Cognitive Effects and Correlates of Reading Fiction: Two Preregistered Multilevel Meta-Analyses

Despite significantly increasing research efforts, the psychological effects of reading fiction remain under debate. We present two preregistered meta-analyses synthesizing cognitive effects and correlates of reading fiction. In Meta-Analysis 1 (371 effect sizes/70 experiments), reading fiction led...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of experimental psychology. General 2024-06, Vol.153 (6), p.1464-1488
Hauptverfasser: Wimmer, Lena, Currie, Gregory, Friend, Stacie, Wittwer, Jörg, Ferguson, Heather J.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 1488
container_issue 6
container_start_page 1464
container_title Journal of experimental psychology. General
container_volume 153
creator Wimmer, Lena
Currie, Gregory
Friend, Stacie
Wittwer, Jörg
Ferguson, Heather J.
description Despite significantly increasing research efforts, the psychological effects of reading fiction remain under debate. We present two preregistered meta-analyses synthesizing cognitive effects and correlates of reading fiction. In Meta-Analysis 1 (371 effect sizes/70 experiments), reading fiction led to significant small-sized cognitive benefits, g = 0.14, 95% confidence interval (CI) [0.06, 0.21]. This effect of fiction reading was moderated by the comparison group (effects were greater when reading fiction was compared with watching fiction or reading nothing than when reading fiction was compared with reading nonfiction) and the outcome variable (significant effects emerged for empathy and mentalizing only). In Meta-Analysis 2 (559 effect sizes/114 studies reporting correlations), lifetime exposure to print fiction was linked with significant small-sized cognitive benefits, r = .16, 95% CI [0.13, 0.19]. This effect was moderated by outcome variable (effects were greatest for verbal abilities, followed by general cognitive abilities and empathy/mentalizing/outgroup judgments), fictionality of the print material (greater effects were found for fiction than nonfiction), publication status (published work exhibited greater effects than unpublished work), type of assessment measure (larger effects emerged when neither the outcome nor print exposure were assessed via self-report, than when either the outcome or print exposure were assessed via self-report), participant group (community samples showed greater effects than student samples), study design (greater effects were found for correlational than for experimental designs), and percentage of female participants (via a negative relationship with cognitive benefits). Together, these meta-analyses provide robust evidence for a small-sized positive relationship between reading fiction and cognitive benefits. Public Significance Statement This research project suggests that people who read a lot of fiction have better cognitive skills than people who read little or no fiction. These benefits are small in size across various cognitive skills, but of medium size for verbal and general cognitive abilities, for example, intelligence. Importantly, there is a stronger association between reading fiction and cognitive skills than between reading nonfiction and those skills. However, whether the benefits are caused by reading fiction or by one or more other variables remains to be determined through future research.
doi_str_mv 10.1037/xge0001583
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_3038436776</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>3072308200</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-a306t-45389ee1970f9d3433f69be67c46832de1a765a25a771fb0e1ce7ba15c99689c3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp90U9rFDEYBvAgFrutXvwAEvAiwthk3kz-eCtLW4WWFqnnkM28s6TMTtYk07rf3ixbFTyYQ97Lj4fkfQh5y9knzkCd_VwjY4x3Gl6QBTdgmrael2TBmJENCNEdk5OcHypioOUrclxv1iqtF8Qu43oKJTwivRgG9CVTN_V0GVPC0RXMNA70G7o-TGt6GXwJcfpM758ivUuYcB1yqaOnN_NYwoiPONIbLK45n9y4y5hfk6PBjRnfPM9T8v3y4n75pbm-vfq6PL9uHDBZGtGBNojcKDaYHgTAIM0KpfJCamh75E7JzrWdU4oPK4bco1o53nljpDYeTsmHQ-42xR8z5mI3IXscRzdhnLOF-nMBUilZ6ft_6EOcU33vXqkWmG7rnv6rQDHZGaGr-nhQPsWcEw52m8LGpZ3lzO7LsX_Lqfjdc-S82mD_h_5uo4LmANzW2W3eeZdK8CNmP9c6prIPs7wDKy0XUsAv_JyYGw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>3037065948</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Cognitive Effects and Correlates of Reading Fiction: Two Preregistered Multilevel Meta-Analyses</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>EBSCOhost APA PsycARTICLES</source><creator>Wimmer, Lena ; Currie, Gregory ; Friend, Stacie ; Wittwer, Jörg ; Ferguson, Heather J.