Evaluating Sci-fi Readers’ Perspective: Correlation between Immersive Emotion and Speculative Factors
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.52731/liir.v003.062Keywords:
cognitive value, evaluation factors of science fiction, narrative engagement scale, science fiction prototypingAbstract
The narrative experience in stories influences subsequent beliefs related to it but no quantitative research has been conducted in the sci-fi genre. Therefore, this study identified factors for the quantitative evaluation of the narrative experience of science fiction (sci-fi). Data on sci-fi readers were collected using a questionnaire survey in 2022. The questionnaire items were developed based on the narrative engagement scale and sci-fi studies. The scale explains factors consisting of the narrative experience that novels bring to readers. A total of 978 samples were statistically analyzed using exploratory factor analysis. As a result, three latent constructs were found: “comprehension,” “immersion,” and “speculation,” which is a specific factor in sci-fi. Next, a correlation analysis was performed for the three constructs. The results showed that the correlation between immersion and speculation was higher than any other correlation. The study’s findings such as: (1) the narrative engagement scales could be applied to sci-fi evaluation, (2) the identification of an evaluation factor unique to the narrative experience of sci-fi “speculation” and (3) clarification of the relationship between the emotional immersive factor and speculation factor, suggests that the influence of sci-fi on immersive emotion changes the future perspective of readers.
References
R. Busselle and H. Bilandzic, “Measuring Narrative Engagement,” Media Psychology, vol. 12, no. 4, 2009, pp. 321-347.
J.E. Escalas, “Self-referencing and Persuasion: Narrative Transportation versus Analytical Elaboration,” Journal of Consumer Research, vol. 33, no. 4, 2007, pp. 421-429.
M. Green, “Transportation into Narrative Worlds: The Role of Prior Knowledge and Perceived Realism,” Discourse Processes, vol. 38, no. 2, 2004, pp. 247-266.
M.C. Green, J. Garst, T.C. Brock, and S. Chung, “Fact Versus Fiction Labeling: Persuasion Parity Despite Heightened Scrutiny of Fact,” Media Psychology, vol. 8, no. 3, 2006, pp. 267-285.
M.D. Slater, D. Rouner, and M. Long, “Television Dramas and Support for Controversial Public Policies: Effects and Mechanisms,” Journal of Communication, vol. 56, no. 2, 2006, pp. 235-252.
S. Kiyokawa, D. Miyamoto, M. Nishinaka, Y. Namba, T. Minegishi, R. Miyata, and H. Ohsawa, “Science Fiction Prototyping Method Improves Readers’ Narrative Experiences,” IIAI Letters on Informatics and Interdisciplinary Research (Printing), 2023.
F. Sukalla, H. Bilandzic, P.D. Bolls, and R.W. Busselle, “Embodiment of Narrative Engagement: Connecting Self-reported Narrative Engagement to Psychophysiological Measures,” Journal of Media Psychology: Theories, Methods, and Applications, vol. 28, no. 4, 2015, pp. 175-186.
D. Samur, M. Tops, R. Slapšinskaitė, and S.L. Koole, “Getting Lost in a Story: How Narrative Engagement Emerges from Narrative Perspective and Individual Differences in Alexithymia,” Cognition and Emotion, vol. 35, no. 3, 2021, pp. 576-588.
D. Suvin, “The Strugatskys and their ‘Snail on the Slope’,” Foundation, 1979, pp. 64-75.
D. Suvin, Metamorphoses of Science Fiction: On the Poetics and History of a Literary Genre, G. Canavan, eds., 2016, Peter Lang.
D. Suvin, “An Approach to Epistemology, Literature, and the Poet’s Politics,” Annual Review of the Faculty of Philosophy, vol. 41, no. 1, 2016, pp. 437-457.
I. Csicsery-Ronay, Jr., “What Do We Mean When We Say ‘Global Science Fiction’? Reflections on a New Nexus,” Science Fiction Studies, vol. 39, no. 3, 2012, pp. 478-493.
P. Stockwell, The Poetics of Science Fiction, 2014, Routledge.
S. Hase “With a Headwind,” SF Thinking: Skills for Thinking about the Future of Your Business and Yourself, D. Miyamoto, A. Fujimoto, and H. Sekine, eds., Diamond Inc., 2021, pp. 262-290.
J. Hayashi, “Hope in the Midst of Calamity,” SF Thinking: Skills for Thinking about the Future of Your Business and Yourself, D. Miyamoto, A. Fujimoto, and H. Sekine, eds., Diamond Inc., 2021, pp. 297-315.
Y. Matsuzaki, “Saury Fish, Bitter or Sour?” SF Thinking: Skills for Thinking about the Future of Your Business and Yourself, D. Miyamoto, A. Fujimoto, and H. Sekine, eds. Diamond Inc., 2021, pp. 322-342.
K. Shibata, “Autumn Thunder,” SF Thinking: Skills for Thinking about the Future of Your Business and Yourself, D. Miyamoto, A. Fujimoto, and H. Sekine, eds., Diamond Inc., 2021, pp. 235-255.
F. Takahashi, “Emotions of the Sea,” SF Thinking: Skills for Thinking about the Future of Your Business and Yourself, D. Miyamoto, A. Fujimoto, and H. Sekine, eds. Diamond Inc., 2021, pp. 213-228.
A. Fujimoto, D. Miyamoto, and H. Sekine, SF Thinking, Diamond Co., 2021.
B.D. Johnson, “Science Fiction Prototyping: Designing the Future with Science Fiction,” Synthesis Lectures on Computer Science, vol. 3, no. 1, 2011, pp. 1-190.
M. Nishinaka, Y. Kishita, H. Masuda, and K. Shirahada, “Concept of Future Prototyping Methodology to Enhance Value Creation within Future Contexts,” Proceedings of AAAI (the Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence) 2019 Spring Symposium Series, March. 25-27, 2019, CEUR Workshop Proceedings, 2448. http://doi.org/10.57372/00011392
M. Nishinaka and K. Shirahada, “Emergent Process of Shared Leadership for Innovative Knowledge Creation: Text-Mining Approach to Discussion Data,” International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management, 2350013, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1142/S021987702350013X
L.R. Fabrigar and D.T. Wegener, Explanatory Factor Analysis: Understanding Statistics, 2012, Oxford University Press.
F. Bell, G. Fletcher, A. Greenhill, M. Griffiths, and R. McLean, “Science Fiction Prototypes: Visionary Technology Narratives Between Futures,” Futures, 2013, vol. 50, pp. 5-14.
