Psychology of Popular Media Culture The Diamonds and the Dross: A Quantitative Exploration of Integrative Complexity in Fanfiction Hayley McCullough Online First Publication, November 12, 2018. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/ppm0000216
CITATION McCullough, H. (2018, November 12). The Diamonds and the Dross: A Quantitative Exploration of Integrative Complexity in Fanfiction. Psychology of Popular Media Culture. Advance online publication. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/ppm0000216
Psychology of Popular Media Culture © 2018 American Psychological Association 2160-4134/18/$12.00
2018, Vol. 8, No. 999, 000 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/ppm0000216
The Diamonds and the Dross: A Quantitative Exploration of Integrative Complexity in Fanfiction Hayley McCullough
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, New York Vinney and Dill-Shackleford (2018) applied linguistic analysis to the study of the psychology of fanfiction. This article builds upon this previous research through two studies that individually score and compare the integrative complexity, a linguistic variable, of a sample of paragraphs from 45 popular fanfictions and 45 unpopular fanfictions. Across both studies, significant main effects were found for integrative complexity and its two subtypes. A singular mean pattern emerged: The popular fanfiction had consistently higher complexity scores than the unpopular fanfiction. These results are a clear divergence from expectations because typically simplicity is preferred over complexity (see Conway et al., 2012, for greater discussion). This divergence may be a result of the nature of writing and text-based medium, the nature of critical review, or potentially the nature of fanfiction as a partial by-product of fan frustration. Finally, these studies provide a foundation for future exploration in the underlying psychology of fanfiction as a growing phenomenon and new form of cultural critique.
Public Policy Relevance Statement Fanfiction is a central aspect of the majority of fan experiences; however, few studies have used psychological theory to explore and study fanfiction. Building on Vinney and Dill-Shackleford (2018), the present research uses integrative complexity to examine linguistic differences between popular and unpopular fanfictions and adds new information to our understanding of fanfiction as a cultural and psychological phenomenon.
Keywords: fanfiction, integrative complexity, fans, fandom
According to Vinney and Dill-Shackleford (2018), “it is noteworthy that most of the literature on popular culture fans comes from the humanities [. . .] psychological theory has rarely been used to understand the reasons fans write and read fan fiction” (p. 18 –19). For example, previous qualitative humanities scholarship of fanfiction has focused on discussing fanfiction as a transgressive work (Gray, Sandvoss, & Harrington, 2007), defining the boundaries of fanfiction (Stein & Busse, 2009) and the phenomenon of hack fiction (Carruthers, 2004). In response, Vinney and Dill-Shackleford (2018) performed a quantitative, linguistic analysis based in psychological theory of a substantial sample of Mad Men fanfiction “to investigate whether the stories are written for fun or to explore something deeper” (p. 18). The two studies described here attempt to expand upon Vinney and Dill-Shackleford (2018) by performing a similar but distinct linguistic analysis on another sample of fanfiction. These studies use integrative complexity, a linguistic variable, to test if there are quantifiable differences between the extremely popular and unpopular fanfictions.