</creator><contributor>Brown-Schmidt, Sarah</contributor><creatorcontrib>Wimmer, Lena ; Currie, Gregory ; Friend, Stacie ; Wittwer, Jörg ; Ferguson, Heather J. ; Brown-Schmidt, Sarah</creatorcontrib><description>Despite significantly increasing research efforts, the psychological effects of reading fiction remain under debate. We present two preregistered meta-analyses synthesizing cognitive effects and correlates of reading fiction. In Meta-Analysis 1 (371 effect sizes/70 experiments), reading fiction led to significant small-sized cognitive benefits, g = 0.14, 95% confidence interval (CI) [0.06, 0.21]. This effect of fiction reading was moderated by the comparison group (effects were greater when reading fiction was compared with watching fiction or reading nothing than when reading fiction was compared with reading nonfiction) and the outcome variable (significant effects emerged for empathy and mentalizing only). In Meta-Analysis 2 (559 effect sizes/114 studies reporting correlations), lifetime exposure to print fiction was linked with significant small-sized cognitive benefits, r = .16, 95% CI [0.13, 0.19]. This effect was moderated by outcome variable (effects were greatest for verbal abilities, followed by general cognitive abilities and empathy/mentalizing/outgroup judgments), fictionality of the print material (greater effects were found for fiction than nonfiction), publication status (published work exhibited greater effects than unpublished work), type of assessment measure (larger effects emerged when neither the outcome nor print exposure were assessed via self-report, than when either the outcome or print exposure were assessed via self-report), participant group (community samples showed greater effects than student samples), study design (greater effects were found for correlational than for experimental designs), and percentage of female participants (via a negative relationship with cognitive benefits). Together, these meta-analyses provide robust evidence for a small-sized positive relationship between reading fiction and cognitive benefits. Public Significance Statement This research project suggests that people who read a lot of fiction have better cognitive skills than people who read little or no fiction. These benefits are small in size across various cognitive skills, but of medium size for verbal and general cognitive abilities, for example, intelligence. Importantly, there is a stronger association between reading fiction and cognitive skills than between reading nonfiction and those skills. However, whether the benefits are caused by reading fiction or by one or more other variables remains to be determined through future research.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0096-3445</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1939-2222</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1939-2222</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1037/xge0001583</identifier><identifier>PMID: 38602788</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: American Psychological Association</publisher><subject>Cognition ; Cognition &amp; reasoning ; Educational Measures ; Empathy ; Exposure ; Fiction ; Human ; Humans ; Literature ; Meta-analysis ; Psychology ; Reading ; Theory of Mind ; Theory of Mind - physiology</subject><ispartof>Journal of experimental psychology. General, 2024-06, Vol.153 (6), p.1464-1488</ispartof><rights>2024 American Psychological Association</rights><rights>2024, American Psychological Association</rights><rights>Copyright American Psychological Association Jun 2024</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><orcidid>0000-0001-8434-1766</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38602788$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><contributor>Brown-Schmidt, Sarah</contributor><creatorcontrib>Wimmer, Lena</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Currie, Gregory</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Friend, Stacie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wittwer, Jörg</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ferguson, Heather J.</creatorcontrib><title>Cognitive Effects and Correlates of Reading Fiction: Two Preregistered Multilevel Meta-Analyses</title><title>Journal of experimental psychology. General</title><addtitle>J Exp Psychol Gen</addtitle><description>Despite significantly increasing research efforts, the psychological effects of reading fiction remain under debate. We present two preregistered meta-analyses synthesizing cognitive effects and correlates of reading fiction. In Meta-Analysis 1 (371 effect sizes/70 experiments), reading fiction led to significant small-sized cognitive benefits, g = 0.14, 95% confidence interval (CI) [0.06, 0.21]. This effect of fiction reading was moderated by the comparison group (effects were greater when reading fiction was compared with watching fiction or