Reading, Hearing, and Seeing Poetry Performed

The study investigated the differences between reading a poem, listening to a poem, and watching a live poetic performance. Stimulus materials included three poems with positive and three with negative themes written by Michelle Hilscher. The 32 participants, including an equal number of males and females in psychology and literature, completed a General Poetry Questionnaire (GPQ) to indicate their experiences and impressions of poetry coming into the study. Following the presentation of each poem, participants answered 14 5-point scale questions in a Poetry Reception Questionnaire (PRQ) which captured cognitive and emotional nuances of poetry reception, and one open-ended question where the participants wrote freely about the poem's meaning. A factor analysis of the GPQ distinguished primarily between participants' responsiveness to the stylistic features and subject matter of poetry. A factor analysis of the PRQ identified global absorption, interpretive engagement, and narrative representation as the primary activities involved in responses to the six poems. A factor analysis of qualitatively derived meaning categories (MC) contrasted an elaboration of style and metaphor as opposed to subject matter and story line. Analyses of variance showed that respondents preferred to read poetry as compared to hearing, or seeing it performed live. By reading poetry themselves, participants were able to explore and interpret the literary devices in poetry in an independent and creative manner, whereas participants who experienced a live performance seemed constrained in their ability to be actively involved in their experience of poetry and therefore found the poetry less engaging.