The DOI matches its Crossref record; 46 of the 53 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Use of “Literary Fiction” to Promote Mentalizing Ability
Open accessAbstract
Empathy is a multidimensional process that incorporates both mentalizing and emotional sharing dimensions. Empathic competencies are important for creating interpersonal relationships with other people and developing adequate social behaviour. The lack of these social components also leads to isolation and exclusion in healthy populations. However, few studies have investigated how to improve these social skills. In a recent study, Kidd and Castano (2013) found that reading literary fiction increases mentalizing ability and may change how people think about other people's emotions and mental states. The aim of our study was to evaluate the effects of reading literary fiction, compared to nonfiction and science fiction, on empathic abilities. Compared to previous studies, we used a larger variety of empathy measures and utilized a pre and post-test design. In all, 214 healthy participants were randomly assigned to read a book representative of one of three literary genres (literary fiction, nonfiction, science fiction). Participants were assessed before and after the reading phase using mentalizing and emotional sharing tests, according to Zaki and Ochsner' s (2012) model. Comparisons of sociodemographic, mentalizing, and emotional sharing variables across conditions were conducted using ANOVA. Our results showed that after the reading phase, the literary fiction group showed improvement in mentalizing abilities, but there was no discernible effect on emotional sharing abilities. Our study showed that the reading processes can promote mentalizing abilities. These results may set important goals for future low-cost rehabilitation protocols for several disorders in which the mentalizing deficit is considered central to the disease, such as Autism Spectrum Disorders and Schizophrenia.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“At post-test, the literary fiction group outperformed the remaining groups on two indicators of ToM, namely the first-and second-order false belief test and the faces task, but not on any indicator of empathy.”
From The effects of reading narrative fiction on social and moral cognition (2021) · cites this paper as Pino & Mazza, 2016
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Only one previous experiment has tested the effects of reading on social cognition using entire books as stimuli (Pino & Mazza, 2016).”
From The effects of reading narrative fiction on social and moral cognition (2021) · cites this paper as Pino & Mazza, 2016
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“However, this study did not contrast narrative with expository texts and did not examine effects on morality.”
From The effects of reading narrative fiction on social and moral cognition (2021) · cites this paper as Pino & Mazza, 2016
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Experiment 2 goes beyond the study byPino and Mazza (2016) by implementing follow-up assessments in addition to pre-and post-tests, manipulating narrativity and fictionality separately instead of contrasting different types of narratives, and by including indicators of morality in addition to measures of ToM and empathy.”
From The effects of reading narrative fiction on social and moral cognition (2021) · cites this paper as Pino and Mazza (2016)
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
Measuring individual differences in empathy: Evidence for a multidimensional approach.
Davis, M. H. (1983) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.44.1.113 · Cited by 10,272 · cited 2×
“Interpersonal Reactivity Index cognitive sub-scales (IRI): the IRI, which Davis [30] developed, is the most frequently used self-administered instrument to assess the different components of empathy.”
BackgroundMethodMeasuring emotion: The self-assessment manikin and the semantic differential
Bradley, M. M., & Lang, P. J. (1994) · Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry · doi:10.1016/0005-7916(94)90063-9 · Cited by 9,538 · cited 1×
“In these pictures, taken from the International Affective Picture System (IAPS) [44], the stimuli show individuals feeling different emotions: positive emotions (25 pictures that include emotions such as happiness, positive surprise) and negative emotions (25 pictures that include emotions such as sadness, anger, disa…”
MethodEstimating the reproducibility of psychological science
Open Science Collaboration (2015) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aac4716 · Cited by 8,515
Baron-Cohen, S., Wheelwright, S., Skinner, R., Martin, J., & Clubley, E. (2001) · Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders · doi:10.1023/a:1005653411471 · Cited by 6,450 · cited 1×
“For the post-reading phase, we used the following measures Empathy Quotient- Emotional sub-scale [46, 38].”
MethodBaron‐Cohen, S., Wheelwright, S., Hill, J., Raste, Y., & Plumb, I. (2001) · Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry · doi:10.1111/1469-7610.00715 · Cited by 4,555 · cited 5×
“For the pre-reading phase, we used the following measures: Basic Empathy Scale-Affective Empathy Sub-scale (AES) [28, 29]: the AES is comprised of 11 items (N° 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 8, 11, 13, 15, 17, 18) that measure congruence with another person’s emotions [18].”