What Is Integrative Complexity? Integrative complexity describes an individual’s ability to differentiate between the relevant but discrete perspectives of an issue and, at higher levels, the ability to integrate these perspectives in some intelligible manner (Suedfeld & Tetlock, 1977; see also Baker-Brown et al., 1992). There are two subtypes of integrative complexity— dialectical and elaborative. Dialectical complexity describes discussion of issues performed in a general manner, assessing it from numerous, assorted standpoints. Oppositely, elaborative complexity describes a single issue explored in a multilayered way (Conway et al., 2008; Houck, Conway, & Gornick, 2014). Integrative complexity and its subtypes can be applied to any written or transcribed material and is appraised on a scale of one to seven: A one indicates the material scored low in both differentiation and integration and a seven indicates the material scored high on both integration and differentiation (for more scoring details, see Baker-Brown et al., 1992). It has a long history as a research variable. For example, integrative complexity has been applied to the study of the psychology of war and peace (Conway, Suedfeld, & Clements, 2003; Conway, Suedfeld, & Tetlock, 2001; Suedfeld & Bluck, 1988; Suedfeld & Leighton, 2002; Suedfeld & Rank, 1976; Winter, 2007), terrorism (Conway & Conway, 2011; Smith, Suedfeld, Conway, & Winter, 2008), the film award season (McCullough & Conway, 2017a), political leadership (Ballard,
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Hayley McCullough, Department of Communication and Media, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Russell Sage Laboratory 4307, 110 8th Street, Troy, NY 12180. E-mail:
[email protected] 1
MCCULLOUGH
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
2
1983; Thoemmes & Conway, 2007; Wasike, 2017), the psychology of attitude formation (Conway et al., 2008, 2012), fiction (McCullough & Conway, 2017b), video games (McCullough, in press), and personality psychology (Schneider & Giambra, 1971; Suedfeld, Conway, & Eichhorn, 2001; Tuckman, 1966). Why use integrative complexity to study fanfiction? As McCullough and Conway (2017b) explained, “linguistic measurements in general can provide a potential window into the behindthe-scenes psychology of the human experience” (p. 2). Moreover, integrative complexity, unlike other linguistic variables, analyzes a paragraph’s main structure as opposed to its contents, providing invaluable insights into psychological processes that are not dictated or controlled by obvious influences (see Conway, Conway, Gornick, & Houck, 2014). Because of this unique strength of integrative complexity, it appears reasonable to suspect that integrative complexity can reveal previously unknown aspects of the underlying psychology of fanfiction.
Fanfiction: A Brief Overview As Vinney and Dill-Shackleford (2018) explained, “fan fiction uses the settings, plotlines, and characters of a source text, such as a movie, TV show, or book [or the lives of real people], to create new narratives” (p. 18). According to Coppa (2006), fanfiction originated in the science fiction fanzines of the 1930. However, older examples of fanfiction can be found scattered throughout history (Lantagne, 2011). Arguably, most of William Shakespeare’s work, from the history plays (based on actual people in history, such as the Plantagenet kings of England) to Cymbeline (based on stories from Boccaccio’s Decameron), can be considered as fanfiction. Currently, the Internet allows fanfiction to proliferate (Thomas, 2011), and the overall amount of fanfiction continues to grow, becoming a keystone element of most fan experiences. Of course, the increased amount and popularity of fanfiction has increased exposure and controversy. As Diana Gabaldon, author of the popular science-fiction-romance series Outlander, wrote “OK, my position on fan-fic is pretty clear: I think it’s immoral, I _know_ it’s illegal, and it makes me want to barf whenever I’ve inadvertently encountered some of it involving my characters” (Gabaldon, 2010, para. 1). Many authors passionately proclaim the immorality and illegality of fanfiction and in some cases, actively pursue legal action (for examples, see Lantagne, 2011). This response is rather unsurprising. Traditionally, fans—the primary creators, consumers, and writers of fanfiction— have been treated as occupying a degraded social status, criticized for preferring the make-believe of fantasies over reality, and accused of being unable to distinguish the differences between the two (Dill, 2009; Larsen & Zubernis, 2013). As such, fanfiction and other types of fan-spawned content are perceived as being worthy of little respect by those outside their respective communities (Costello & Moore, 2007). However, this mindset may be slowly but substantially changing in the mainstream. In terms of legality, for example, Lantagne (2011) explained how in copyright lawsuits, traditional authors like Gabaldon tend to favor emotional appeals, likening their characters to family members and the existence of fanfiction to some form of deep, emotional violation, instead of using established legal arguments. This ill-advised tactic has led court deci-
sions to favor the fanfiction writers and creators over traditional authors more often than not, bolstering the continue, legal existence of fanfiction. More importantly, pulling-to-publish, a process of rewriting and republishing fanfiction for profit purposes, has become an increasingly common practice. E L. James’s Fifty Shades series— originally a Twilight fanfiction—is likely the most well-known example (Brennan & Large, 2014), but more recently, Ann Todd signed a three-volume publishing deal with Simon and Schuster for the rights to her One Direction fanfiction series After (Rotham, 2014). It seems safe to assume that fanfiction will continue to flourish despite the protests of traditional authors. Considering the sheer quantity of fanfiction currently available (e.g., on Fanfiction.net, there are more than 760,000 individual works of fanfiction for the Harry Potter fandom alone), fanfiction provides one of the largest windows into the underlying psychology of fandoms, fans, and pop culture currently available to researchers. As such, “it would seem that the discipline of psychology has much to offer [the study of fanfiction]” (Vinney & DillShackleford, 2018, p. 18) because unlike more passive consumers of media, fans are “actively engaged in dealing with cognitive and affective challenges posed by the media content” (Bartsch & Hartmann, 2017, p. 2). Thus, fanfiction provides “voice to those who could not affect the source text directly, empowering fans to transform the source text in ways that were more reflective of their desires and interests” (Vinney & Dill-Shackleford, 2018, p. 19). Fanfiction is born from two seemingly contradictory impulses in fanatic behavior. By definition, fans are fascinated with pop cultural works, but their single-minded enthusiasm often leads to feelings of frustration with those works. They respond by taking authorship into their own hands, transforming the stories to better reflect their desires and interests (Jenkins, 1992), while also participating in a unique and powerful method of critiquing contemporary culture (Jenkins, 2006).
