Explicit Instruction of Pathos in Introductory College Literature

1

Author: Skemp, Andrew A.

Title: Explicit Instruction of Pathos in Introductory College Literature: Enhancing

Literature Students’ Empathic Connections with Fictional Characters

The accompanying research report is submitted to the University of Wisconsin-Stout, Graduate School in partial

completion of the requirements for the Graduate Degree/ Major: Technical and Professional Communication MS Degree

Research Advisor: Emi Stuemke, Dr.

Submission Term/Year: Fall/2018

Number of Pages: 41

Style Manual Used: American Psychological Association, 6th edition ☒ I have adhered to the Graduate School Research Guide and have proofread my work. ☒ I understand that this research report must be officially approved by the Graduate School. Additionally, by signing and submitting this form, I (the author(s) or copyright owner) grant the University of Wisconsin-Stout the non-exclusive right to reproduce, translate, and/or distribute this submission (including abstract) worldwide in print and electronic format and in any medium, including but not limited to audio or video. If my research includes proprietary information, an agreement has been made between myself, the company, and the University to submit a thesis that meets course-specific learning outcomes and CAN be published. There will be no exceptions to this permission. ☒ I attest that the research report is my original work (that any copyrightable materials have been used with the permission of the original authors), and as such, it is automatically protected by the laws, rules, and regulations of the U.S. Copyright Office. ☒ My research advisor has approved the content and quality of this paper.

STUDENT: NAME: Andrew Skemp DATE: 12/21/2018

ADVISOR: (Committee Chair if MS Plan A or EdS Thesis or Field Project/Problem):

NAME: Dr. Emi Stuemke DATE: 12/21/2018 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----

This section for MS Plan A Thesis or EdS Thesis/Field Project papers only Committee members (other than your advisor who is listed in the section above)

1. CMTE MEMBER’S NAME: DATE: 2. CMTE MEMBER’S NAME: DATE:

3. CMTE MEMBER’S NAME: DATE:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------

This section to be completed by the Graduate School

This final research report has been approved by the Graduate School.

Director, Office of Graduate Studies: DATE:

2

Skemp, Andrew A. Explicit Instruction of Pathos in Introductory College Literature:

Enhancing Literature Students’ Empathic Connections with Fictional Characters

Abstract

Literature instructors do not typically teach students about rhetoric and how rhetorical concepts

might apply to literature. One rhetorical concept relevant to literary studies is pathos, an appeal

to the emotions of the audience. In this field project study, I test the idea that explicit instruction

in the rhetorical concept of pathos may make students who read literary fiction more likely to

form empathic connections with fictional characters. Using a quantitative approach, I found that

students who heard a lecture about pathos reported more connection with a main character, and

also identified more feelings that character might be experiencing when compared to students

who heard a lecture about the elements of fiction. Through qualitative analysis, I found that

students who heard the lecture about pathos were more likely to share detailed personal

connections with the character’s situation.

This field project study shows that for my sample group, explicit instruction in the

rhetorical concept of pathos enhances the reader’s ability to form an empathic connection with

fictional characters. The results suggest that instructors of college literature courses may want to

consider adding an explicit instruction of rhetoric, and of rhetorical pathos in particular, to their

curriculum.

3

Table of Contents

Abstract ........................................................................................................................................... 2

List of Tables .................................................................................................................................. 4

Chapter I: Introduction .................................................................................................................... 5

Chapter II: Methods ........................................................................................................................ 8

Chapter III: Results ....................................................................................................................... 13

Quantitative Data .............................................................................................................. 13

Qualitative Data ................................................................................................................ 17

Reliability Testing: Qualitative Comparisons Between Different Evaluators ...... 24

Summary ........................................................................................................................... 27

Chapter IV: Analysis and Next Steps in Practical Application .................................................... 29

Analysis............................................................................................................................. 29

Next Steps in Practical Application .................................................................................. 33

References ..................................................................................................................................... 35

Appendix A: Part 1 ....................................................................................................................... 37

Appendix B: Part 2........................................................................................................................ 39

Appendix C: Part 3........................................................................................................................ 40

Appendix D: Part 4 ....................................................................................................................... 41

4

List of Tables

Table 1: Survey Question Results ................................................................................................. 14

Table 2: Differences Between Treatment Groups' Question 1 Responses ................................... 21

Table 3: Differences Between Treatment Groups' Question 2 Responses ................................... 24

Table 4: Presence/Absence of Personal Details in Treatment Groups' Responses to Questions 1

and 2 .................................................................................................................................. 26

Table 5: Level of Personal Detail Provided in Treatment Groups' Responses to Questions 1 and 2

........................................................................................................................................... 27

5

Chapter I: Introduction

Higher education is increasingly perceived as a service for students, not a privilege, and

the value of many college courses, including literature courses, is scrutinized. I am a

Communication Skills instructor at Western Technical College in La Crosse, WI. I have a

Master’s degree in literature, and my teaching assignments include introductory-level literature

courses. As a college literature instructor, I believe studying literature can help students hone the

reading, writing, research, and critical thinking skills they will need in other college courses and

in the workplace. But recent psychology research, including Mar (2011), Kidd and Costano

(2013), Johnson, Huffman, and Jasper (2014), and Oatley (2016), suggests college literature

classes can provide an additional benefit: readers build skills of social perception and empathy

when they make empathic connections with fictional characters.

Interest in this topic is not limited to the field of psychology, but includes literature and

medicine as well. In literary studies, Keen (2007) has surveyed the centuries-old debate over the

idea that readers’ social behavior is influenced as a result of empathizing with fictional

characters. Keen (2015) has also provided a literary theory defining narrative empathy and how

it works. In scholarship on methods for educating medical students, Hester and Schleifer (2016)

claim that literature courses can help teach medical students empathy needed for patient

interactions, and Graham et. al (2016) find medical students who study literature maintain or

increase their scores on empathy tests when compared to medical students who do not study

literature.

