Embedded Files
Research Methods and Procedures
Research Methods and Procedures
The Society maintains a collection of research instruments and research protocols that are frequently used in empirical studies of literature. Because some of these materials are copyrighted, access in a few cases is restricted to members of specific research coalitions. An overview of these materials is provided below. Please navigate to the specific research coalition web pages for more details.
The Society maintains a Cumulative (Zotero) Bibliography dedicated to empirical studies of literature (and a few closely related topics).
- Computer Analysis of Metrical Structure
- Metricalizer (Bobenhausen & Hammerich, 2015)
- Manual and Automated Data Analyses
- CLARIN-D
- MAUS
_____________________________________________
_____________________________________________
- Epistemology Measures
- Literature Epistemic Cognition Scale (LECS; Yukhymenko-Lescroart et al., 2016)
- Reader Beliefs Inventory (RBI; Schraw & Bruning, 1996)
- Assessing Inferences
- Taxonomy of inference categories generated during literary comprehension (Magilano, Baggett, & Graesser, 1996)
- Identifying types of literary inferences in open-ended responses (McCarthy & Goldman, 2015)
_____________________________________________
_____________________________________________
- Author (Genre) Familiarity Scales
- Author Recognition Test (Genres) (ART–G) (Mar & Rain, 2015)
- Theory of Mind (Empathy) Measures
- Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test (Revised) (RMET-R) (Baron-Cohen, Wheelwright, & Hill, 2001)
_____________________________________________
_____________________________________________
- Character Identification Scales
- Cohen Identification Scale (Revised) (Cohen, 2001)
- Identification with the Character Scale (Igartua & Barrios (2012).
_____________________________________________
_____________________________________________
- Mood Scales
- Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) (Watson, Clark, & Tellegen, 1988)
- Qualitative Methods
- Interpretive Phenomenological Analysis (Smith, Flowers, & Larkin, 2009)
Report abuse