Fact<i>vs</i>fiction—how paratextual information shapes our reading processes

TLDR

Stories can be factual or fictional, yet little is known about the neurocognitive processes that differentiate reading of factual versus fictional content. The study investigated how reading short narratives labeled as factual or fictional affects brain activity. Neuroimaging was employed while participants read short factual or fictional stories to capture activation patterns. Reading factual narratives activated action‑based reconstruction networks and produced shorter reaction times, whereas fictional narratives engaged constructive simulation networks, consistent with imagination research.

Abstract

Our life is full of stories: some of them depict real-life events and were reported, e.g. in the daily news or in autobiographies, whereas other stories, as often presented to us in movies and novels, are fictional. However, we have only little insights in the neurocognitive processes underlying the reading of factual as compared to fictional contents. We investigated the neurocognitive effects of reading short narratives, labeled to be either factual or fictional. Reading in a factual mode engaged an activation pattern suggesting an action-based reconstruction of the events depicted in a story. This process seems to be past-oriented and leads to shorter reaction times at the behavioral level. In contrast, the brain activation patterns corresponding to reading fiction seem to reflect a constructive simulation of what might have happened. This is in line with studies on imagination of possible past or future events.