Integrative Complexity and Fanfiction: Expectations and Hypothesis The purpose of these studies is to investigate the following research question: Are there quantifiable linguistic differences between popular works and unpopular works of fanfiction? In other words, do popular works of fanfiction score higher or lower in terms of integrative complexity when compared with unpopular works of fanfiction? Previous integrative complexity research does present consistent complexity patterns in relation to success: Generally speaking, the previous findings indicate that persons often favor simplicity over complexity (Conway et al., 2012; Suedfeld & Rank, 1976; Tetlock, 1981; Thoemmes & Conway, 2007). McCullough and Conway (2017a) provided an excellent example of previous research that illustrates this preference toward simplicity. The two studies compared the integrative complexity of the dialogue of the films that won during the film award season against the other nominated films, finding the films that ultimately won scored significantly lower than the films that did not win. Although film and fanfiction are not direct analogues, they both typically reside in the realm of pop culture. Moreover, film fanfiction is one of the most popular categories of fanfiction. Based on the collective findings of previous complexity research, the studies that follow function under the hypothesis that
DIAMONDS AND THE DROSS
popular fanfiction will score significantly lower in terms of integrative complexity and its subtypes than unpopular fanfiction. However, it is important to remember that these studies are the first to use integrative complexity and its subtypes to explore the underlying psychology of fanfiction. As such, this research is exploratory in nature.
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
Methods and Operational Definitions for Study 1 and Study 2 As previously discussed, the world of fanfiction is both thriving and vast. Millions of fanfictions presently exist.1 Because of the sheer amount of fanfiction currently available, the obvious first step in conducting this research was condensing the amount of fanfiction into a more manageable amount. This condensation was accomplished in two ways. First, a single fanfiction-hosting website—Archive of Our Own—was chosen. Archive of Our Own was chosen because despite being a relatively new site, it hosts a large, substantial quantity of fanfiction, it places no restrictions on content, and it permits its content to be copied and pasted. The later reason is particularly important because the ability to copy and paste removed the need for transcription, saving both time and resources during the execution of the present studies. Second, three fanfiction categories that are available on Archive of Our Own were selected—Anime/Manga, Live-Action TV, and Videogames.2 The data collection was completed between May 13, 2017 and May 17, 2017. To reduce the chances of any potential confounds influencing the final results, several additional criteria were determined and applied: Each work of fanfiction (a) needed to have a unique author or authors and (b) needed to be originally written in the English language. These criteria prevent an individual writing style or potential mistranslations from skewing the results. (c) The fanfictions could not be podfics3 or crossovers4, (d) needed to be at least one thousand words in length, and (e) needed to be originally published before February, 2017. This final criterion was added to mitigate recency of publication from having a confounding effect. If a fanfiction had been published on May 16, 2017, for example, it would not have been available long enough for readers to fully interact with it—to decide whether to read it or not read it. The second step in this research was determining how to define popularity and success in terms of fanfiction. The online experience of fanfiction at its core is a community experience. As such, it only made sense to allow the fanfiction community to determine the success and popularity of an individual fanfiction. Luckily, Archive of Our Own uses and tracks two metrics—Kudos and Hits—that communicate the community’s respective approval and interest for individual works of fanfiction. Hits tracks the number of times a specific fanfiction has been visited or viewed by the readership and publicly displays that number. If a fanfiction has a high number of hits, then it can be classified as a popular fanfiction, having been read and viewed by a significant number of readers.5 Moreover, Archive of Our Own allows users to sort fanfiction by the number of Hits, making tracking this variable relatively simple. Study 1 compared and contrasted the integrative complexity of two groups of fanfictions, those with a high number of Hits (High Hits) and those with a low number of hits (Low
3
Hits). See the “Study 1’s Methods—Analyzing Hits” section for definitions of these two terms. Similarly, Kudos are a “quick and easy way to let a creator know that you like their work” (Archive FAQ, n.d.). Although not providing as viable information on the overall traffic an individual fanfiction experiences, Kudos provide more insight to the fanfiction community’s perception of a fanfiction than Hits. A high number of Kudos indicates a general perception of quality and approval on the part of the community, whereas a low number of Kudos indicates a general perception of inferiority and dislike.6 As such, Study 2 compared and contrasted the integrative complexity of two groups of fanfictions, those with a high number of Kudos (High Kudos) and those with a low number of Kudos (Low Kudos). See the “Study 2’s Methods—Analyzing Kudos” section for definitions of these two terms.