In light of the research in psychology, literary studies, and medicine, some college

literature instructors may wish to encourage and strengthen students’ emotional connections with

the fictional characters in assigned reading. Pursuing this learning goal may increase students’

6

empathy and sharpen their interpersonal communication skills, and it may carry other benefits as

well. If students experience enhanced emotional connections with fictional characters, they may

find the reading experience more enjoyable, they may be more engaged in class discussions of

assigned reading, and they may be more successful in achieving learning outcomes. These

benefits, along with strengthened interpersonal communication skills, could help prepare

students for success in various academic, professional, and civic settings. Teaching that

strengthens students’ emotional connections with the fictional characters could also benefit

English departments, colleges, and universities; if students are more engaged and successful in

college literature courses, this could result in increased retention, higher grades and pass rates,

higher enrollment, and better results on student course evaluations and student satisfaction

surveys.

If enhancing students’ emotional connections to fictional characters is a learning goal,

learning about the rhetorical pathos of literature has the potential to help students achieve this

goal. Using rhetorical concepts to teach college literature has been advocated in scholarship by

Phelan (2010), Wilder (2012), and Fuss and Gleason (2016). However, none of these discuss

using rhetorical pathos. Pathos is a communication technique meant to elicit an emotional

response from an audience, a technique that can be utilized in any communication medium,

including literature. Discussions of the rhetorical pathos of literature span historically from

Aristotle in the classical period (Gould, 1990/2014, p. xxi), to rhetoricians of the belles lettres

movement in the 17th and 18th centuries (Bizzell & Herzberg, 2001, p. 805), to contemporary

literary scholarship such as the article “Oedipa’s Unsentimental Journey: Preempted Pathos in

The Crying of Lot 49” (Miller, 2017, p. 69). Given this history, rhetorical pathos may be a useful

vehicle for exploring the emotional impact of literature and encouraging literature students’

7

empathic connections with fictional characters in assigned reading. Research completed for this

field project suggests that, while scholarship exists on rhetoric as a teaching tool in literary

studies, little or nothing has been written about teaching rhetorical pathos of literature in

undergraduate college literature courses.

If a college literature instructor would like students to learn about rhetorical pathos of

literature, what might she or he do to accomplish this? One option would be to inform students

about pathos of literature using explicit instruction, a type of instruction that is “systematic” and

“direct” (Archer & Hughs, 2010, p. vii). Both Alfieri et al. (2011) and Abbuhl (2011) find

explicit instruction is more beneficial when compared to a discovery-based approach that uses

minimal guidance and implicit prompts. This scholarship suggests an approach to teaching the

rhetorical pathos of literature: rather than waiting for students to discover on their own how

literature can elicit an emotional response, the instructor could openly share the concept of

rhetorical pathos of literature and then encourage students to apply that information when

completing assigned reading. My research project will test this explicit approach to teaching

pathos of literature. The goal of the project is to answer this three-part question: will students in

introductory-level college literature courses who undergo explicit instruction of the rhetorical

pathos of literature 1) self-report more empathic connection with fictional characters, 2) self-

report more enjoyment of literature, and/or 3) demonstrate greater comprehension of the material

when compared to students who do not undergo explicit instruction of the pathos of literature

before reading the same literary work?

8

Chapter II: Methods

In spring of 2017 and spring of 2018 I taught one section of Introduction to Literature at

Western Technical College (WTC). Introduction to Literature is designed to introduce students

to college-level literary studies and to meet curricular standards such that the credits will

successfully transfer to four-year institutions. The student population at WTC interested in

receiving credit for transfer courses such as Introduction to Literature is steadily growing. In

spring of 2017, 17 students (8 females and 9 males) enrolled in my Introduction to Literature

course, and in spring of 2018, 19 students (11 females and 7 males) enrolled in my Introduction

to Literature course. Each of these blended sections met in person once a week for two hours

and had an additional weekly online component. The curriculum and homework schedule for

each of these sections was nearly identical. The semester was divided into four units. The first

three were focused on different literary genres, one on poetry, one on fiction, and one on drama.

The final unit introduced students to literary theory. I conducted this research study during the

thirteenth of our scheduled fifteen class meetings, which occurred the second week of the literary

theory unit. Prior the day of the study, there had been no discussion or explicit instruction of the

rhetorical concept of pathos in the class. We had, instead, discussed literary elements such as

figurative language in poetry, character development in fiction, and irony in drama. The only

assignment in class that indirectly addressed rhetorical pathos asked the students to respond to a

Walt Whitman poem; after reading the poem the students were asked to write a short description

of the poem’s speaker and to explain if they had ever met anyone like the speaker before. There

was no discussion of or instruction on rhetoric or pathos as a part of this assignment.

For each section and year, the methods used in the study were the same. The one

difference was that qualitative data was not collected in the spring of 2017, but was collected in

9

the spring of 2018. Qualitative methods are discussed below. On the day I conducted the

research, I began by randomly assigning my seventeen students into two groups, Group 1 and

Group 2. Group 1 was then asked to move to a different room in 2017 and Group 2 was moved

to a different room in 2018. This meant that the 2 groups would be separate during the study.

After the two groups were separated, I gave each group a different five minute lecture. For

Group 1 (Literature Group), my lecture was a review of the elements of fiction. I listed the

elements on the whiteboard, reviewed the basic definition of each element, and reviewed the way

elements can work together to create themes. For Group 2 (Rhetoric Group), my lecture

introduced rhetorical pathos. I sketched the rhetorical triangle (ethos, pathos, logos) on the

whiteboard, defined the three modes of persuasion, and explained their origin in classical

rhetoric. I then provided a more detailed definition of rhetorical pathos, and I connected pathos

to literature by noting how famous philosophers have identified pathos as a way to describe

literature’s power to affect the emotions of readers and create connections with fictional

characters. Group 1 was randomly assigned to receive their lecture first in 2017, and second in

2018. While the first group received their lecture, the other group was asked to draft an outline

of an unrelated essay assigned for the following week in class. After lecturing the first group, I

then lectured the second group.

