Abstract
Most story plots contain multiple characters who are independent, interact, and often have conflicting goals. One would expect that narrative understanding would require monitoring of the goals, concerns, and situations of multiple agents. There is considerable evidence that understanders monitor the primary protagonist’s goal plans (e.g., Suh & Trabasso, 1993). However, there is relatively little research on the extent to which understanders monitor the goals of multiple agents. We investigated the impact of characters’ roles and prominence on the extent to which understanders monitor the goal plans of multiple characters in a feature length film. In Experiment 1, participants made situation change judgments, and in Experiment 2, they verbally described scenes. Both types of judgments indicated that viewers monitor the goals and plans of multiple agents but do so to a greater extent for characters more prominent to the plotline.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Albrecht, J. E., O’Brien, E. J., Mason, R. A., &Myers, J. L. (1995). The role of perspective in the accessibility of goals during reading.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,21, 364–372.
Allbritton, D. W., &Gerrig, R. J. (1991). Participatory responses in text understanding.Journal of Memory & Language,30, 603–626.
Baggett, P. (1979). Structurally equivalent stories in movie and text and the effect of the medium on recall.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,18, 333–356.
Black, J. B., Turner, T. J., &Bower, G. H. (1979). Point of view in narrative comprehension, memory, and production.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,18, 187–198.
Bordwell, D. (1985).Narration in the fiction film. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
Bordwell, D., &Thompson, K. (1993).Film art: An introduction. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Broccoli, A. R. (Producer), & Gilbert, L. (Director) (1979).Moonraker [Film]. Available from CBS/Fox Video, Industrial Park Drive, Farmington Hills, MI 48024.
Coonan, J. R., Moder, M., Wizan, J. (Producers), &Pollack, S. (Director) (1972).Jeremiah Johnson [Film]. Available from Warner Brothers, 4000 Warner Boulevard, Burbank, CA 91522.
de Wied, M., Zillmann, D., &Ordman, V. (1994). The role of empathic distress in the enjoyment of cinematic tragedy.Poetics,23, 91–106.
Fillmore, C. J. (1968). The case for case. In E. Bach & T. Harms (Eds.),Universals in linguistic theory (pp. 1–90). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Fillmore, C. J. (1972). Some problems for case grammar. In R. J. O’Brien (Ed.),Report of the 22nd Annual Round Table Meeting on Linguistics and Language Studies (pp. 35–56). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
Gerrig, R. J. (1996). Participatory aspects of narrative understanding. In R. J. Kreuz & M. S. MacNealy (Eds.),Empirical approaches to literature and aesthetics (pp. 127–142). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Graesser, A. C. (1981).Prose comprehension beyond the word. New York: Springer.
Graesser, A. C., Bowers, C., Olde, B., &Pomeroy, V. (1999). Who said what? Source memory for narrator and character agents in literary short stories.Journal of Educational Psychology,91, 284–300.
Graesser, A. C., Bowers, C., Olde, B., White, K., &Person, N. K. (1999). Who knows what: Propagation of knowledge among agents in a literary storyworld.Poetic,26, 143–175.
Graesser, A. C., &Clark, L. F. (1985).Structures and procedures of implicit knowledge. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Graesser, A. C., Singer, M., &Trabasso, T. (1994). Constructing inferences during narrative text comprehension.Psychological Review,101, 371–395.
Holland, N. N. (1992). Film response from eye to I: The Kuleshov experiment. In J. Gaines (Ed.),Classical Hollywood narrative: The paradigm wars (pp. 415–442). Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Horton, W. S., &Rapp, D. N. (2003). Out of sight, out of mind: Occlusion and the accessibility of information in narrative comprehension.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,10, 104–110.
Long, D. L., &Golding, J. M. (1993). Superordinate goal inferences: Are they automatically generated during comprehension?Discourse Processes,16, 55–73.
Lutz, M. F., &Radvansky, G. A. (1997). The fate of completed goal information in narrative comprehension.Journal of Memory & Language,36, 293–310.
Magliano, J. P., Dijkstra, K., &Zwaan, R. (1996). Generating predictive inferences while viewing a movie.Discourse Processes,22, 199–224.
Magliano, J. P., &Graesser, A. C. (1991). A three-pronged method for studying inference generation in literary text.Poetics,20, 193–232.
Magliano, J. P., Miller, J., &Zwaan, R. A. (2001). Indexing space and time in film understanding.Applied Cognitive Psychology,15, 533–545.
