Cited by 51Ethics, Aesthetics, and ArtNarrative Theory and AnalysisPhilosophy and Theoretical Science

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Fiction Film and the Varieties of Empathic Engagement

VAAGE, MARGRETHE BRUUN·2010·Midwest Studies In Philosophy

Abstract

Mindreading, simulation, empathy and central imagining are often used interchangeably in current analytic philosophy, and typically defined as imagining what the other wants and believes - to run these states "off-line" as the lingo often goes. By imagining the others beliefs and desires, one will come to understand and predict his emotional and behavioral reactions. Many have suggested that films may trigger engagement in the characters' perspectives, and one finds similar use of these terms in film theory. Imagining the character's states- with emphasis on mental states - has for example, been labelled as central imagining, (Choi 2005; Smith 1995), imagining from the inside(Smith 1997), and empathetic re-enactment (Currie 1995). In a similar vein, understanding the meaning of a narrative event for a character is understood as empathy (Tan 1996). These accounts all point to ways in which the spectator understands the character and the situation the character is in. Nevertheless, one also finds a different use of the term empathy in film theory, namely as a matching feeling with the character. The emphasis here is not on understanding the character and the narrative situation, but on the emotional output of the process.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1475-4975.2010.00200.x

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 66

  1. Andringa, 2001, New Perspectives on Narrative Perspective, 133
  2. Armstrong, 1981, The Nature of Mind and Other Essays
  3. Baron-Cohen, 1995, Mindblindness: An Essay on Autism and Theory of Mind, 10.7551/mitpress/4635.001.0001 · DOI · Paper page
  4. Blanchet, 2005, Hollywood: Recent Developments, 76
  5. Bordwell, 1997, Modernism, Minimalism, Melancholy: Angelopoulos and Visual Style, 11
  6. Bordwell, 2000, Planet Hong Kong: Popular Cinema and the Art of Entertainment
  7. Bordwell, 2006, The Way Hollywood Tells It: Story and Style in Modern Movies, 10.1525/9780520932326 · DOI
  8. Bower, 1990, Mental Models in Narrative Comprehension, Science, 247, 44, 10.1126/science.2403694 · DOI
  9. Branigan, 1984, Point of View in the Cinema: A Theory of Narration and Subjectivity in Classical Film, 10.1515/9783110817591 · DOI
  10. Branigan, 1992, Narrative Comprehension and Film
  11. Carroll, 1990, The Philosophy of Horror or Paradoxes of the Heart
  12. Carroll, 1996, Theorizing the Moving Image
  13. Carroll, 1997, Emotion in Postmodernism, 383
  14. Carroll, 1999, Passionate Views: Film, Cognition, and Emotion, 21
  15. Carroll, 2001, Beyond Aesthetics: Philosophical Essays, 10.1017/CBO9780511605970 · DOI
  16. Carroll, 2008, The Philosophy of Motion Pictures
  17. Choi, 2005, Leaving It Up to the Imagination: POV Shots and Imagining from the Inside, The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 63, 17, 10.1111/j.0021-8529.2005.00177.x · DOI
  18. Coplan, 2004, Empathic Engagement with Narrative Fictions, The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 62, 141, 10.1111/j.1540-594X.2004.00147.x · DOI
  19. Coplan, 2006, Catching Characters' Emotions: Emotional Contagion Responses to Narrative Fiction Film, Film Studies, 8, 26, 10.7227/FS.8.5 · DOI
  20. Coplan, 2008, Review of Simulating Minds by Alvin Goldman, The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 66, 94, 10.1111/j.1540-594X.2008.00290_3.x · DOI
  21. Cowie, 1998, Contemporary Hollywood Cinema, 178
  22. Crafton, 1987 2006, The Cinema of Attractions Reloaded, 355
  23. 2009, Einfühlung. Zur Geschichte und Gegenwart Eines Ästhetischen Konzepts
  24. 1995a, Folk Psychology: The Theory of Mind Debate
  25. 1995b, Mental Simulation: Evaluations and Applications
  26. Davis, 1996, Empathy: A Social Psychological Approach
  27. Eisenberg, 2000, Handbook of Emotions, 677
  28. Feagin, 1996, Reading with Feeling: The Aesthetics of Appreciation, 10.7591/9781501721465 · DOI
  29. Feagin, 1999, Passionate Views: Film, Cognition, and Emotion, 168
  30. Frijda, 1986, The Emotions
  31. Gernsbacher, 1992, Do Readers Mentally Represent Characters' Emotional States?, Cognition and Emotion, 6, 89, 10.1080/02699939208411061 · DOI
