Cognitive scientists refer to stories as “psychologically
privileged,” meaning they are granted special treatment by our brains.
Compared to other informational formats, we attend to stories more closely. We understand them more readily. And we remember them more accurately.
privileged,” meaning they are granted special treatment by our brains.
Compared to other informational formats, we attend to stories more closely. We understand them more readily. And we remember them more accurately.
Research has found that we recall as much as *50
percent* more information from stories than from expository passages.
A thread about why stories exert these effects on us:
percent* more information from stories than from expository passages.
A thread about why stories exert these effects on us:
One reason is that stories shape the way information is shared, in cognitively congenial ways.
The human brain has evolved to seek out evidence of CAUSAL relationships: this happened because of that. Stories are, by their nature, all about causal relationships:
The human brain has evolved to seek out evidence of CAUSAL relationships: this happened because of that. Stories are, by their nature, all about causal relationships:
Event A leads to Event B, which in turn causes Event C, and so on.
If a speaker were to relate a story in which the first part of the tale had no bearing on the second part, listeners would justifiably protest that this so-called “story” made no sense.
If a speaker were to relate a story in which the first part of the tale had no bearing on the second part, listeners would justifiably protest that this so-called “story” made no sense.
At the same time, stories don’t spell everything out for us, either. If a storyteller were to laboriously connect
every narrative dot, listeners would again rightly object: "Okay, we get it!"
When stories are told well, only the highlights are included—
every narrative dot, listeners would again rightly object: "Okay, we get it!"
When stories are told well, only the highlights are included—
—leaving listeners to fill in the causal inferences that lend the story its full meaning.
Such inferences require some mental effort, though not TOO much, making stories enjoyable to listen to and think about.
Such inferences require some mental effort, though not TOO much, making stories enjoyable to listen to and think about.
But because we DO have to think about stories in order to understand them—do have to maintain a mental chain of events that links beginning, middle, and end—we’re more likely to remember stories than to remember information that doesn’t require such cognitive processing.
In my forthcoming book, I write a lot about how telling and listening to stories is one way that social interaction can extend our minds.
My account draws on the work of UVA professor Daniel Willingham (@DTWillingham)—here's an interesting article of his on the subject.
My account draws on the work of UVA professor Daniel Willingham (@DTWillingham)—here's an interesting article of his on the subject.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