1 It is impossible to know exactly how many fanfictions currently exist and are posted to the Internet. There are simply too many fanfiction-hosting websites, writing websites, independent blogs, etc. to account for, and the discrepancy across different fandoms in terms overall quantity can be immense. For example, on Archive of Our Own, there are 228,982 unique fanfictions for the Marvel Cinematic Universe and only 120,167 individual fanfictions for the DC Comics Extended Universe as of August 21, 2018. Moreover, new fanfictions are added on a regularly basis, meaning the number is constantly changing: In their study, Vinney and Dill-Shackleford (2018) reported they collected all available Mad Men fanfictions from Archive of Our Own and Fanfiction.net, totaling in an initial data set of 340 unique works of fanfiction. As of August 21, 2018, there are now more than 500 Mad Men fanfictions on Archive of Our Own alone. 2 There a total of 11 categories of fanfiction on Archive of Our Own— Anime/Manga, Books/Literature, Cartoons/Comics/Graphic Novels, Celebrities/Real People, Movies, Music/Bands, Other Media, Theater, LiveAction TV, Videogames, and Uncategorized Fandoms. From these 11, Other Media and Uncategorized Fandoms were removed because they lack internal cohesion. The three categories used in this study were randomly selected from the remaining nine categories. The random selection was accomplished through use of an online random number generator. 3 Podfics are audio fanfictions, similar to radio dramas. This type of fanfiction was not considered because the different medium—audio as opposed to text—may have a confounding effect on the final results, skewing them positively or negatively. 4 Crossovers are fanfictions that feature characters, plotlines, and narrative elements from multiple fandoms (the characters from Naruto attending Hogwarts School for Witchcraft and Wizardry, for example). Because the intermingling of fandoms may act as a confound, influencing the final findings, this type of fanfiction was not used in these studies. 5 What a “significant number of readers” exactly means fluctuates based on the individual fandom. As of May 16, 2018, for example, the Harry Potter fanfiction with the highest number of Hits (Harry Potter Futanari Oneshots by futadom) had 634,296 Hits, whereas the fanfiction with the highest number of Hits for the Kate Daniels series (How to Train Your Godling by sifshadowheart) only had 5,598 Hits. This difference may be extreme but is not uncommon across the many, many fandoms on Archive of Our Own. These varied extremes of Hits also informed the decision to use only three fandoms from each category (see “Sample of Fanfiction” subsection for more detail) and to make the threshold High-Hits group for the top 30 fanfictions in each fandom as opposed to a specific, defined number. 6 Similar to Hits, what constitutes a high number of Kudos and a low number of Kudos depends on the individual fandom.