Immediately after each group received their five minute lecture I asked them to read the

short story “Good People” by David Foster Wallace (2016). This story was not chosen

especially for my research; it had been on the schedule since the beginning of the semester and

happened to be the assigned reading on the day I chose to conduct the study. The story’s main

characters are Lane and Sheri, two young, white, Christian, working class adults who are

enrolled at the local junior college. The setting is a lakeside park in present day Peoria, Illinois

10

where Lane and Sheri sit together at a picnic table. As the two characters sit still and quiet, the

third-person narrator describes Lane’s memories and feelings. The narrator reveals that Lane

and Sheri are in a relationship, Sheri is pregnant, and Lane is unsure if Sheri will decide to have

an abortion. Lane feels that Sheri is a good person who is more mature and academically

talented than he is. Lane wants Sheri to have an abortion, but he also believes this is sinful and

he should support her no matter what. Lane believes he does not love Sheri, but he feels he

should not tell her even though she may already know. Lane wishes he could now find

something to do or to say, but he cannot. The story ends when Sheri turns to Lane as though she

is about to say something to him.

Both groups were allowed to finish the story at their own pace. I waited until all students

had finished reading the story, then I handed out Part 1 of the survey (Appendix A). I did this to

ensure that none of the students would see the survey questions until they were completely

finished reading. The survey had three parts. Part 1 had sixteen questions. Questions 1-14

asked respondents to rate characters or to rate the story on a scale of 1-10. In question 15,

students were asked to “list some of the feelings you think that Lane might be experiencing in

this story.” Question 16 asked students to do the same for Sheri. After all students had

completed Part One, I collected their responses. Then, I handed out Part Two of the survey

(Appendix B). Part Two provided students with a list of 63 traits and asked them to circle traits

they felt described Lane. The traits were a mix of positive, negative, and neutral words that

could reasonably be used to describe either Lane or Sheri. Once all students had finished their

response to Part Two, I collected the responses and then handed out Part 3 (Appendix C). Part 3

provided students with exactly the same list of 63 traits as Part 2 and asked them to circle all the

traits they felt described Sheri. Once all students had finished their responses to Part 3,

11

responses were collected. At no point were limits imposed on how long students could take to

complete any part of the survey; all students finished in less than an hour during the two-hour

class period.

Part Four (Appendix D) consists of a list of four open-ended questions and is designed to

collect qualitative data. This survey was used in 2018, but not in 2017, so this section of the

project has a smaller sample size (N = 18). question 1 asks the respondent if she/he, similar to

the characters in the story, has ever been unsure of what to do next. Question 2 asks the

respondent how she/he would add to the end of the story, question 3 asks the respondent what

she/he believes Lane will be doing five years after the story ends, and question 4 asks the

respondent what she/he believes Sheri will be doing five years after the story ends. The

questions were presented in a discussion board format on the class’ Blackboard website.

Students were asked to type answers and to post their answers anonymously on discussion

boards on our class website. Students were given as much time as needed to complete answers.

Each question had a separate discussion forum of its own, and students were asked to

anonymously post their answers to question 1 on the question 1 discussion board, answers to

question 2 on the question 2 discussion board, and so on. Once all students finished posting

answers, they were asked to read the posts for each question and to reply anonymously to at least

one post for each question. At no point were limits imposed on how long students could take to

complete any part of their discussion board responses or their survey responses.

This field project study was submitted to UW-Stout’s Institutional Review Board and was

approved. Before the students participated in this study, they were informed that results were

completely anonymous, that their responses would in no way affect their grade in the course, and

12

that participation in the study was voluntary. All 36 students chose to participate in the project.

For a full copy of the survey, see Appendices A, B, C, and D.

13

Chapter III: Results

In this chapter I present the two types of data collected over the course of this project and

summarize key findings. In the quantitative data section of this chapter, I present data collected

after I administered Part One, Part Two, and Part Three of the survey to two separate sections of

Introduction to Literature I taught at Western Technical College. For statistical analyses, I

combined data from both sections and present the data in table format. I used two sample t tests

to reject the null hypothesis that the topic of the instructional lecture would not affect how

students responded on the surveys. In the qualitative data section of this chapter, I present data

collected after I administered Part Four of the survey to one section of Introduction to Literature

and present the data using bulleted lists and tables. For qualitative analyses, I read qualitative

responses, blind of treatment group, and I noted differences. A second evaluator, also blind of

treatment group, repeated these methods. I then compared reliability between evaluators. In the

summary section of this chapter, I provide a list of three notable findings.

Quantitative Data

After I collected the surveys I entered the data into Excel and used the JMP statistical

program to determine if the mean (average) responses to survey questions between Group 1

(Literature) and Group 2 (Rhetoric) were significantly different. My null hypothesis is that there

is no difference in the mean value of responses between the groups or, in other words, that the

topic of the instructional lecture would not affect how students responded on the surveys. I used

two-sample t-tests to test this null hypothesis and determine if lecture exposure did influence

survey response. The following table outlines the results for the 18 survey questions:

14

Table 1

Survey Questions Results

Questions Mean response Literature

Mean Response Rhetoric

T ratio (degrees of freedom in parentheses)

P value

1. Do you feel a connection to Lane?

5.2 6.5 T(33) = 2.04 P = 0.04

2. Do you feel a connection to Sheri?

5.2 5.6 T(33) =0.52 P = 0.60

3. Could you imagine yourself in Lane’s situation?

5.9 5.4 T (33) = -1.58 P = 0.57

4. Could you imagine yourself in Sheri’s situation?

5.2 6.1 T (32) = 1.09 P = 0.28

5. Would it be stressful to be in Lane’s situation?

8.2 8.5 T (28) = 0.38 P = 0.70

6. Would it be stressful to be in Sheri’s situation?

8.4 8.7 T (33) = 0.47 P = 0.66

7. Does Lane remind you of anyone you know?

6.3 6.7 T (33) = 0.35 P = 0.73

8. Does Sheri remind you of anyone you know?

7.1 7.8 T (32) = 0.73 P = 0.47

9. Do you like Lane?

5.2 5.6 T (32) = 0.54 P = 0.80

10. Do you like Sheri?

6.3 6.9 T (34) = 1.06 P = 0.30

11.Would you want to read a story about what Lane and Sheri are doing a year later?

