Investigating the possible relationships between narrative empathy, neuroticism and reading experience A quantitative survey study among Dutch adults Abstract This research project aimed to investigate the possible relationships between narrative empathy, neuroticism and reading experience. By doing this, it contributes to the literature on the relationship between narrative empathy and readers characteristics, a relatively young area of research (Koopman, 2015a), because most studies investigating narrative empathy have been focused on its relationship with text characteristics (Keen, 2006). Narrative empathy has been defined by Keen (2013) as the sharing of feeling and perspective-taking induced by reading, viewing, hearing, or imagining narratives of another’s situation and condition. Neuroticism, a personality characteristic, reflects the tendency to be highly emotional, impulsive, anxious, and stress reactive (Costa & McCrae, 1992b). Reading experience refers to the amount of literature someone has read in the past. An online survey (N = 92) was used to study these relationships, which included a short narrative and several questionnaires. Based on previous literature, a positive correlation between narrative empathy and neuroticism was hypothesized, which was found by the current study as well. Additionally, the study investigated the possible relationship between narrative empathy and reading experience, which has been proposed as a positive correlation by academics, although this was not supported by results of the current study. In conclusion, the study gathered interesting insights in the relationships between narrative empathy, neuroticism and reading experience useful for both academia and broader contexts. By: Bo van Beuningen (s1008644) Supervisor: L. S. Eekhof Communication- and Information Sciences Bachelor thesis Radboud University 8-6-2020 Table of contents Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 3 Background ............................................................................................................................ 3 Theoretical background .......................................................................................................... 3 Research question and hypotheses ......................................................................................... 8 Method ..................................................................................................................................... 11 Instruments ........................................................................................................................... 11 Participants ........................................................................................................................... 14 Procedure .............................................................................................................................. 15 Statistical treatment .............................................................................................................. 15 Results ...................................................................................................................................... 16 Conclusion and discussion ....................................................................................................... 18 References ................................................................................................................................ 22 Appendices ............................................................................................................................... 31 2 Introduction Background For a long time, researchers in the field of philosophy and social psychology have been interested in the study of empathy (Unger & Thumuluri, 1997), while only in the recent years, research on the relationship between reading narratives and social cognition has been increased (Eekhof, Van Krieken, & Willems, in preparation). According to many scholars, narrative empathy, the experience of feeling along with story characters, plays a key role in our engagement with narratives (Keen, 2006). Previous research on narrative empathy has mainly been focussed on the relationship between text characteristics and narrative empathy (Keen, 2006) and not so much on the relationship between personal characteristics of the reader and narrative empathy (Koopman, 2015a). This is somewhat paradoxical, because personal characteristics could perhaps be even more influential on narrative empathy than text characteristics (Eekhof et al., in preparation). Hence, the aim of the current project is to gain more insight in this possible relationship. According to scholars, increasing readers narrative empathy or sympathy has several benefits, namely: increased empathy towards an outgroup after reading a story about this particular outgroup (Johnson, 2013), increased pro-social behaviour (Johnson, 2012), higher levels of affective empathy after reading (Bal & Veltkamp, 2013), persuasion (Green & Brock, 2000; Slater & Rouner, 2002; Van Boven & Loewenstein, 2003), and changes in attitudes and beliefs in the direction of character’s opinions or events in stories (Green, 2007; Green & Carpenter, 2011). This emphasizes the practical relevance of understanding the driving forces behind narrative empathy, which is where the current study aims to contribute to. Theoretical background Narrative empathy The word ‘empathy’ is derived from German translation of ‘Einfuhlung’ by Titchener (1909, as cited in Spreng, McKinnon, Mar, & Levine, 2009), which means ‘feeling into’ (Wispe, 1987, as cited in Spreng et al., 2009). ‘Narrative empathy’ has been defined as: ‘the sharing of feeling and perspective-taking induced by reading, viewing, hearing, or imagining narratives of another’s situation and condition’ (Keen, 2013, p. 1). This implies that not only real situations and people, as is the case with so called ‘real-life empathy’, but also narratives are able to evoke empathic reactions (Koopman, 2015a). 3 The narrative empathy vs. real-life empathy distinction is one dimension in the debate on empathy (Keen, 2013). Other two common distinctions are between ‘cognitive’ or ‘cold’ empathy versus ‘affective’ or ‘warm’ empathy (Davis, 1983; Decety & Jackson, 2006; Preston & De Waal, 2002; Vingemont, & Singer, 2006), and ‘trait empathy’ versus ‘state empathy’ (Koopman, 2015a). Empathy is often distinguished as being either cognitive (being able to understand someone else’s perspective; Leverage, Mancing, Schweickert, & William, 2011) or affective (feeling similar emotions as someone else feels; Hatfield, Cacioppo, & Rapson, 1994, as cited in Koopman, 2015a). Cognitive empathy is also known as ‘Theory of Mind’ (Leverage et al., 2011) and affective empathy has been called emotional contagion or emotional empathy (Hatfield et al., 1994, as cited in Koopman, 2015a). Many academics propose that both forms are independent and are mediated by different brain structures (Koopman, 2015a; Nathanson, 2003; Shamay-Tsoory, Aharon-Peretz, & Perry, 2009). The current research project will focus on this second type of empathy. Another well-known classification is the distinction between trait empathy and state empathy. Although the concept of trait empathy has been researched frequently in the past, there is no consensus about a clear definition (Spreng et al., 2009). Trait-empathy can be seen as a personality characteristic, which is more or less fixed, while state empathy is empathy that could be increased temporarily (Koopman, 2015a), e.g., by hearing about another’s emotional state, another’s condition or exposure to narratives (Keen, 2006). The current study will focus on narrative empathy, and therefore on state empathy, because narrative empathy means that temporary empathic reactions are evoked by narratives (Koopman, 2015a). The related concept of ‘sympathy’ was used in literature earlier than empathy, and in the early days, the two terms were even used interchangeably (Keen, 2007, as cited in Koopman, 2015a; Titchener, 1909, as cited in Koopman, 2015a). Furthermore, the two concepts are still considered related (Keen, 2006), because in practice these reactions tend to often co-occur (Kuijpers, 2014). Recently, several scholars (e.g., Busselle & Bilandzic, 2009; Coplan, 2004; Koopman, 2015a; Mar, Oatley, Djikic, & Mullin, 2011) tried to define the difference between the concepts. This resulted in the following distinction: empathy can be used to express the experience of feeling someone else’s feelings, while sympathy means feeling concern for someone, without experiencing their feelings (Busselle & Bilandzic, 2009; Keen, 2006). This can be summarized as ‘feeling with’ (empathy) vs. ‘feeling for’ (sympathy; Keen, 2006). 4 Dimensions of narrative empathy Because the main concept of the current study is narrative empathy, understanding its dimensions and driving forces is highly valuable. It has been suggested that ‘character identification’ (Keen, 2006), ‘immersion’ (Keen, 2016), ‘transportation’ (Johnson, 2012; Mar & Oatley, 2008), and ‘absorption’ (Kuijpers, Hakemulder, Tan, & Doicaru, 2014) influence the degree of narrative empathy a reader experiences. Those concepts will be outlined below. Character identification has been defined by literary scholars as: ‘the process whereby readers put themselves in the place of a character and experience what the character feels’ (Altenbernd & Lewis, 1969, in Jose & Brewer,