Why literature matters

You cannot get more scientific than the journal entitled “Science,” the academic journal of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. “Science” is one of the top scientific journals in the world today. In its online edition last Oct. 3, “Science” published a research article entitled “Reading Literary Fiction Improves Theory of Mind,” by David Comer Kidd and Emanuele Castano.

This is the abstract of the article: “Understanding others’ mental states is a crucial skill that enables the complex social relationships that characterize human societies. Yet little research has investigated what fosters this skill, which is known as Theory of Mind (ToM), in adults. We present five experiments showing that reading literary fiction led to better performance on tests of affective ToM and cognitive ToM compared with reading nonfiction, popular fiction, or nothing at all. Specifically, these results show that reading literary fiction temporarily enhances ToM. More broadly, they suggest that ToM may be influenced by engagement with works of art.”

That is the statement of a pair of hard-core scientists. It is not a statement by literature teachers or literary writers, who might be accused of having a vested interest in getting literature back into the mainstream of education. In fact, historically, scientists used to be the most vocal against literature (remember the classic essay on “The Two Cultures”?). That scientists today are advocating the return of literature to education is a major change in the academic world.

The popular journal “Scientific American” in its Oct. 4 issue featured an article based on the “Science” research, entitled “Novel Finding: Reading Literary Fiction Improves Empathy: The types of books we read may affect how we relate to others,” written by Julianne Chiaet. Since this article is easier to understand for most readers than the scientific one in “Science,” allow me to quote from this popularization of the latest findings about literature:

“Emanuele Castano, a social psychologist, along with PhD candidate David Kidd, conducted five studies in which they divided a varying number of participants (ranging from 86 to 356) and gave them different reading assignments: excerpts from genre (or popular) fiction, literary fiction, nonfiction, or nothing. After they finished the excerpts, the participants took a test that measured their ability to infer and understand other people’s thoughts and emotions. The researchers found, to their surprise, a significant difference between the literary- and genre-fiction readers.

“When study participants read non-fiction or nothing, their results were unimpressive. When they read excerpts of genre fiction, such as Danielle Steel’s ‘The Sins of the Mother,’ their test results were dually insignificant. However, when they read literary fiction, such as ‘The Round House’ by Louise Erdrich, their test results improved markedly – and, by implication, so did their capacity for empathy.

“The results are consistent with what literary criticism has to say about the two genres – and indeed, this may be the first empirical evidence linking literary and psychological theories of fiction. Popular fiction tends to portray situations that are otherworldly and follow a formula to take readers on a roller-coaster ride of emotions and exciting experiences. Although the settings and situations are grand, the characters are internally consistent and predictable, which tends to affirm the reader’s expectations of others. It stands to reason that popular fiction does not expand the capacity to empathize.

“Literary fiction, by contrast, focuses more on the psychology of characters and their relationships. ‘Often those characters’ minds are depicted vaguely, without many details, and we’re forced to fill in the gaps to understand their intentions and motivations,’ Kidd says. This genre prompts the reader to imagine the characters’ introspective dialogues. This psychological awareness carries over into the real world, which is full of complicated individuals whose inner lives are usually difficult to fathom. Although literary fiction tends to be more realistic than popular fiction, the characters disrupt reader expectations, undermining prejudices and stereotypes. They support and teach us values about social behavior, such as the importance of understanding those who are different from ourselves.

“The results suggest that reading fiction is a valuable socializing influence. The study data could inform debates over how much fiction should be included in educational curricula and whether reading programs should be implemented in prisons, where reading literary fiction might improve inmates’ social functioning and empathy. Castano also hopes the finding will encourage autistic people to engage in more literary fiction, in the hope it could improve their ability to empathize without the side effects of medication.”

Last week, during the opening ceremonies of the Asia Pacific Writers conference in Bangkok, the Deputy Ambassador of the Kingdom of The Netherlands, Doris Voorbraak, gave a message that read, in part:

“We need literature to feed the imagination. We crave imagination in our hunger for knowledge. We need imagination to challenge set norms, to push boundaries and help us progress as humankind. In the words of Albert Einstein, ‘Imagination is more important than knowledge, for knowledge is limited to all we now know and understand, while imagination embraces the entire world and all there ever will be to know and understand.’ Culture makes us human. Culture remains essential to progress and development. Without culture, development cannot be sustainable and is meaningless.” (To be continued)