Cognitive Approaches to Children's Literature: A Roadmap to Possible and Answerable Questions

What you are doing right now is, cosmically speaking, against the odds.

—Damon Young, The Art of Reading 9

As Maryanne Wolf explains, "we were never born to read. The brain that reads is not a given. Literacy is a cultural invention, which means that there is no genetic program that can dictate its design" (3; emphasis in orig.). Instead, the brain makes use of structures that evolved (and are still used) for different purposes, building connections that are simultaneously novel and ancient. Understanding the interplay between the written word and the physiological structures involved in interpreting those symbols is one small part of the recently emerged cognitive approach to the study of literature, which has proved especially relevant for understanding texts intended for the developing minds of children. This special issue of Children's Literature Association Quarterly aims to provide a roadmap to these approaches, guiding readers to see the range of questions made possible and answerable from this perspective.

When we state that, when reading, the brain repurposes existing mental structures, we mean that reading capitalizes on the way the brain instinctively interacts with its environment. Human cognition—making sense of the world—is essentially about forming and distinguishing between categories. One of the earliest things that infants learn is how to identify similarities and differences. Survival depends on this skill: that which resembles "us" is known and therefore safe, whereas that which is different and new requires attention as it may pose a threat (Tenngart 26). By categorizing the familiar as harmless and the unfamiliar as potentially harmful, the brain sorts information efficiently. Attention is drawn to understanding how the new behaves, to be able to predict what will happen next, especially when observing other humans. The human brain identifies behavioral patterns by attributing mental states to others. This is known as Theory of Mind (abbreviated as ToM), which is necessary for empathy: the ability to adopt a similar state of mind temporarily. The array of possible reactions to others' behavior is also stored mentally (Stockwell 75–77).

This brain-environment interaction is inherently embodied; language forms a bridge between the body and the world. Rejecting the Descartian dichotomy between mind and body, Ronald Langacker and other cognitive linguists, like neurologists and psychologists, recognize the deeply embodied nature of cognition. The human capacities for observing, experiencing, and perceiving take place within the body, never externally. These biological conditions shape all forms of perception and expression. All that is known is "involved in and expressible only through patterns of language that have their roots in our material existence" (Stockwell 5; cf. 109). The brain applies this embodied knowledge about the workings of other brains when reading literature.

Cognitive approaches to the study of literature originate from similar insights in the neurosciences, psychology, linguistics, and education. Independent lines of inquiry into cognition were boosted in the 1980s and '90s by technologies that allowed for research methodologies that had hitherto proved impossible. For instance, the development of Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) enabled neuroscientists to measure blood flow very precisely, making it possible to identify which areas of the brain are being used and, therefore, to extrapolate the sequences of neural pathways. Separately and unrelatedly, the digitalization of texts enabled linguists to examine large corpora and thus form evidence-based conclusions about how language is used and how it has changed over time. The dramatic expansion in methodologies made empirical research on how human cognition functions more precise. Consequently, ideas such as the Whorfian hypothesis¹ proposing that perception is encoded through language could be tested, and the computer programs generating artificial intelligence could be "fed" with the contextual, conceptual knowledge needed to process language (Stockwell 75).

The new high-tech methodologies easily dazzle newcomers, particularly within the liberal arts and the so-called soft sciences, including education and literary studies, which are often dismissed as "unscientific"—not least due to questions about the neutrality and verifiability of their methodologies. We do not think it coincidental that cognitive approaches to literature emerged during the recent...