordance-nest for developing kinesic engagement with poetry: A case study. Cogent Arts & Humanities 6:1688631. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Slingerland, E. G. 2008. What Science Offers the Humanities: Integrating Body and Culture. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sneath, P. H. & Sokal, R. R. 1973. Numerical Taxonomy: The Principles and Practice of Numerical Taxonomy. San Francisco: Freeman W. H. & Co.Google Scholar
Snow, C. P. 1959 [2001]. The Two Cultures. London: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Snyders, G. 1999. Des Élèves Heureux: Réflexion sur la Joie à l’École à Partir de Quelques Texts Littéraires. L’Harmattan.Google Scholar
Sokolowski, R. 2000. Introduction to Phenomenology. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Solomon, R. 1976. The Passions. Garden City: Anchor Press/Doubleday.Google Scholar
1980. Emotions and Choice. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Sopčák, P. 2007. ‘Creation from nothing’ – A foregrounding study of James Joyce’s drafts for Ulysses. Language and Literature 16(2): 183–196. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Speer, N. K., Reynolds, J., Swallow, K. & Zacks, J. 2009. Reading stories activates neural representations of visual and motor experiences. Psychological Science 20(8): 989–999. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Spiegelberg, H. & Schuhmann, K. 1982. The Phenomenological Movement: A Historical Introduction. Hague: Nijhoff.Google Scholar
Steen, G. 1994. Understanding Metaphor in Literature: An Empirical Approach. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Stockwell, P. 2002[2020]. Cognitive Poetics: An Introduction. 2nd ed. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Straus, E. 1966. Philosophical Psychology. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Tan, E. S. 1994. Film-induced affect as a witness emotion. Poetics 23: 7–32. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tellegen, A. & Atkinson, G. 1974. Openness to absorbing and self-altering experiences (“absorption”), a trait related to hypnotic susceptibility. Journal of Abnormal Psychology 83(3): 268–277. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tettamanti, M. E. 2005. Listening to action-related sentences activates fronto-parietal motor circuits. Journal of Cognitive Studies 17: 273–281. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tettamanti, M., Buccino, G., Saccuman, M. C., Gallese, V., Danna, M., Scifo, P., Fazio, F., Rizzolatti, G., Cappa, S. F. & Perani, D. 2005. Sentences describing actions activate visuomotor execution and observation systems. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 17: 273–281. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
The Oxford English Dictionary. 2011. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Thompson, G. & Hunston, S. 2000. Evaluation in Text: Authorial Stance and the Construction of Discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Thue, F. W. 2019. Den Historiske Allmenndannelse. Historisk Tidsskrift 2: 167–90. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Todorov, T. 2007. La Littérature en Péril. Paris: Flammarion.Google Scholar
2009. A Literatura em Perigo. C. Meira (trad.) Rio de Janeiro: Difel.Google Scholar
Toolan, M. J. 2008. Verbal Art: Through Repetition to Immersion. Paper presented at the Second International Stylistics Conference. Shanghai International Studies University, Shanghai, China. October 22–25, 2008. Available at: [URL]
2009. Narrative Progression in the Short Story: A Corpus Stylistics Approach [Linguistic Approaches to Literature 6]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2010. Emotions in Texts: A Corpus Stylistics Study. PALA 2010 Conference. Conference Presentation. (pp.20–25 July). Genoa: University of Genoa.Google Scholar
Toyne, J. & Usherwood, B. 2001. Checking the Books: The Value and Impact of Public Library Book Reading. Sheffield: Centre for the Public Library and Information in Society, Department of Information Studies.Google Scholar
Troustine, J. R. & Waxler, R. P. 2005. Finding a Voice: The Practice of Changing Lives Through Literature. University of Michigan Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tryon, R. C. 1939. Cluster Analysis: Correlation Profile and Orthometric (Factor) Analysis for the Isolation of Unities of the Mind and Personality. Ann Arbor: Edwards Brothers.Google Scholar
Tsur, R. 1992. What Makes Sound Patterns Expressive: The Poetic Mode of Speech-Perception. Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
2012. Playing by Ear and the Tip of the Tongue: Precategorial information in poetry. [Linguistic Approaches to Literature 14]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van Dalen-Oskam, K. 2021. Het Raadsel Literatuur: Is Literaire Kwaliteit Meetbaar? Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.Google Scholar
van Manen, M. 1997. Researching Lived Experience: Human Science for an Action Sensitive Pedagogy. London: Althouse Press.Google Scholar
van Peer, W. 1986. Stylistics and Psychology: Investigations of Foregrounding. London, Sydney, Wolfeboro: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
(ed.). 2007. Special Issue on Foregrounding. Language and Literature 16(2).Google Scholar
van Peer, W. & Hakemulder, F. 2006. Foregrounding. In The Pergamon Encyclopaedia of Language and Linguistics, K. Brown (ed.), Vol. 4: 546–551. Elsevier. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van Peer, W., Hakemulder, F. & Zyngier, S. 2012. Scientific Methods for the Humanities. [Linguistic Approaches to Literature 13]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van Peer, W., Sopcak, P., Castiglione, D., Fialho, O., Jacobs, A. & Hakemulder, F. 2021. Foregrounding. In Handbook of Empirical Literary Studies, D. Kuiken & A. M. Jacobs (eds.), 145–176. Berlin, Boston: DeGruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van Schooten, E., Oostdam, R. & de Glopper, K. 2001. Dimensions and predictors of literary response. Journal of Literacy Research 33(1): 1–32. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Varela, F. J. 1996. Neurophenomenology: A methodological remedy to the hard problem. Journal of Consciousness Studies 3: 330–50.Google Scholar