MCCULLOUGH
4 Study 1’s Methods—Analyzing Hits
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
Sample of Fanfiction For each category, three fandoms were selected to be used for collection purposes. This selection was completed to further condense the overall amount of usable fanfiction, making it even more manageable. For the Anime/Manga category, Naruto, Attack on Titan, and Hetalia: Axis Powers were chosen, for the Live-Action TV category, Supernatural, The 100, and Once Upon a Time were chosen, and for the Videogame category, Undertale, Overwatch, and Mass Effect were chosen. These fandoms were selected because at the time the data collection was completed, (a) they each had lower occurrences of podfics and crossovers than the average fandom within their respective categories and (b) they each had comparable numbers of Hits for their more popular fanfictions with the other chosen fandoms in their category. For each fandom, five fanfictions were randomly selected for each group. The High-Hits fanfictions were randomly selected from the 30 fanfictions with the most Hits as of May 17, 2017. The exact number that creates the threshold for the top 30 varies across the different fandoms: For example, in the Naruto fandom at the time of the data collection, the threshold number for the top 30 was more than 64,550 Hits, and in the Overwatch fandom, the threshold number was more than 45,640 Hits. The Low-Hits fanfictions were randomly selected from the total number of fanfictions that had less than 100 Hits as of May 17, 2017.7 The random selection was completed via an online random generator. Specifically, each eligible fanfiction was given a number label and the generator determined the numbers used. For a complete list of the fanfiction used, see Table 1.
Selection of Scoring Materials and Coding Process A grand total of 900 narrative blocks were selected and scored for the use in Study 1’s data analysis. These narrative blocks were equally divided among the chosen fanfictions and the two groups. From each fanfiction, 10 narrative blocks were randomly selected. Why use a sample instead of the entire fanfiction? There is no uniform length for fanfictions. Individual fanfictions can vary in length from only a few dozen words to hundreds of chapters. By limiting each fanfiction to strictly 10 blocks a balance between the High-Hits and Low-Hits groups was created, mitigating the chance of length or word count acting as a confound. To further balance the two groups, to be eligible, each block needed to be at least three sentences in length and no longer than a paragraph as defined by grammatical convention. The same constraints on minimum and maximum length were used previously in McCullough and Conway (2017b) and McCullough (in press). These parameters eliminated any single sentence paragraphs, overly short paragraphs, and overly long paragraphs that are not grammatically or stylistically correct from the random selection process. The blocks that were ultimately used were randomly selected in the same manner as the fanfiction themselves, each eligible paragraph being assigned a number and an online number generator determining which were ultimately used. This selection process allowed for blocks to be sampled across the entirety of the fanfiction and not contiguous, making for a more representative sample.
The sampled paragraphs were then scored for integrative complexity and its subtypes using Automated Integrative Complexity, a computer-based program that has been widely validated as a measurement of integrative complexity. It demonstrates tangibly higher computer-to-human consistency than other integrative complexity scoring systems that are currently available (Houck et al., 2014). The system scores each selected block of material (in this case, paragraphs from the respective fanfiction) on the same 1–7 scale used in traditional human scoring (see Conway et al., 2014, for more details). The Automated Integrative Complexity approximates integrative complexity scores for each block by assigning phrases or individual words according to the empirical probability of said phrases or words appearing in complex passages. It also computes scores for dialectical and elaborative complexity using the same logic (see Houck et al., 2014). Furthermore, McCullough and Conway (2017a), McCullough (in press), McCullough (2018), and McCullough and Conway (2017b) showed the Automated Integrative Complexity’s viability as a tool in the examination of complexity in pop culture contexts.