6.8 6.8 T(13) = 0 P = 1.00

12. How likely would you be to read another story by this author?

5.8 6.3 T (34) = 0.69 P = 0.49

15

13. How easy was this story to understand?

6.3 6.3 T (34) = 0 P = 1.00

14. Compared to other stories we’ve read in class, how good was this story?

6.0 6.2 T (33) = 0.28 P = 0.77

15. List some of the feelings you think that Lane might be experiencing in this story.

3.3 4.3 T (29) = 1.69 P = 0.10

16. List some of the feelings you think that Sheri might be experiencing in this story.

3.4 4.4 T (29) = 1.64 P = 0.10

17. Circle the words that describe Lane.

16.5 20.8 T (30) = 1.69 P = 0.10

18. Circle the words that describe Sheri.

18.6 26.1 T (31) = 2.33 P = 0.03

The first 14 questions on the survey asked the students to rate their reaction by circling a

number from 1 to 10 that corresponds to their response. On all of these questions 1 was a weak

response and 10 was a strong response. For example, for question 1, “Do you feel a connection

to Lane?” 1 corresponded to “not at all” and 10 corresponded to “very much so.” The numbers

1-10 were set up next to each other to represent a gradient between these two extremes and

students circled one number. For questions 2-14 there were no significant effects of the topic of

the lecture on the average responses on the survey. These results support the null hypothesis that

lecture type does not affect survey responses, i.e. the two groups would have the same responses

on the survey regardless of which lecture they heard. These results do not support my research

hypothesis that students who receive explicit instruction on pathos are more likely to self-report

an empathic connection with fictional characters. They also do not provide support for the idea

that instruction on pathos might make a piece of literature easier to understand or make students

more likely to want to read.

16

In contrast to the questions above, lecture type did affect survey responses for question

#1, “Do you feel a connection to Lane?” For this question, the t-test I conducted to compare

mean survey responses between the Literature Group (Mean=5.2, SD=1.9) and the Rhetoric

Group (Mean=6.5, SD=(2.1) did show a significant difference (t(33)=2.04, p=0.0495).

Specifically, this result suggests that students who listened to the lecture on the rhetorical

concept of pathos were more likely to report feeling a connection to Lane than were the students

who listened to the lecture on literary elements. This result provides evidence to reject my null

hypothesis, i.e. there are significant data to suggest that students who receive explicit instruction

on pathos are more likely to self-report an empathic connection with fictional characters.

For Part 2 and Part 3, (Questions 15-18) students were asked to either list some of the

emotions the characters might be feeling or were asked to circle words from a list of 63 traits that

could describe either Lane or Sheri. Results for questions 15-17 all suggest a trend that students

who receive explicit instruction in the rhetorical concept of pathos either list or circle more

words to describe the characters. For “List some of the feelings you think Lane might be

experiencing” the Literature Group listed fewer words (Mean= 3.3 feelings, SD= 1.3) than the

Rhetoric Group (Mean=4.3 feelings, SD=1.9), t (29) = 1.69, p = 0.10. Similarly, for “List some

of the feelings you think Sheri might be experiencing the Literature Group listed fewer words

(Mean for literature= 3.4 feelings SD= 1.4) than the Rhetoric Group (Mean for literature=4.4

feelings, SD=2.1), t (29) = 1.64, p = 0.10. Finally, for the direction “Circle the words that

describe Lane” the Literature Group on average circled fewer words (Mean for literature= 16.5

SD =6.6 ) than the Rhetoric Group did (Mean for rhetoric= 20.8 words SD =8.2 ). However,

even though the average number of words listed or circled are all higher under the Rhetoric

Group for all three of these questions (15-18), these results had p values of 0.10, which is not

17

statistically significant based on the p value of less than 0.05. Because of the fact that the

averages are all higher for those in the Rhetoric Group, and because the p values are close to 0.5,

it would be interesting to pursue this part of the research study further, to determine if this trend

would reach significance with a larger sample size in future studies.

The results for question 18, on the other hand, were statistically significant in this study.

For “Circle the words that describe Sheri” students who heard the lecture on rhetorical pathos

circled on average more words for Sheri (Mean for rhetoric=26.1 words, SD=10.4) than students

who heard the lecture on elements of fiction (Mean for literature=18.6 feelings, SD=2.1),

resulting t (31) = 2.33, p = 0.03. This result suggests that students who listened to a lecture about

the rhetorical concept of pathos before reading ascribed more feelings to the main character than

those students who heard about elements of fiction before reading. Collectively, these results for

#18, and the trend seen from questions #15-17 suggest that the experience of hearing about

rhetoric makes students more likely to list feelings the characters may be experiencing and more

likely to circle more words from a large list of character traits. The result from #1 additionally

suggests that a lecture on pathos increases a reader’s tendency to make an empathic connection

with a character. Overall, these results support my hypothesis that explicit instruction in rhetoric

makes students more likely to form an empathic connection with literary characters.

Qualitative Data

After completing the survey described above, in 2018 students were given the

opportunity to respond in a more open ended way to the four questions on the blackboard

website. One student chose to leave before this part of the research, resulting in nine students in

the literature treatment and nine students in the rhetoric treatment. This part of the study was not

included in my initial pilot study in 2017, so the sample size is smaller (N = 18, 9 per treatment

18

group). To analyze these data, with the help of an assistant who kept track of group identity, I

blindly read the two sets of answers, i.e. I read each set of answers without knowing what

treatment that set was from (literature vs. rhetoric) and recorded any notable qualitative

differences. In my opinion, two questions provided noteworthy differences. The first question

that students were asked to respond to was: “In this story, a character is unsure what to do next.

Have you ever been in a situation like this? If yes, explain.” Those answers later assigned to the

Literature Group dealt typically with decisions related to jobs and college. The two responses in

the Literature Group that dealt with more intense personal situations alluded to the situation

without providing details about it or identifying a specific problem the respondent was dealing

with.