Magliano, J. P., &Radvansky, G. A. (2001). Goal coordination in narrative comprehension.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,8, 372–376.
Magliano, J. P., Zwaan, R. A., &Graesser, A. C. (1999). The role of situational continuity in narrative understanding. In S. R. Goldman & H. van Oostendorp,The construction of mental representations during reading (pp. 219–245). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Mandler, J. M., &Johnson, S. S. (1977). Remembrance of things parsed: Story structure and recall.Cognitive Psychology,9, 111–151.
McKoon, G., &Ratcliff, R. (1992). Inference during reading.Psychological Review,99, 440–466.
Metz, C. (1982).The imaginary signifier: Psychoanalysis and the cinema. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Morrow, D. G. (1985). Prominent characters and events organize narrative understanding.Journal of Memory & Language,24, 304–319.
Myers, J. L., &O’Brien, E. J. (1998). Accessing the discourse representation during reading.Discourse Processes,26, 131–157.
Newtson, D. (1973). Attribution and the unit of perception of ongoing behavior.Journal of Personality & Social Psychology,28, 28–38.
Özyürek, A., &Trabasso, T. (1997). Evaluation during the understanding of narratives.Discourse Processes,23, 305–335.
Rapp, D. N., &Gerrig, R. J. (2002). Readers’ reality-driven and plotdriven analyses in narrative comprehension.Memory & Cognition,30, 779–788.
Richards, E., &Singer, M. (2001). Representation of complex goal structures in narrative comprehension.Discourse Processes,31, 111–135.
Sallin, R. (Producer), &Meyer, N. (Director) (1982).Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan [Film]. Available from Paramount Pictures, 5555 Melrose Avenue, Hollywood, CA 90038.
Schank, R. C., &Abelson, R. (1977).Scripts, plans, and goals. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Schwan, S., Garsoffky, B., &Hesse, F. W. (2000). Do film cuts facilitate the perceptual and cognitive organization of activity sequences?Memory & Cognition,28, 214–223.
Scott Rich, S., &Taylor, H. A. (2000). Not all narrative shifts function equally.Memory & Cognition,28, 1257–1266.
Stein, N. L., &Glenn, C. G. (1979). An analysis of story comprehension in elementary school children. In R. O. Freedle (Ed.),New directions in discourse processing (pp. 53–120). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Suh, S. Y., &Trabasso, T. (1993). Inferences during reading: Converging evidence from discourse analysis, talk-aloud protocols, and recognition priming.Journal of Memory & Language,32, 279–300.
Tan, E. S. (1996).Emotions and the structure of narrative film. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Thorndyke, P. W. (1977). Cognitive structures in comprehension and memory of narrative discourse.Cognitive Psychology,9, 77–110.
Trabasso, T., &Nickels, M. (1992). The development of goal plans of action in the narration of a picture story.Discourse Processes,15, 249–275.
Trabasso, T., &Sperry, L. (1985). Causal relatedness and importance of story events.Journal of Memory & Language,24, 595–611.
Trabasso, T., &Suh, S. (1993). Understanding text: Achieving explanatory coherence through on-line inferences and mental operations in working memory.Discourse Processes,16, 3–34.
Trabasso, T., &van den Broek, P. (1985). Causal thinking and the representation of narrative events.Journal of Memory & Language,24, 612–630.
Trabasso, T., van den Broek, P., &Suh, S. (1989). Logical necessity and transitivity of causal relations in the representation of stories.Discourse Processes,12, 1–25.
van den Broek, P., Risden, K., &Husebye-Hartmann, E. (1995). The role of readers’ standards for coherence in the generation of inferences during reading. In R. F. Lorch, Jr., & E. J. O’Brien (Eds.),Sources of coherence in reading (pp. 353–373). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Zacks, J. M., Tversky, B., &Iyer, G. (2001). Event structure in perception and conception.Psychological Bulletin,127, 3–21.
Zillmann, D. (1994). Mechanisms of emotional involvement with drama.Poetics,23, 33–51.
Zwaan, R. A., Langston, M. C., &Graesser, A. C. (1995). The construction of situation models in narrative comprehension: An eventindexing model.Psychological Science,6, 292–297.
Zwaan, R. A., &Radvansky, G. A. (1998). Situation models in language comprehension and memory.Psychological Bulletin,123, 162–185.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Magliano, J.P., Taylor, H.A. & Kim, HJ.J. When goals collide: Monitoring the goals of multiple characters. Memory & Cognition 33, 1357–1367 (2005). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193368
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193368