reading nothing than when reading fiction was compared with reading nonfiction) and the outcome variable (significant effects emerged for empathy and mentalizing only). In Meta-Analysis 2 (559 effect sizes/114 studies reporting correlations), lifetime exposure to print fiction was linked with significant small-sized cognitive benefits, r = .16, 95% CI [0.13, 0.19]. This effect was moderated by outcome variable (effects were greatest for verbal abilities, followed by general cognitive abilities and empathy/mentalizing/outgroup judgments), fictionality of the print material (greater effects were found for fiction than nonfiction), publication status (published work exhibited greater effects than unpublished work), type of assessment measure (larger effects emerged when neither the outcome nor print exposure were assessed via self-report, than when either the outcome or print exposure were assessed via self-report), participant group (community samples showed greater effects than student samples), study design (greater effects were found for correlational than for experimental designs), and percentage of female participants (via a negative relationship with cognitive benefits). Together, these meta-analyses provide robust evidence for a small-sized positive relationship between reading fiction and cognitive benefits. Public Significance Statement This research project suggests that people who read a lot of fiction have better cognitive skills than people who read little or no fiction. These benefits are small in size across various cognitive skills, but of medium size for verbal and general cognitive abilities, for example, intelligence. Importantly, there is a stronger association between reading fiction and cognitive skills than between reading nonfiction and those skills. However, whether the benefits are caused by reading fiction or by one or more other variables remains to be determined through future research.</description><subject>Cognition</subject><subject>Cognition &amp; reasoning</subject><subject>Educational Measures</subject><subject>Empathy</subject><subject>Exposure</subject><subject>Fiction</subject><subject>Human</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Literature</subject><subject>Meta-analysis</subject><subject>Psychology</subject><subject>Reading</subject><subject>Theory of Mind</subject><subject>Theory of Mind - physiology</subject><issn>0096-3445</issn><issn>1939-2222</issn><issn>1939-2222</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp90U9rFDEYBvAgFrutXvwAEvAiwthk3kz-eCtLW4WWFqnnkM28s6TMTtYk07rf3ixbFTyYQ97Lj4fkfQh5y9knzkCd_VwjY4x3Gl6QBTdgmrael2TBmJENCNEdk5OcHypioOUrclxv1iqtF8Qu43oKJTwivRgG9CVTN_V0GVPC0RXMNA70G7o-TGt6GXwJcfpM758ivUuYcB1yqaOnN_NYwoiPONIbLK45n9y4y5hfk6PBjRnfPM9T8v3y4n75pbm-vfq6PL9uHDBZGtGBNojcKDaYHgTAIM0KpfJCamh75E7JzrWdU4oPK4bco1o53nljpDYeTsmHQ-42xR8z5mI3IXscRzdhnLOF-nMBUilZ6ft_6EOcU33vXqkWmG7rnv6rQDHZGaGr-nhQPsWcEw52m8LGpZ3lzO7LsX_Lqfjdc-S82mD_h_5uo4LmANzW2W3eeZdK8CNmP9c6prIPs7wDKy0XUsAv_JyYGw</recordid><startdate>202406</startdate><enddate>202406</enddate><creator>Wimmer, Lena</creator><creator>Currie, Gregory</creator><creator>Friend, Stacie</creator><creator>Wittwer, Jörg</creator><creator>Ferguson, Heather J.</creator><general>American Psychological Association</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7RZ</scope><scope>PSYQQ</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8434-1766</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202406</creationdate><title>Cognitive Effects and Correlates of Reading Fiction: Two Preregistered Multilevel Meta-Analyses</title><author>Wimmer, Lena ; Currie, Gregory ; Friend, Stacie ; Wittwer, Jörg ; Ferguson, Heather J.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a306t-45389ee1970f9d3433f69be67c46832de1a765a25a771fb0e1ce7ba15c99689c3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><topic>Cognition</topic><topic>Cognition &amp; reasoning</topic><topic>Educational Measures</topic><topic>Empathy</topic><topic>Exposure</topic><topic>Fiction</topic><topic>Human</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Literature</topic><topic>Meta-analysis</topic><topic>Psychology</topic><topic>Reading</topic><topic>Theory of Mind</topic><topic>Theory of Mind - physiology</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Wimmer, Lena</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Currie, Gregory</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Friend, Stacie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wittwer, Jörg</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ferguson, Heather J.