  32. Goldman, 2006, Simulating Minds: The Philosophy, Psychology, and Neuroscience of Mindreading, 10.1093/0195138929.001.0001 · DOI
  33. Goldman , Alvin I. Two Routes to Empathy: Insights from Cognitive Neuroscience Empathy: Philosophical and Psychological Perspectives Amy Coplan Peter Goldie Oxford University Press
  34. Grodal, 1997, Moving Pictures: A New Theory of Film Genres, Feelings, and Cognition
  35. Grodal, 2009, Embodied Visions: Evolution, Emotion, Culture, and Film, 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195371314.001.0001 · DOI
  36. Gunning, 1989 1994, Viewing Positions: Ways of Seeing Film, 114
  37. Gunning, 1986 2006, The Cinema of Attractions Reloaded, 381
  38. Harris, 2000, The Work of the Imagination
  39. Hatfield, 1994, Emotional Contagion
  40. Hoffman, 2000, Empathy and Moral Development: Implications for Caring and Justice, 10.1017/CBO9780511805851 · DOI
  41. Iacoboni, 2008, Mirroring People: The New Science of How We Connect with Others
  42. 1997, Empathic Accuracy
  43. Ickes, 2003, Everyday Mindreading: Understanding What Other People Think and Feel
  44. Keen, 2007, Empathy and the Novel, 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195175769.001.0001 · DOI
  45. King, 2000, Spectacular Narratives: Hollywood in the Age of the Blockbuster, 10.5040/9780755699315 · DOI
  46. LeDoux, 1998, The Emotional Brain: The Mysterious Underpinnings of Emotional Life
  47. Musser, 1994 2006, The Cinema of Attractions Reloaded, 389
  48. Plantinga, 1999, Passionate Views: Film, Cognition, and Emotion, 239, 10.56021/9780801860102 · DOI
  49. Plantinga, 2009, Moving Viewers: American Film and the Spectator's Experience, 10.1525/9780520943919 · DOI
  50. Rinck, 1996, Spatial Situation Models and Narrative Understanding: Some Generalizations and Extensions, Discourse Processes, 21, 23, 10.1080/01638539609544948 · DOI
  51. Schatz, 1993, Film Theory Goes to the Movies, 8
  52. Shaw, 2008, A Rejoinder to Noël Carroll's The Philosophy of Motion Pictures, Film-Philosophy, 12, 142, 10.3366/film.2008.0021 · DOI
  53. Smith, 2003, Film Structure and the Emotion System, 10.1017/CBO9780511497759 · DOI
  54. Smith, 1995, Engaging Characters. Fiction, Emotion, and the Cinema
  55. Smith, 1997, Film Theory and Philosophy, 412, 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198159216.003.0019 · DOI
  56. Smith, 1998, Contemporary Hollywood Cinema, 3
  57. Smith , Murray Empathy, Expansionism, and the Extended Mind Empathy: Philosophical and Psychological Perspectives Amy Coplan Peter Goldie Oxford University Press
  58. Tan, 1996, Emotion and the Structure of Narrative Film: Film as an Emotion Machine
  59. Vaage, 2006, The Empathic Film Spectator in Analytic Philosophy and Naturalized Phenomenology, Film and Philosophy, 10, 21, 10.5840/filmphil2006103 · DOI
  60. Vaage, 2009a, The Role of Empathy in Gregory Currie's Philosophy of Film, British Journal of Aesthetics, 49, 109, 10.1093/aesthj/ayp005 · DOI
  61. Vaage, 2009b, Self-Reflection: Beyond Conventional Fiction Film Engagement, Nordicom Review, 30, 159, 10.1515/nor-2017-0157 · DOI
  62. Williams, 1998, Refiguring American Film Genres: History and Theory, 42, 10.1525/9780520918559-005 · DOI
  63. Williams, 1999, Film Theory and Criticism, 701
  64. Wispé, 1987, Empathy and Its Development, 17
  65. Zillmann, 1991, Responding to the Screen: Reception and Reaction Processes, 135
  66. Zillmann, 2000, Moving Images, Culture and the Mind, 53

Metadata

Authors
VAAGE, M. B.
Corresponding author
VAAGE, MARGRETHE BRUUN
Venue
Midwest Studies In Philosophy
Published
2010-09-08
Volume
34
Issue
1
Pages
158-179
ISSN
0363-6550 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1948347582
Cited by
51
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 14 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 1
FWCI
5.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Midwest Studies in Philosophy (publishedVersion)
  • Kent Academic Repository (University of Kent) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Ethics, Aesthetics, and Art
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Literature and Literary Theory › Narrative Theory and Analysis
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Philosophy and Theoretical Science
Keywords
empathy, fiction film, spectatorship, theory of mind, simulation, emotional engagement, film spectatorship, narrative comprehension, film theory

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review