The following are examples of the responses to question 1 (In this story, a character is

unsure what to do next. Have you ever been in a situation like this? If yes, explain) in the two

treatment groups.

Literature Group responses to question 1:

1. Yes, I have been in a situation like this before. For example, when I had to decide

weather to have a job my first year in college or not. I decided not to because I was

going to be taking a lot of classes and wasn't going to have time.

2. Yes i have been in a situation like this one before. Honestly im currently in a situation

where im unsure what to do next. As my time here at TC is coming to an end im in a

position where im forced to select what I want to do next. I need to figure out where I

want to transfer and what exactly i want to do with my life.

19

3. Yes I always come into a situation where I am unsure about something like school for

example. I wasn't sure what I wanted to do for the rest of my life . It took a lot of time

and thought.

4. Yes, I have been in a situation of what to do next. A lot of times for me it involves

school, friends, and family.

5. Yes I have. I have been in many situations in which I did not know how to proceed. I

often get mixed up in bad situations that I should not have been in in the first place.

In contrast, responses later ascribed to the Rhetoric Group elected to provide details about less

vague, more personal topics including bullying, pregnancy, breaking up with a partner, and

suicide. Students in the rhetoric treatment not only identified an empathic connection, but also

voluntarily chose to provide details about that situation.

Rhetoric Group responses to question 1:

1. Yes I have, I have been in a situation throughout many years of high school where

there was intense bullying going on where I was the subject. I dealt with a lot of

doubt and I was very ashamed in myself to the point of self harm and suicidal

thoughts. I had to make a decision to accept help from my parents and professionals

for depression or my doctor was recommending that I should be sent away to a

treatment facility.

2. I have been in a situation like that. I was on the verge of a relationship with someone

and the person I was with weren’t emotionally ready to be in a serious relationship, so

we both knew it wasn't going to go anywhere any time soon, but we didn't want to

stop being around each other, We knew what we had to do but we didn't want to do it.

We were unsure of what the next step should be because either way it would have

20

sucked. Staying with that person wouldn't have been honest, but leaving that person

would have been lonely.

3. I think everyone has been in a situation in which they were unsure of what to do next.

My situation came in the form of job interviews. I started applying for jobs in Feb.

and after the interviewing process was over, I wasn't sure of what to do next. Do I call

them. do I wait for them to call me? I ended up calling them and they told the

positions have been filled.

4. Yes. In middle school I was bullied to the point that I left, turning to home schooling

to further my education. Only to be unsuccessful, as the teachers were unwilling to

help and in other words, very unreliable. Beforehand, I have been an A+ student, on

the honor roll, and now I was failing, unsure of what to do next. Where was I going to

go from here?

5. Of course. I've done a lot of traveling in the last 3 years. Plenty of times I've been

stranded with little to no money not knowing what to do. I'm also not a stranger to

pregnancy scares.

The following table below captures some of the differences between treatment groups:

21

Table 2

Differences Between Treatment Groups’ Question 1 Responses

Literature Treatment, student responses Rhetoric Treatment, student responses

decide weather to have a job

intense bullying going on... very ashamed in myself to the point of self harm and suicidal thoughts... depression...treatment facility

im forced to select what I want to do next…what exactly i want to do with my life.

relationship with someone and the person I was with weren't emotionally ready

I am unsure about something like school for example

job interviews. I started applying for jobs in Feb. and after the interviewing process was over, I wasn't sure of what to do next.

what to do next...A lot of times for me it involves school, friends, and family.

middle school I was bullied to the point that I left, turning to home schooling...A+ student, on the honor roll, and now I was failing, unsure of what to do next.

I often get mixed up in bad situations

I've been stranded with little to no money not knowing what to do. I'm also not a stranger to pregnancy scares.

Question 2 in this open ended format was: “If you were asked to continue writing from

where the story ends, how would you like the story to end?” I again read the two answer sets

blindly and assigned them to their correct group after I recorded any differences. I saw a similar

trend to that observed for question 1. Specifically, students in the Rhetoric Group again chose to

provide more details. To be clear, the Literature Group also included some specifics, but the

qualitative trend I observed was for the students in the Rhetoric Group to include more specific

details, and for more students to include those details. Examples of student responses and a table

that compares the two groups side by side is provided in the following list:

22

Literature Group responses to question 2:

1. I would probably write about their futures. If they get married, what jobs they have,

etc.

2. I would like the story to end with them both braking up because I think that it would

be interesting and it would help spice up the story more.

3. After this moment, I would like to see how their future unfolds. Would they get

married? Does their relationship grow stronger or weaken?

4. I would end the story as a cliff hanger and let the reader decide or image want will

happen to the main characters.

5. I would like to have the story ending with Lane coming back to Sheri. He seemed a

little indecisive on whether he really loved her or not towards the ending of the story,

but I would write that he would come back to her later on. In a way, it is like the

cliche saying of something like "you don't really know you love him/her until he/she

is gone." I feel like Lane would realize that after some time away from her. He

probably is in the mindset of guilt and fear throughout this short story part.

Rhetoric Group responses to question 2:

1. I would continue it with Sherri becoming a nurse, Lane involved in the child's life,

and both as peace with their decisions. Sherri has also moved on, finding a man

whom is christian and is willing to accept her and her child. In addition, Lane has

solely concentrated on work/school, seeing the child whenever possible.

2. Both Lane and Sheri know that they are not in love, so I would not continue the story

with them getting together. It would only make the situation more sad if they tried to

make it work when they know it wouldn't. So I would write that they would go their

23

separate ways, and that they would eventually see each other years later and reflect

and gain some peace. It is honestly hard to think about because its such an undesired

situation.

3. I'm a sap so I love happy endings. I would like Lane to come forth with his feeling s

for Sheri, I also want him and Sheri to talk out their feelings for each other. They get

married or something and have some kids.

4. Lane decides to stay and help raise the baby, be involved in Sheri's life, and provide

and support both mom and baby, even if he doesn't love Sheri.

5. I have some time pass and then I would have the two characters casually meet

up again in the future when everything has settled down.

