de.mpg.escidoc.pubman.appbase.FacesBean
Deutsch
 
Hilfe Wegweiser Impressum Kontakt Einloggen
  DetailsucheBrowse

Datensatz

DATENSATZ AKTIONENEXPORT

Freigegeben

Konferenzbeitrag

Reading Perception - Perceiving Literature: an Interdisciplinary Approach

MPG-Autoren
http://pubman.mpdl.mpg.de/cone/persons/resource/persons84036

Lampert,  A
Department Human Perception, Cognition and Action, Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Max Planck Society;

http://pubman.mpdl.mpg.de/cone/persons/resource/persons84115

Nusseck,  M
Department Human Perception, Cognition and Action, Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Max Planck Society;

http://pubman.mpdl.mpg.de/cone/persons/resource/persons83839

Bülthoff,  HH
Department Human Perception, Cognition and Action, Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Max Planck Society;

Externe Ressourcen
Es sind keine Externen Ressourcen verfügbar
Volltexte (frei zugänglich)
Es sind keine frei zugänglichen Volltexte verfügbar
Ergänzendes Material (frei zugänglich)
Es sind keine frei zugänglichen Ergänzenden Materialien verfügbar
Zitation

Lampert, A., Nusseck, M., Wertheimer, J., & Bülthoff, H. (2007). Reading Perception - Perceiving Literature: an Interdisciplinary Approach. Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Enactive Interfaces (ENACTIVE 07), 369-372.


Zitierlink: http://hdl.handle.net/11858/00-001M-0000-0013-CB17-A
Zusammenfassung
This paper presents the results of experiments made within the interdisciplinary project between the Department for Comparative Literature at the University of Tübingen and Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics. We examined the following three questions using both psychophysical and structuralistic-hermeneutical methods: a) Are there regularities in the judgments of spatial descriptions by different readers? b) Do readers encode the perceptual perspective of characters during reading? c) Are there correspondences between foregrounding effects and the physiological reaction (galvanic skin response) of readers? The results show that a) that the semantic validation of spatial descriptions showed high homogeneity; b) the method actually showed more about literary strategies concerning object occluding and required the development of new experiment approaches to identify the perspective taken by the reader, that c) the emotional response is quite idiosyncratic but can be roughly divided into two schemes (high or low response).