Predicting subjective ratings of affect and comprehensibility with text features: a reader response study of narrative poetry.

Literary reading is an interactive process between a reader and a text that depends on a balance between cognitive effort and emotional rewards. By studying both the crucial features of the text and of the subjective reader reception, a better understanding of this interactive process can be reached. In the present study, subjects (N=31) read and rated a work of narrative fiction that was written in a poetic style, thereby offering the readers two pathways to cognitive rewards: Aesthetic appreciation and narrative immersion. Using purely text-based quantitative descriptors, we were able to independently and accurately predict the subjective ratings in the dimensions comprehensibility, valence, arousal, and liking across roughly 140 pages of naturalistic text. The specific text features that were most important in predicting each rating dimension are discussed in detail. In addition, the implications of the findings are discussed more generally in the context of existing models of literary processing and future research avenues for empirical literary studies.

Exploring Individual Differences in Recognizing Idiomatic Expressions in Context.

Written language comprehension requires readers to integrate incoming information with stored mental knowledge to construct meaning. Literally plausible idiomatic expressions can activate both figurative and literal interpretations, which convey different meanings. Previous research has shown that contexts biasing the figurative or literal interpretation of an idiom can facilitate its processing. Moreover, there is evidence that processing of idiomatic expressions is subject to individual differences in linguistic knowledge and cognitive-linguistic skills. It is therefore conceivable that individuals vary in the extent to which they experience context-induced facilitation in processing idiomatic expressions. To explore the interplay between reader-related variables and contextual facilitation, we conducted a self-paced reading experiment. We recruited participants who had recently completed a battery of 33 behavioural tests measuring individual differences in linguistic knowledge, general cognitive skills and linguistic processing skills. In the present experiment, a subset of these participants read idiomatic expressions that were either presented in isolation or preceded by a figuratively or literally biasing context. We conducted analyses on the reading times of idiom-final nouns and the word thereafter (spill-over region) across the three conditions, including participants' scores from the individual differences battery. Our results showed no main effect of the preceding context, but substantial variation between readers and variation in contextual facilitation. We encourage interested researchers to exploit the present dataset for follow-up studies on individual differences in idiom processing.