The table following table captures some of the differences between treatment groups:

24

Table 3

Differences Between Treatment Groups’ Question 2 Responses

Literature Treatment, student responses Rhetoric Treatment, student responses

futures. If they get married, what jobs Sherri becoming a nurse...involved in the child's life...peace with their decisions...finding a man whom is christian...solely concentrated on work/school

braking up

are not in love...go their separate ways...reflect and gain some peace.

Would they get married? Does their relationship grow stronger or weaken?

talk out their feelings for each other...married...some kids.

cliff hanger...let the reader decide

stay and help raise the baby...provide and support both mom and baby

Lane coming back to Sheri..."you don't really know you love him/her until he/she is gone."...mindset of guilt and fear

two characters casually meet up again

Reliability testing: Qualitative comparisons between different evaluators. I next

wanted to determine if the differences I am observing between treatment groups are real trends,

i.e. not due to researcher bias. To evaluate this, I asked a different person to evaluate the

student’s written responses. They knew they were dealing with two different experimental

groups, but did not know what treatments the two different groups had experienced. I asked this

evaluator to write about any differences she observed between groups. For the purposes of

reader understanding, I have inserted the treatment group in parentheses.

• Question 1: In this story, a character is unsure what to do next. Have you ever been in

a situation like this? If yes, explain.

25

o Written response by evaluator: One person in (Literature) gave a lot of details

in their answer, about school, employment and wages. The other people in

(Literature) answered that yes, they were able to relate to the situation the

character is in, but did not provide as lengthy of a response in comparison to

the first person who answered. One difference that I saw is that the groups

wrote about different things. Most of (Literature) talked about school in some

way, and decisions related to that. (Rhetoric) also wrote about school some

too, but they also wrote about things that (Literature) did not. These topics

that I only saw in (Rhetoric) included shame, self harm, suicide, depression,

emotional readiness for a serious love relationship, bullying, financial strain,

and pregnancy.

• Question 2: If you were asked to continue writing from where the story stops, how

would you like the story to end?

o Written response by evaluator: I see differences between (Literature and

Rhetoric) for this question also. People in (Literature) asked more open-ended

questions like would they get married, or listed what they would write about.

(Rhetoric) told more about exactly what they would do, if they would get

married or not, and what jobs they would have like a nurse. One thing that I

noticed is that in (Literature) one person wrote about how Lane and Sherry

have a kid. In (Rhetoric) five people wrote about how they have a kid.

Based on these two written responses I am comfortable concluding that the second observer

recorded the same qualitative trends that I did.

26

The following table, in which I code to quantify the qualitative responses, also examines

any differences between observers to provide an additional level of testing reliability.

Table 4

Presence/Absence of Personal Details in Treatment Groups’ Responses to Questions 1 and 2

Question #, Treatment Group

Primary Investigator Second Evaluator (blind)

Question 1, Literature 3/9 subjects included personal detail in their response

3/9 subjects included personal detail in their response

Question 1, Rhetoric 9/9 subjects included personal detail in their response

8/9 subjects included personal detail in their response

Question 2, Literature 7/9 subjects included personal details in their response

7/9 subjects included personal details in their response

Question 2, Rhetoric 7/9 subjects included personal details in their response

7/9 subjects included personal details in their response

The next table summarizes the level of the detail provided in the responses between the

groups. The numbers correspond to a Likert Scale where 0 equals no personal details, 3 equals a

moderate level of personal detail, and 5 equals many personal details were provided.

27

Table 5

Level of Personal Detail Provided in Treatment Groups’ Responses to Questions 1 and 2

Question #, Treatment Group

Primary Investigator Second Evaluator (blind)

Question 1, Literature

All assignments on the scale: 4,2,0,1,0,0,0,0,0 Average assignment on the scale: 0.77 (on a scale of 0-5)


Question 1, Rhetoric



Question 2, Literature



Question 2, Rhetoric



Summary

In summary, three points of interest emerge from these tables and the process of coding

or quantifying the qualitative data:

1. For question 1, more students in the Rhetoric Group included personal details in their

response than did students in the Literature Group.

2. For both question 1 and question 2, the reported level of detail on a Likert Scale (0-5,

with 0 equating to no detail and 5 equating to much detail) was higher for students in

the Rhetoric Group than for students in the Literature Group.

3. Evaluator bias does not seem to be significant in the evaluation of these qualitative

data. Although there are some discrepancies on the #s (2 vs. 3), there is little

28

disagreement on the presence or absence of personal details (in one instance I assign a

1 (low level) of personal detail while the blind evaluator assigned a 0 (absence of)

personal detail. Overall, the averages of our Likert scale assignments align very well.

The final two questions in this part of the research, “What do you think Lane will be

doing five years after the story ends?” and “What do you think Sheri will be doing five years

after the story ends?” did not yield any notable qualitative differences in my opinion.

29

Chapter IV: Analysis and Next Steps in Practical Application

In this chapter I analyze my data and discuss my findings in light of best practices and

practical applications. In the analysis section of the chapter, I conclude that my study suggests

students in introductory-level college literature courses who undergo explicit instruction of the

rhetorical pathos of literature will self-report more empathic connection with fictional characters

when compared to students who do not undergo explicit instruction of the pathos of literature

before reading the same literary work. In the section of the chapter on next steps, I suggest that

expanded instruction of rhetorical pathos in introductory-level college literature courses could

have a positive impact on students’ academic and professional development.

Analysis

Perhaps surprisingly, the single difference between hearing a five minute lecture on

literature and hearing a five minute lecture on the rhetorical concept of pathos significantly

affected the way students responded to survey questions. Notably, the number of words circled

to describe Sheri, number of words circled to describe Lane, and number of feelings listed for

both Sheri and Lane, were all higher for the Rhetoric Group. Additionally, students in the

Rhetoric Group reported a stronger connection to Lane than did the students in the Literature

Group when responding to a Likert scale question. Because the students were randomly assigned

to the pathos lecture group and the literature lecture group, the single factor that differed between

these two groups was the five minute lecture. It should be noted that students were not primed to

respond a certain way on the survey; when the students heard the lecture and then read the story,

they had no idea a survey would follow.

