Branches Book

BRANCHES

Figure 4 presents a comparison between subjects across all texts. The vertical scale is a percent of 100. 100 means strong activity, 0 means no activity. Since this is a relative scale (such that we do not have access to medical data), exact values of brain activities are not correlated to percent values. The bars represent one standard deviation. Ninety percent of Subject 2’s results were found to be outliers, and were thus excluded from the comparison. This is likely due to improper device control settings for that specific trial. It is evident that no apparent data grouping nor trend are present between individuals, which suggests that the literature does not induce a consistent focus response in the reader. Additionally, Figure 5 presents the difference of means graph. Each data point represents the average Focus response for each piece of literature. The vertical scale is adjusted to better visualize the results. It is evident in Figure 5 that the differences between texts are not significant. While there are a few texts that differ from others, no unique groups of literature form. Therefore, we can conclude that the literature did not induce significantly different responses, and that the deviation observed is due to natural variance in biological systems. Note the deviation between the two Hamlet excerpts, and The Great Gatsby and The Book Thief. These texts were chosen because they contain drastically different writing styles and topics. However, the results correlate their responses. This result indicates that differing literary elements do not impact the readers’ affective responses. However, an examination of the experimental limitations could explain these results, as discussed in the Conclusion. Conclusion: Human emotional responses to stimuli are influenced by many factors. While the immediate stimulus (literature in this case) can induce a response, the specific response is dependent on the individuals’ past experiences, immediate contexts, and characteristics. Because of this, the results indicate no significant difference between the literary genres. This result suggests that a reader’s emotional responses to literature impacts the subconscious, and is dependent on individual characteristics. In other words, a reader who is fascinated by linguistics might connect more strongly with an old-English text. Alternatively, an individual preparing for an exam in biology might respond more strongly to the science texts purely due to present circumstance. Thus, the results support the alternative hypothesis proposed previously. However, it is widely accepted that literature can influence emotion, so why were these responses not apparent? These results are likely due to experimental limitations. Three experimental limitations are immediately evident: device sensitivity (signal strength), raw data access, and sample size.

254