Study 1’s Results and Transitional Summary Individual one-way analyses of variance revealed significant main effects for integrative complexity and its subtypes for the Anime/ Manga category (integrative complexity, F(1, 298) ⫽ 57.68, p ⬍ .000, p2 ⫽ .16; dialectical complexity, F(1, 298) ⫽ 41.67, p ⬍ .000, p2 ⫽ .12; elaborative complexity, F(1, 298) ⫽ 15.54, p ⬍ .000, p2 ⫽ .05), the Live-Action TV category (integrative complexity, F(1, 298) ⫽ 72.64, p ⬍ .000, p2 ⫽ .20; dialectical complexity, F(1, 298) ⫽ 57.40, p ⬍ .000, p2 ⫽ .16; elaborative complexity, F(1, 298) ⫽ 32.04, p ⬍ .000, p2 ⫽ .10), and the Videogame category (integrative complexity, F(1, 298) ⫽ 30.83, p ⬍ .000, p2 ⫽ .09; dialectical complexity, F(1, 298) ⫽ 20.43, p ⬍ .000, p2 ⫽ .06; elaborative complexity, F(1, 298) ⫽ 17.75, p ⬍ .000, p2 ⫽ .06). A consistent mean pattern for all three types of complexity emerged across all of the tested categories; however, this mean pattern diverged from expectations. Instead of the HighHits fanfiction having lower mean complexity scores than the Low-Hits fanfiction, the High-Hits fanfictions scored significantly higher across all types of complexity than the Low-Hits fanfictions (for mean scores, see Table 2). In this regard, fanfiction stands opposed to other pop cultural domains like film (see McCullough & Conway, 2017a) and video games (see McCullough, in press) in which simplicity is preferred. 7 These thresholds—the top 30 for the High-Hits group and less than 100 for the Low-Hits group—provided a large enough population to draw functional samples from. Originally, the Low-Hits group was going to mirror the High-Hits group, being sampled from the 30 fanfictions with the fewest number of hits; however, more than 30 fanfictions had zero Hits, the absolute lowest a fanfiction can have, at the time of the data collection. As such, it was determined that the Low-Hits group would be defined as a sample drawn from all fanfictions with zero Hits (as it is in Study 2 with the analysis of Kudos). However, when the data collection began, it become quickly obvious that there were not enough fanfictions with zero Hits that met the other criteria to create an equal sample to the High-Hits group. To have a usable sample, the constraints of the Low-Hits group needed to be expanded once again. The use of 100 Hits made sampling possible, while also still operating on the extreme low end of the Hits spectrum.
Video Games
Live Action TV
Hetalia Axis Powers
Anime/Manga
Undertale
Overwatch
Mass Effect
Supernatural
Once Upon A Time
The 100
Attack on Titan
Naruto
Fandom
Category
High-Hits fanfiction (author)
One Night (fuzzy); Young Gods (N1ghtWr1ter); Movie Night (orphan_account); Her Alphas, Her Mates (ComicBookGeek1818); Unfinished Business (zroe) Down the Rabbit Hole (amycarey); Right There All The Time (devje); Calender (SkinnyProcrastinator); Daddy’s Girl (Mas Fawkes); Paint It Black (wily_one24) Asunder (rageprfrock); Powerless (LittleSparrow69); The Breath of All Things (KismelJeska); Gray (Valinde [Valyria]); Sink (crackers4jenn) Ferris Field (Kharem); Flesh is Weak (Revans_Mask); Slaves of Cerebus (NakedOwlMan); Guard Duty (RaeDMagdon); A Handful of Dust (tarysande) Fly on the Wall (Mizu7); four days (starscry); London Calling (Secto Boss); Inappropriate Conduct (Gaqalesque); It’s All Your Fault (Cawaiiey) Breaking Point (sizzlinteapot); Flowey is Not a Good Life Coach (unrestedjade); Between Flesh and Bone (Darkina); The Road to Redemption (Hanari502); Unexpected Attraction (eikwhyo)
New Playmates (toomuchmilk); His Little Angel (MerryGoat); Fill ‘em Up (MissLiveByThePen); Afterglow (WatanabeMaya); Whore of the Worlds (Angel Pair) Reverse (blackkat); Pulling My Weight (itsthechocopuff); Wrangler (EvilFuzzy9); About Face (wroth_and_ruin); Tumbling Naruto (esame) His Beating Heart (Lownly); 1994 (Vee); The Intern (Lutte); Audacity (Shoi); Droplets (prophetlemonade)
Table 1 Study 1—Sampled Fanfiction by Category and Fandom
