Openness to experience, absorption-like states, and the aesthetic, explanatory, and pragmatic effects of literary reading
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Although several measures of reading engagement (e.g., absorption, immersion) have been developed in recent years, the possibility that they reflect different constructs has not been systematically examined. The present study investigated two factorially independent forms of reading engagement measured by the Absorption-Like States Questionnaire (ASQ; Kuiken & Douglas, 2017 , 2018 ). We examined whether (a) expressive enactment (ASQ-EE) and integrative comprehension (ASQ-IC) differentially predict aesthetic, explanatory, and pragmatic reading outcomes; (b) whether the components and outcomes of ASQ-EE and ASQ-IC differ from those of another measure of reading engagement (the Story World Absorption Scale, SWAS; Kuijpers et al., 2014 ), and (c) whether ASQ-EE and ASQ-IC are differentially related to two measures of trait openness to experience: the Tellegen Absorption Scale ( Tellegen & Atkinson, 1974 ) and the Big Five Aspects Scale for Openness/Intellect; DeYoung et al., 2007 ).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it