Similar trends emerge from the qualitative analysis. Students in the Literature Group

tended to share details about decisions related to jobs and college. The responses in the Literature

30

Group that dealt with more intense personal situations alluded to the situation without providing

details about it or identifying a specific problem the respondent is dealing with. In contrast,

students in the Rhetoric Group elected to provide details about less vague, more personal topics.

Students in the rhetoric treatment not only identified an empathic connection, but also voluntarily

chose to provide details about that situation. Coding these qualitative data supports the same

conclusions. Students in the Rhetoric Group provide more detailed personal responses and more

students per group decided to provide these details after being exposed to a rhetoric lecture.

Evaluator bias does not seem to be significant in the evaluation of these qualitative data. All of

this suggests that students retained ideas from the short lecture, and the ideas persisted and

affected the way they responded on a survey after reading the story.

I believe my use of explicit instruction played a role in the results of this study. As an

instructor introducing a new topic, I could have chosen a different teaching approach. For

example, I could have provided no introduction and let students engage in an unguided discovery

exercise where their own backgrounds and experiences are the only things affecting how they

read and interpreted a story. Instead, I choose to directly and overtly introduce pathos by writing

it on the whiteboard, orally defining it, and noting its presence in famous discussions of

literature. I believe that the results of my study suggest that the pathos lecture influenced

students’ reading experience and how they responded on the survey. In other words, students

were encouraged to be more aware of the emotional component of literature and as result, I

would argue, made more empathic connections with the characters. The results of the qualitative

data are particularly interesting to me. To be clear, these students had no obligation to respond at

all, and there were no suggestions or requirements about how they should respond. They chose

to share very personal information on the Blackboard site, and were more likely to make this

31

choice after hearing a lecture about rhetorical pathos. As such, it could be argued, the very

simple step of adding instruction in rhetoric to a literature course could have far-reaching

implications. Despite a small sample size of 36 students and a very short five minute lecture, the

single difference between hearing a fiction lecture and hearing a pathos lecture affected students’

responses on survey questions. If rhetorical pathos were introduced early in the semester and

revisited regularly, I believe students would form even more empathic connections with fictional

characters and would be even more attentive and imaginative regarding characters’ feelings.

Interesting areas for future research include the effect of multiple lectures or multiple

guided learning experiences. It would be worthwhile to extend this research to multiple class

sections and dozens of students. I chose to test my hypothesis using the story “Good People”

because it just happened to be the reading assignment on the day I wanted to conduct research. It

is worth noting that it may have been particularly easy for students to make empathic

connections with the characters in this story. Many of my students are demographically similar

to Lane and Sheri. Many have also probably thought about love relationships and reproductive

choices, an experience they would have in common with Lane and Sheri. When I plan additional

research, I will have to think carefully about what literary material I choose to test my hypothesis

further. Would explicit instruction of rhetoric help students form empathic connections to almost

any fictional character featured in a literary work? Or are empathic connections only likely

when fictional characters are demographically similar to students or when characters are in

situations students are familiar with? I think it would be valuable to test the same hypothesis

with fictional characters whose background and experiences do not overlap so clearly with

students’. Here I am thinking of characters from different cultures or countries, or even

characters created in the distant past by Shakespeare or by nineteenth century American authors.

32

As an instructor, I’ve found it can be more challenging to get students excited about reading

older works, in part, I think, because it is harder for students to relate to the characters. If

explicit instruction of rhetorical pathos acts to strengthen empathic connections across literary

genres and time periods, it could be a particularly useful educational tool when assigning works

written many decades or centuries ago.

If I continue to use Part 2 and Part 3 (or other prompts designed the same way),

additional research could be done to help analyze responses. When I created the list of traits for

this part of the survey, I tried to include only traits that could reasonably be used to describe

either Lane or Sheri, even if some traits listed were more obviously accurate than others.

However, I currently have no objective method of measuring which traits listed are more

accurate than others. Thus, I would like to have a separate group of students complete a survey

where they rank the list of traits and emotions based on how accurately they describe each

character. As with the other groups, this group would not be aware of the goals of my research.

I could use the results from this group to rate the accuracy of each trait on the list. I could then

use these accuracy ratings to analyze responses from Group 1 and Group 2 on Part 2 and Part 3.

The accuracy ratings from the third group could help to test my hypothesis because, if explicit

instruction of rhetorical pathos does indeed makes students more likely to form an empathic

connection with literary characters, students should not only circle more feelings to describe

those characters but also circle feelings that most accurately describe the characters.

Overall, I believe that my results do indeed indicate that explicit instruction of rhetorical

pathos encourages students to form empathic connections with literary characters. There is,

however, an alternative interpretation of results that merits attention. It could be argued that

students generally like to do things that please their instructors because this leads to positive

33

feedback, higher scores, or better grades. Therefore, the argument would be that students

lectured on pathos would then circle more feelings on a survey because they believe this is what

the instructor wants. What is more, students might do this without actually considering which

feelings a character might be experiencing or even without forming any type of empathic

connection with the character at all. All this is worth considering, but I believe the fact that the

surveys were completely anonymous makes this interpretation hard to support. I would also

argue that, regardless of students’ possible thoughts about what the instructor wanted, the fact

that they dedicated any additional attention to the feelings of characters is a positive thing. The

more detailed and specific answers provided by the Rhetoric Group on the Blackboard

discussion forums (that were, again, optional and anonymous) further support this idea.

Next Steps in Practical Application

If explicit instruction of pathos does in fact help students form empathic connections with

fictional characters, is it a useful educational tool? I would argue yes. Although beyond the

scope of this study, I predict that a student who forms an empathic connection with a literary

character will be more likely to comprehend and retain material. On a practical level, this could

result in higher quiz and essay scores. Better comprehension and retention of the reading could

also result in increased willingness to engage in classroom discussion about the material. My

study did not find that explicit instruction in pathos made students more likely to report liking

what they read or more likely to report wanting to read similar material again. However, altering

the scope and duration of the instruction might result in a significant effect in these areas.