Curse of Jean (Tsundere Potato); To You in in 2000 Years (knownopain); birthday twins (SomeRandomHuman); Lunacy (28_Characters_Later); Light of Dawn (Rabidy) Arlo (ultraviolet33); we ran away in order to come home (TaamiB); Of Bar and Bellamy (maybe_she_is); Second Chance at Living (MercyHime); The People of Olympus (AtlasShrugged1012) Tell Me Another (PhilciraptorSquad); Right Here (hookedgirl); History (Sunshine6232); Little Mal blue (Daughter_Goldenwood); When I Wake (textbookone) Hunted (MyssyMyssy); Drabble Challenge (veritas_st); Coming of Age (ohnoscarlett); Lydia’s Black Roses (trashmaff); Stumble into History (sevenfists) Four Sevens (sirconnie); Black Heart (xenowriter); Not Jealous (Sillywritergall); Levithan Rising (emilianady); Desert Heat (FrankiValerie) Watchpoint: Antarctica (p_sk); Wishing for Daddy (Mtex); Dionysus (Keiko36); Mistakes, Questions, Choices and Fools (Tashi Rogers); Homeward Bound (kingofthelivingdead) Things Who Were Different (ma_dragon); Seven Stories (Bibichik); Determined Hope (PorcelainRei); Undertale RP (MadaraS); The Lies the Bind Us (Old_Herobine)
The Story of Kiku (Hinata28h); A Nightmare in Oz (Samstar1990); Alfred F P.I (Deablos); Why Me? (Shadown Elvin Angel); Good for you (ankostone) Kaijin (Saamon_sama); One Off (obsobing); Cold Ice (Neji_Hyuga); The Perfect Dream (NATFreak); Blurring Panels (PikaPixie)
Low-Hits fanfiction (author)
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
DIAMONDS AND THE DROSS
5
MCCULLOUGH
6 Table 2 Study 1—Mean Scores by Category
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
High Hits mean score
Low Hits mean score
Category
IC
DIAL
ELAB
IC
DIAL
ELAB
ps
Anime/Manga (N ⫽ 300)a Live-Action TV (N ⫽ 300)b Video Games (N ⫽ 300)c
2.05 1.94 1.95
1.80 1.69 1.71
1.36 1.40 1.36
1.47 1.40 1.52
1.37 1.28 1.41
1.15 1.11 1.13
.000 .000 .000
Note. IC ⫽ integrative complexity; DIAL ⫽ dialectical complexity; ELAB ⫽ elaborative complexity. a Integrative complexity, F(1, 298) ⫽ 57.94, p ⬍ .000; dialectical complexity, F(1, 298) ⫽ 50.11, p ⬍ .000; elaborative complexity, F(1, 298) ⫽ 23.33, p ⬍ .000. b Integrative complexity, F(1, 298) ⫽ 34.42, p ⬍ .000; dialectical complexity, F(1, 298) ⫽ 23.06, p ⬍ .000; elaborative complexity, F(1, 298) ⫽ 18.60, p ⬍ .000. c Integrative complexity, F(1, 298) ⫽ 72.18, p ⬍ .000; dialectical complexity, F(1, 298) ⫽ 57.61, p ⬍ .000; elaborative complexity, F(1, 298) ⫽ 21.16, p ⬍ .000.
Furthermore, both dialectical complexity and elaborative complexity experienced similar significant main effects. As subtypes of integrative complexity, dialectical complexity and elaborative complexity measure specific styles of integrative complexity: Dialectical complexity indicates a discussion of issue that is executed broadly and generally from differing and varied viewpoints, and conversely, elaborative complexity is a single issue discussed in a multifaceted way (Conway et al., 2008; Houck et al., 2014). Typically, if a work displays high levels of dialectical complexity, it displays low levels of elaborative complexity, and vice versa. Because significant main effects were witnessed for both dialectical complexity and elaborative complexity, the findings suggest that a single style of integrative complexity is not overtly preferred or favored: Complexity in general is desired in terms of fanfiction. These results are not without some backing in previous research. Conway, Houck, Gornick, and Repke (2016) found that complexity is preferred over simplicity in some specific situations and the above findings indicate that fanfiction may be one such situation. Moreover, McCullough (2018) found that audiences prefer complexity over simplicity in the context of film review, favoring critics and reviewers who point out both the strengths and weakness of a film. Fanfiction is a form of cultural critique (Jenkins, 2006), and a preference toward complexity may be a by-product of critical thought as a general rule. However, concrete, definitive conclusions cannot be drawn based on the findings of a single data set. As Tryon (2016) explained, “no single study should ever be trusted” (p. 236), thus further examination is required. Study 2 builds and expands upon the work of Study 1 by once again comparing the complexity between popular and unpopular fanfiction but instead of using Hits as the indicator of popularity, Study 2 uses Kudos.