BackgroundMethodResultInfluentialBaron-Cohen, S., & Wheelwright, S. (2004) · Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders · doi:10.1023/b:jadd.0000022607.19833.00 · Cited by 4,093 · cited 1×
“[36] developed to measure the different aspects of empathy [37–40].”
BackgroundHappé, F. G. E. (1994) · Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders · doi:10.1007/bf02172093 · Cited by 2,352 · cited 3×
“Happè’s task is more advanced than previous tests of theory of mind.”
MethodCharon, R. (2001) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.286.15.1897 · Cited by 2,351 · cited 1×
“Recent studies [10, 11] have pointed towards reading literary texts as a means of enhancing empathic abilities.”
BackgroundReading literary fiction improves theory of mind
Kidd, D. C., & Castano, E. (2013) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1239918 · Cited by 1,642 · cited 1×
“In a recent study, Kidd and Castano (2013) found that reading literary fiction increases mentalizing ability and may change how people think about other people’s emotions and mental states.”
BackgroundDevelopment and validation of the Basic Empathy Scale
Jolliffe, D., & Farrington, D. P. (2005) · Journal of Adolescence · doi:10.1016/j.adolescence.2005.08.010 · Cited by 1,625 · cited 8×
“Example of items on the AES are: “My friend’s emotions don’t affect me much” or “I often get swept up in my friend’s feelings”.”
BackgroundMethodInfluential
Flagged first, then by citations
7 of the 53 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.
Research works printed but not linked: 6
- JH Davidson, 2015, Clinical empathy and narrative competence: the relevance of reading talmudic legends as literary fiction, Rambam Maimonides Med J, 6, e0014, 10.5041/RMMJ.10198 · DOI
- S Baron-Cohen, 2001, Are intuitive physics and intuitive psychology independent? A test with children with Asperger Syndrome, Developmental and Learning Disorders, 5, 47
- Saunders G. Tenth of December. Random House Trade Paperbacks, 2014.
- Reynolds A. Troika. Subterranean; First edition, 2011.
- Bradbury R. Fahrenheit 451. Reissue edition, 2013.
- DM D’Orazio, 2004, The journal’s publication of research that incorrectly employs Davis’ Interpersonal Reactivity Index, Sex Abuse, 16, 173
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 101–103 of 103
Tohidi, D. (2026) · Scientific Study of Literature · doi:10.61645/ssol.206
Beyond beauty - affective and aesthetic processes in reading and art perception
Altmann, U. (2018) · Universitätsbibliothek der FU Berlin Hochschulschriftenstelle u. Dokumentenserver · doi:10.17169/refubium-9390
“Similarly, Pino & Mazza (2016) observed an improvement in mentalizing abilities after the reading of literary fiction, compared to science fiction or nonfiction.”
BackgroundWood, L. (2017) · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-63303-9_29
Metadata
- Authors
- Pino, M. C., & Mazza, M.
- Affiliations
- University of L'Aquila (IT)
- Corresponding author
- Pino, Maria Chiara
- Venue
- PLOS ONE
- Publisher
- Public Library of Science (PLoS)
- Published
- 2016-08-04
- Volume
- 11
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- e0160254
- ISSN
- 1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC4973931
- OpenAlex
- W2505321358
- Cited by
- 123
- References
- 53
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 18 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 27 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 1
- FWCI
- 191.49
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Archivio Istituzionale della Ricerca - Università degli Studi dell Aquila (submittedVersion, public-domain)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Communication › Media Influence and Health
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Empathy and Medical Education
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Action Observation and Synchronization
- Keywords
- literary fiction, mentalization, empathy, emotional sharing, reading, fiction and non-fiction, science fiction, social cognition, social skills, autism spectrum disorder, schizophrenia, rehabilitation
- MeSH terms
- Autism Spectrum Disorder, Adult, Emotions, Female, Humans, Literature, Male, Reading, Schizophrenia, Theory of Mind
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