Varela, F. J., Thompson, E. & Rosch, E. 1991. The Embodied Mind: Cognitive Science and Human Experience. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Verdonk, P. 2002. Stylistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Verissimo, E. 1938/2005. Olhai os Lirios dos Campos. Companhia das Letras.Google Scholar
Vipond, D. & Hunt, R. A. 1984. Point-driven understanding: Pragmatic and cognitive dimensions of literary reading. Poetics: International Review for the Theory of Literature 13(3): 261–277. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Voltaire, F. 1759/2006. Candide, or Optimism. Penguin Classics.Google Scholar
Votteler, T. 1988. Short Story Criticism: Excerpts from Criticism of the Works of Short Fiction Writers, 1988–1992. Detroit, MI: Gale Research.Google Scholar
Wales, K. 2001. A Dictionary of Stylistics. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Wallentin, M., Nielsen, A., Vuust, P., Dohn, A., Roepstorff, A. & Lund, T. 2011. Amygdala and heart rate variability responses from listening to emotionally intense parts of a story. NeuroImage 58(3): 963–973. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Watson, J. B. 1924. Psychology from the Standpoint of a Behaviorist. Philadelphia and London: J. B. Lippincott. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Waxler, R. P. & Troustine, J. R. 1999. Changing Lives through Literature. University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
Weber, M. 1949. The Methodology of the Social Sciences. E. A. Shils & H. A. Finch (trans.). Glencoe, IL: Free Press.Google Scholar
Wheeler, M. 2005. Reconstructing the Cognitive World: The Next Step. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wild, T. C. & Kuiken, D. 1992. Aesthetic attitude and variations in reported experience of a painting. Empirical Studies of the Arts 10: 57–78. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wild, T. C., Kuiken, D. & Schopflocher, D. 1995. The role of absorption in experiential involvement. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology 69(3): 569–579. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wilhelm, J. 2016. You Gotta BE the Book: Teaching Engaged and Reflective Reading with Adolescents. 3rd ed.. New York, NY: Teachers College.Google Scholar
Wimsatt, W. K. & Beardsley, M. C. 1949. The affective fallacy. The Sewanee Review 57(1): 31–55.Google Scholar
Winkielman, P., Niedenthal, P. M. & Oberman, L. 2008. The Embodied Emotional Mind. New York: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Winter, E. O. 1974. Replacement as a Function of Repetition: A Study of its Principal Features in the Clause Relations of Contemporary English. PhD dissertation, University of London.
1979. Replacement as a fundamental function of the sentence in context. Forum Linguisticum 4(2): 95–133.Google Scholar
Wirth, W., Hofer, M. & Schramm, H. 2012. Beyond pleasure: Exploring the eudaimonic entertainment experience. Human Communication Research 38: 406–428. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wishart, D. 2000. Clustan Graphics Primer. Edinburgh: Clustan Limited.Google Scholar
Wohl, M. J., Kuiken, D. & Noels, K. A. 2006. Three ways to forgive: A numerically aided phenomenological study. British Journal of Social Psychology 45: 547–561. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wootton, A. J. 1975. Dilemmas of Discourse: Controversies about the Sociological Interpretation of Language. London: G. Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
Wordsworth, W. 1798[1963]. Lines Written a Few Miles Above Tintern Abbey, On Revisiting the Banks of the Wye During a Tour, July 13, 1798. In Lyrical Ballads: The Text of the 1798 edition with the Additional 1800 Poems and the Prefaces, R. L. Brett & A. R. Jones (eds.). London: Methuen.Google Scholar
Wordsworth, W. & Coleridge, S. T. 1963. Lyrical Ballads: The Text of the 1798 edition with the Additional 1800 Poems and the Prefaces, R. L. Brett & A. R. Jones (eds.) London: Methuen and Co. Ldt.Google Scholar
Zajonc, R. B. 1980. Feeling and thinking: Preferences need no inferences. American Psychologist 39: 151–175. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1984. On the Primacy of Affect. American Psychologist 39(2): 117–123. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zimmer, B. 2011. The jargon of the novel, computed. New York Times: Sunday Book Review, 29 July 2011, 〈[URL]〉 (30 July 2011).
Zubin, J. 1938. A technique for measuring like-mindedness. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 33(4): 508–516. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zwaan, R. A. 1994. Effect of genre expectations on text comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 20(4): 920–933.Google Scholar
Zwaan, R. A. & Singer, M. 2003. Text Comprehension. In Handbook of Discourse Processes, E. A. Graesser, M. A. Gernsbacher & S. R. Goldman (eds.), 83–121. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.Google Scholar
Zwaan, R. A., Magliano, J. P. & Graesser, A. C. 1995. Dimensions of situation model construction in narrative comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 21(2): 386–397.Google Scholar
Zyngier, S. 1994a. At the Crosswords of Language and Literature. PhD dissertation. Birmingham: University of Birmingham.
1994b. Introducing Literary Awareness. Language Awareness 3(2): 95–108. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2008. Macbeth through the computer: Literary evaluation and pedagogical implications. In The Quality of Literature: Linguistic Studies in Literary Evaluation, W. van Peer (ed.), 169–190. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zyngier, S. & Shepherd, T. M. 2003. What is literature, really? A corpus-driven study of students’ statements. Style 37(1): 14–26.Google Scholar
Zyngier, S., Fialho, O. & Pinheiro, P. 2007. Revisiting Literary Awareness. In Literature and Stylistics for Language Learners: Theory and Practice, G. Watson & S. Zyngier (eds.), 194–209. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar