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 to significant small-sized cognitive benefits, = 0.

Two routes to perspective: simulation and rule-use as approaches to mentalizing.

We review evidence relating to children's ability to acknowledge false beliefs within a simulation account according to which our focus is set by default to the world as we know it: hence, our current beliefs assume salience over beliefs that do not fall into this category. The model proposes that the ease with which we imaginatively shift from this default depends on the salience of our current belief, relative to the salience of the belief that is being simulated. However, children do use a rule-based approach for mentalizing in some contexts, which has the advantage of protecting them from the salience of their own belief.

How does narrative cue children's perspective taking?

Three experiments with a total of 120 children between 4 and 9 years of age revealed systematic errors in the recall of deictic terms from a narrative. In some cases, the terms were inconsistent with the perspective of a protagonist. The errors occurred in all age groups and were at the same level whether the protagonist was "good" or "bad" but were less common in a narrative that did not include a protagonist.