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Access via APA PsycArticles® (ProQuest)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Psychology</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of experimental psychology. General</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Wimmer, Lena</au><au>Currie, Gregory</au><au>Friend, Stacie</au><au>Wittwer, Jörg</au><au>Ferguson, Heather J.</au><au>Brown-Schmidt, Sarah</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Cognitive Effects and Correlates of Reading Fiction: Two Preregistered Multilevel Meta-Analyses</atitle><jtitle>Journal of experimental psychology. General</jtitle><addtitle>J Exp Psychol Gen</addtitle><date>2024-06</date><risdate>2024</risdate><volume>153</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>1464</spage><epage>1488</epage><pages>1464-1488</pages><issn>0096-3445</issn><issn>1939-2222</issn><eissn>1939-2222</eissn><abstract>Despite significantly increasing research efforts, the psychological effects of reading fiction remain under debate. We present two preregistered meta-analyses synthesizing cognitive effects and correlates of reading fiction. In Meta-Analysis 1 (371 effect sizes/70 experiments), reading fiction led to significant small-sized cognitive benefits, g = 0.14, 95% confidence interval (CI) [0.06, 0.21]. This effect of fiction reading was moderated by the comparison group (effects were greater when reading fiction was compared with watching fiction or reading nothing than when reading fiction was compared with reading nonfiction) and the outcome variable (significant effects emerged for empathy and mentalizing only). In Meta-Analysis 2 (559 effect sizes/114 studies reporting correlations), lifetime exposure to print fiction was linked with significant small-sized cognitive benefits, r = .16, 95% CI [0.13, 0.19]. This effect was moderated by outcome variable (effects were greatest for verbal abilities, followed by general cognitive abilities and empathy/mentalizing/outgroup judgments), fictionality of the print material (greater effects were found for fiction than nonfiction), publication status (published work exhibited greater effects than unpublished work), type of assessment measure (larger effects emerged when neither the outcome nor print exposure were assessed via self-report, than when either the outcome or print exposure were assessed via self-report), participant group (community samples showed greater effects than student samples), study design (greater effects were found for correlational than for experimental designs), and percentage of female participants (via a negative relationship with cognitive benefits). Together, these meta-analyses provide robust evidence for a small-sized positive relationship between reading fiction and cognitive benefits. Public Significance Statement This research project suggests that people who read a lot of fiction have better cognitive skills than people who read little or no fiction. These benefits are small in size across various cognitive skills, but of medium size for verbal and general cognitive abilities, for example, intelligence. Importantly, there is a stronger association between reading fiction and cognitive skills than between reading nonfiction and those skills. However, whether the benefits are caused by reading fiction or by one or more other variables remains to be determined through future research.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>American Psychological Association</pub><pmid>38602788</pmid><doi>10.1037/xge0001583</doi><tpages>25</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8434-1766</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0096-3445
ispartof Journal of experimental psychology. General, 2024-06, Vol.153 (6), p.1464-1488
issn 0096-3445
1939-2222
1939-2222
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_3038436776
source MEDLINE; EBSCOhost APA PsycARTICLES
subjects Cognition
Cognition & reasoning
Educational Measures
Empathy
Exposure
Fiction
Human
Humans
Literature
Meta-analysis
Psychology
Reading
Theory of Mind
Theory of Mind - physiology
title Cognitive Effects and Correlates of Reading Fiction: Two Preregistered Multilevel Meta-Analyses
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-24T00%3A35%3A41IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Cognitive%20Effects%20and%20Correlates%20of%20Reading%20Fiction:%20Two%20Preregistered%20Multilevel%20Meta-Analyses&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20experimental%20psychology.%20General&rft.au=Wimmer,%20Lena&rft.date=2024-06&rft.volume=153&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=1464&rft.epage=1488&rft.pages=1464-1488&rft.issn=0096-3445&rft.eissn=1939-2222&rft_id=info:doi/10.1037/xge0001583&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E3072308200%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=3037065948&rft_id=info:pmid/38602788&rfr_iscdi=true