Another potential educational benefit of forming empathic connections with characters is that it

may heighten the positive personal impact of assignments for students, helping make the reading

more meaningful in the context of their daily lives. Finally, as Oatley’s (2016) review of

34

psychology research suggests, forming empathic connections with fictional characters may help

strengthen communication skills (p. 618). Students’ ability to effectively communicate in

academic or professional settings depends on their attentiveness to the feelings and perspectives

of others. They practice this attentiveness when they form empathic connections with fictional

characters.

35

References

Alfieri, L., Brooks, P. J., Aldrich, N. J., & Tenenbaum, H. R. (2011). Does discovery-based

instruction enhance learning? Journal of Educational Psychology, 103(1), 1-18. doi:

10.1037/a0021017

Abbuhl, R. (2011). Using models in writing instruction. SAGE Open, 1(3). doi:

2158244011426295

Bizzell, P., & Herzberg, B. (2001). Enlightenment rhetoric. In P. Bizzell & B. Herzberg (Eds.),

The rhetorical tradition: Readings from classical times to the present, (pp. 791-813).

Boston, MA: Bedford/St. Martin’s.

Fuss, D. G. W. A. (2015). The pocket instructor: Literature: 101 exercises for the college

literature classroom. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Gould, T. (2014). The ancient quarrel between poetry and philosophy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton

University Press. Retrieved from https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uws-

ebooks/detail.action?docID=1700389

Graham, J., Benson, L. M., Swanson, J., Potyk, D., Daratha, K., & Roberts, K. (2016). Medical

humanities coursework is associated with greater measured empathy in medical students.

The American journal of medicine, 129(12), 1334-1337. doi:

10.1016/j.amjmed.2016.08.005

Hester, C., & Schleifer, R. (2016). Enhancing physician empathy: Optimizing learner potential

for narrative transportation. Enthymema: international journal of literary theory,

criticism and philosophy, 16, 105-118. https://doi.org/10.13130/2037-2426/7474

36

Johnson, D., Huffman, B., & Jasper, D. (2014). Changing race boundary perception by reading

narrative fiction. Basic and applied social psychology, 36(1), 83-90. doi:

10.1080/01973533.2013.856791

Keen, S. (2007). Empathy and the novel. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Keen, S. (2015). Narrative form. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.

Mar, R. A. (2011). The neural bases of social cognition and story comprehension. Annual Review

of Psychology, 62, 103-134. doi:10.1146/ annurev-psych-120709-145406

Miller, S. (2017). Oedipa's unsentimental journey: Preempted pathos in the crying of lot 49.

Studies in the novel, 49(1), 69-89. doi:10.1353/sdn.2017.0003

Oatley, K. (2016). Fiction: Simulation of social worlds. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 20(8),

618-628. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2016.06.002

Phelan, J. (2010). Teaching narrative as rhetoric: The example of Time's arrow. Pedagogy 10(1),

217-228. doi:10.1215/15314200-2009-033

Wallace, D. F. (2016). Good people. In K. J. Mays (Ed.), The norton introduction to literature

shorter (12th ed.). New York, NY: W. W. Norton & Company.

Wilder, L. (2012). Rhetorical strategies and genre conventions in literary studies. Carbondale,

IL: Southern Illinois University Press.

37

Appendix A: Part 1

Directions: Respond to each question by circling a number between 1 and 10. 1) Do you feel a connection to Lane?

no connection very strong connection

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

2) Do you feel a connection to Sheri?

no connection very strong connection

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

3) Could you imagine yourself in Lane’s situation?

not at all very much so

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

4) Could you imagine yourself in Sheri’s situation?


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

5) Would it be stressful to be in Lane’s situation?


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

6) Would it be stressful to be in Sheri’s situation?


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

7) Does Lane remind you of anyone you know?


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

38

8) Does Sheri remind you of anyone you know?


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

9) Do you like Lane?


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

10) Do you like Sheri?


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

11) Would you want to read a story about what Lane and Sheri are doing a year later?


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

12) How likely would you be to read another story by this author?

not at all likely very likely

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

13) How easy was this story to understand?

not at all easy very easy

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

14) Compared to other stories we’ve read in class, how good was this story?

not at all good very good

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

15) List some of the feelings you think the Lane might be experiencing in this story. 16) List some of the feelings you think the Sheri might be experiencing in this story.

39

Appendix B: Part 2

Directions: Circle the words that describe Lane

genuine supportive flawed reflective persistent moral self-aware mature relaxed honest unsure Midwestern depressed sensitive concerned afraid optimistic friendly mellow guilt-stricken thoughtful Christian ambitious compassionate willing anxious cautious quiet white intense immature sincere easy to be around faithful frustrated good inexperienced unassuming hopeful hard working hesitant reluctant middle class open minded alone nervous agreeable insightful sad

confused kind self-absorbed calm unprepared stubborn easygoing

scared happy lost in thought welcoming well adjusted capable wise

40

Appendix C: Part 3

Directions: Circle the words that describe Sheri genuine supportive flawed reflective persistent moral self-aware mature relaxed honest unsure Midwestern depressed sensitive concerned afraid optimistic friendly mellow guilt-stricken thoughtful Christian ambitious compassionate willing anxious cautious quiet white intense immature sincere easy to be around faithful frustrated good inexperienced unassuming hopeful hard working hesitant reluctant middle class open minded alone nervous agreeable insightful sad

confused kind self-absorbed calm unprepared stubborn easy going

scared happy lost in thought welcoming well adjusted capable wise

41

Appendix D: Part 4

1) In this story, a character is unsure what to do next. Have you ever been in a situation like this? If yes, explain. 2) If you were asked to continue writing from where the story stops, how would you like the story to end? 3) What do you think Lane will be doing five years after the story ends? 4) What do you think Sheri will be doing five years after the story ends?

Explicit Instruction of Pathos in Introductory College Literature

Documents

Transcript of Explicit Instruction of Pathos in Introductory College Literature