Deutsch
 
Hilfe Datenschutzhinweis Impressum
  DetailsucheBrowse

Datensatz

DATENSATZ AKTIONENEXPORT

Freigegeben

Zeitschriftenartikel

Individual differences in sensitivity to style during literary reading: Insights from eye-tracking

MPG-Autoren

Van den Hoven,  E.
Language and Cognition Department, MPI for Psycholinguistics, Max Planck Society;

/persons/resource/persons73150

Hartung,  Franziska
Neurobiology of Language Department, MPI for Psycholinguistics, Max Planck Society;
International Max Planck Research School for Language Sciences, MPI for Psycholinguistics, Max Planck Society;

/persons/resource/persons37865

Willems,  Roel M.
Neurobiology of Language Department, MPI for Psycholinguistics, Max Planck Society;
Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, External Organizations;
Center for Language Studies , External Organizations;

Externe Ressourcen
Es sind keine externen Ressourcen hinterlegt
Volltexte (beschränkter Zugriff)
Für Ihren IP-Bereich sind aktuell keine Volltexte freigegeben.
Volltexte (frei zugänglich)

39-658-1-PB.pdf
(Verlagsversion), 529KB

Ergänzendes Material (frei zugänglich)

collabra-2-39-s1.pdf
(Ergänzendes Material), 700KB

collabra-2-39-s2.pdf
(Ergänzendes Material), 560KB

collabra-2-39-s3.pdf
(Ergänzendes Material), 446KB

Zitation

Van den Hoven, E., Hartung, F., Burke, M., & Willems, R. M. (2016). Individual differences in sensitivity to style during literary reading: Insights from eye-tracking. Collabra, 2(1): 25, pp. 1-16. doi:10.1525/collabra.39.


Zitierlink: https://hdl.handle.net/11858/00-001M-0000-002C-295A-7
Zusammenfassung
Style is an important aspect of literature, and stylistic deviations are sometimes labeled foregrounded, since their manner of expression deviates from the stylistic default. Russian Formalists have claimed that foregrounding increases processing demands and therefore causes slower reading – an effect called retardation. We tested this claim experimentally by having participants read short literary stories while measuring their eye movements. Our results confirm that readers indeed read slower and make more regressions towards foregrounded passages as compared to passages that are not foregrounded. A closer look, however, reveals significant individual differences in sensitivity to foregrounding. Some readers in fact do not slow down at all when reading foregrounded passages. The slowing down effect for literariness was related to a slowing down effect for high perplexity (unexpected) words: those readers who slowed down more during literary passages also slowed down more during high perplexity words, even though no correlation between literariness and perplexity existed in the stories. We conclude that individual differences play a major role in processing of literary texts and argue for accounts of literary reading that focus on the interplay between reader and text.