Current Projects
‘A multidisciplinary examination of the effect of reading tasks on poetic language processing’ | PI Patrick Errington, Co-I Dan Mirman, RA Nicola Burns | Schools of LLC and PPLS, University of Edinburgh (Funded by the Carnegie Trust Research Incentive Grant)
Abstract: The teaching of poetry frequently centres around one particular goal: literary critical analysis. But there are many ways of responding to poems. This project will use empirical tools – functional near-infrared spectroscopy and experimental psychology – to pinpoint how a reader’s experience of poems and poetic language is changed by anticipating different reading tasks, including critical analysis and creative, imitative responses. To accomplish this, we combine research in reader response theory and creative practice, new developments in experimental psychology and neuroscience, and cutting-edge empirical techniques.
‘Prototype codevelopment of a creative reading/writing mobile app: ReWriter‘ | PI Patrick Errington; Co-Is Sarah McGeown & Dan Mirman; Lead Researcher Simon Boyle | Project Partners: The Poetry Society, the National Literacy Trust, the Scottish Poetry Library, Playable Technology | Schools of LLC, PPLS, MHSES, University of Edinburgh (Funded by the Wellcome Trust Institutional Translational Partnership Award)
Abstract: Engaging with poetry, either as a reader or a writer, can be a very positive experience, however we know that many young people do not choose to spend time reading or writing poetry. ReWriter will be a new app, designed for young people, with young people, which aims to promote creativity and connection with poetry, giving young people the opportunity to read, write, edit, style and share poetry with others. In doing so, we hope that it might support their literacy engagement and wellbeing. Indeed poetry provides a relatively condensed, low-time-investment/high-emotional-impact form of literature and overcomes several identified barriers to engaging young people’s literacy. It may therefore provide one avenue for renewing young people’s literacy practices.
This project is being carried out in collaboration with an app developer (Playable Technology), literacy organisations (National Literacy Trust, Poetry Society, Scottish Poetry Library), and young people who we intend to recruit to coproduce a working prototype of the mobile app.
Wellcome Trust Data Prize: DigiCAT (digital counterfactual analysis tool) | PI Aja Murray; Co-Is Marie Allitt, Ingrid Obsuth, Josiah King, Dan Mirman, Patrick Errington and Helen Wright | University of Edinburgh (Funded by the Wellcome Trust Data Prize)
About: DigiCAT allows you to leverage propensity score methods in your own data or using our sample dataset to conduct counterfactual analyses and gain insights into the causal effects of specific interventions or treatments. DigiCAT aims to provide researchers, regardless of their statistical background, with a user-friendly platform that removes barriers and enables them to utilize these methods effectively
Past Projects
‘Developing a counterfactual analysis digital tool to illuminate active ingredients in mental health’ | PI Aja Murray, Co-Is Patrick Errington, Dan Mirman, Josiah King, Ingrid Obsuth, Marie Allitt | Schools of PPLS, LLC, Edinburgh Innovations, University of Edinburgh (Funded by the Wellcome Trust Data Prize, Prototyping Phase)
‘A Counterfactual Analysis of Reading Habits and Anxiety and Depression Longitudinal Datasets, and Development of Analysis Tool for Further Research’ | PI Aja Murray, Co-Is Patrick Errington, Dan Mirman, Ingrid Obsuth, Marie Allitt | Schools of PPLS, LLC, Edinburgh Innovations, University of Edinburgh (Funded by the Wellcome Trust Data Prize, Discovery Phase)
‘Prototype Development and Testing of “Re:Writer” Mobile Poetry App as Mental Health Intervention’ | PI Patrick Errington, Co-Is Aja Murray, Dan Mirman, Ingrid Obsuth, Marie Allitt | Schools of PPLS, LLC, Edinburgh Innovations, University of Edinburgh (Funded by the Wellcome Trust Institutional Transitional Partnership Awards)
‘Difficulty and pleasure in comprehending novel extensions of verb-based metaphors assessed using fNIRS‘ | PI Patrick Errington, Co-I Dr Daniel Mirman, RA Melissa Thye | Schools of LLC and PPLS, University of Edinburgh (Funded by the College of Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences’ Challenge Investment Fund | Testing Phase)
Papers
‘The Forest or the Trees? On the (Im)Possibility of an Ecological Criticism’ (a single-author academic paper | under review)
Abstract: While ecocritical literary analyses are flourishing little attention is being paid to the way that the methodological approach of such analysis reflects and reinforces the divisions and binaries that prevailing ecological theories seek to undo. Examining the metaphors that undergird critical analysis, and surveying empirical evidence of how metaphors shape our thinking, this paper reveals how critical analysis’s foundational activity – the separation of ‘elements’ or relationships within an object of analysis, as well as the separation of critic from that object itself – sets it at odds with ecological theory, which emphasises multidimensional interconnection and a simultaneously non-binary and non-monist worldview. In the end, it is the very methods of critical analysis itself that demonstrate that critical analysis cannot be ecological, suggesting a need for other modes of inquiry if we are to take serious what ecological theory offers.
Errington, Patrick J., Melissa Thye, Daniel Mirman (2022) ‘Difficulty and pleasure in the comprehension of verb-based metaphor sentences: A behavioral study‘. PLoS ONE. 17(2): e0263781. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0263781. (Funded by the College of Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences’ Research Adaptation Fund)
Abstract: What is difficult is not usually pleasurable. Yet, for certain unfamiliar figurative language, like that which is common in poetry, while comprehension is often more difficult than for more conventional language, it is in many cases more pleasurable. Concentrating our investigation on verb-based metaphors, we examined whether and to what degree the novel variations (in the form of verb changes and extensions) of conventional verb metaphors were both more difficult to comprehend and yet induced more pleasure. To test this relationship, we developed a set of 62 familiar metaphor stimuli, each with corresponding optimal and excessive verb variation and metaphor extension conditions, and normed these stimuli using both objective measures and participant subjective ratings. We then tested the pleasure-difficulty relationship with an online behavioral study. Based on Rachel Giora and her colleagues’ ‘optimal innovation hypothesis’, we anticipated an inverse U-shaped relationship between ease and pleasure, with an optimal degree of difficulty, introduced by metaphor variations, producing the highest degree of pleasure when compared to familiar or excessive conditions. Results, however, revealed a more complex picture, with only metaphor extension conditions (not verb variation conditions) producing the anticipated pleasure effects. Individual differences in semantic cognition and verbal reasoning assessed using the Semantic Similarities Test, while clearly influential, further complicated the pleasure-difficulty relationship, suggesting an important avenue for further investigation.