Study 2’s Methods—Analyzing Kudos The same fanfiction categories and fandoms as well as the same methods and procedures that were used in Study 1 were also used in Study 2. The only notable difference between the two studies is the fact that the Low-Kudos group was randomly selected from the fanfictions with zero kudos as of May 17, 2017.8 For a complete list of the used fanfiction, see Table 3. It is important to note that there is some overlap between the authors and/or fanfictions of Study 1 and Study 2. This overlap does imply that Hits and Kudos are correlative in nature; however, the fact that the overlap is
partial and not complete indicates that the two are distinct enough to warrant separate studies and individual sets of analyses.
Study 2’s Results Consistent with Study 1, individual one-way analyses of variance showed significant main effects across integrative complexity and its subtypes for the Anime/Manga category (integrative complexity, F(1, 298) ⫽ 57.94, p ⬍ .000, p2 ⫽ .16; dialectical complexity, F(1, 298) ⫽ 50.11, p ⬍ .000, p2 ⫽ .14; elaborative complexity, F(1, 298) ⫽ 23.33, p ⬍ .000, p2 ⫽ .07), the LiveAction TV category (integrative complexity, F(1, 298) ⫽ 34.42, p ⬍ .000, p2 ⫽ .10; dialectical complexity, F(1, 298) ⫽ 23.06, p ⬍ .000, p2 ⫽ .07; elaborative complexity, F(1, 298) ⫽ 18.60, p ⬍ .000, p2 ⫽ .06), and the Videogame category (integrative complexity, F(1, 298) ⫽ 72.18, p ⬍ .000, p2 ⫽ .20; dialectical complexity, F(1, 298) ⫽ 57.61, p ⬍ .000, p2 ⫽ .16; elaborative complexity, F(1, 298) ⫽ 22.16, p ⬍ .000, p2 ⫽ .07). Furthermore, the same mean pattern seen in Study 1 was also seen here: The High-Kudos fanfiction scored significantly higher in terms of complexity than the Low-Kudos fanfiction. Again, a specific subtype of integrative complexity is not being favored. Instead, complexity in all forms is preferred. See Table 4 for a complete listing of the mean scores.
General Discussion Despite not aligning with expectations or the original hypothesis, the findings for both Study 1 and Study 2 revealed significant main effects and a consistent mean pattern across all types of complexity and tested categories: The more popular or more successful fanfictions scored significantly higher in terms of integrative complexity than the unpopular, generally ignored works of fanfiction. These findings also strongly support integrative complexity’s applicability to the study of fanfiction. 8 The Low-Kudos group was originally defined as the 30 fanfictions with the fewest kudos, the direct opposite of the High-Kudos group; however, in the relevant fandoms, more than 30 fanfictions had zero kudos, the absolute lowest number of kudos a fanfiction could have, at the time of the data collection. As such, the parameters of the Low-Kudos group were changed to consider all fanfiction with zero kudos.
Video Game
Live Action TV
Hetalia Axis Powers
Anime/Manga
Undertale
Overwatch
Mass Effect
Supernatural
Once Upon
The 100
Attack on Titan
Naruto
Fandom
Category
High-Kudos fanfiction (author)
She (thefooliam); The Marrying Type (artsypolarbear); fearless (lordvoldyfarts); break your plans (pizzaoctavia); I have lost my pain (thrace) A Bed of Thorns (Nym); A Dark Ocean (chilly_flame); Shadow Haven (Delicious Comfort); Prism (coatitiongirl); Temporary Distractions (amycarey) Twist and Shout (gabriel and standbyme); Into Your Hideaway (thepinupchemist); The Girlfriend Experience (rageprufrock); Revealed (Valinde [Valyria]); An Exercise in Worthless (beast of the sky) Communication (Evidence); Territory (miscella); Marked Introductions (Feynite); Curiosity (quandrum); Indestructible (theherocomplex) four days (starscry); Picture Perfect (Hawkefeathers) Magic McCree (Cawaiiey); Hang the Fool (AlmaMeDuele); Threads (CommonNonsense) Between Time and Shape (CrossBladeWing); One by One (CourierNew); I Need an Adult (Fulgradrum); There when you call (Senatsu); Corrupted (sososhady)
The Silken Rose (snowyfoxpaws); Making in Convincing (Jacquzy); Never, Ever (sparxwrites); Cuckoo in the Nest (PennyLane); Wrong Number (flybynight) reverse (blackkat); In Bond and Blood (thehoyden); Of Harrowed Hearts (Sable_Scribe); In Good Company (weialala); An Invincible Summer (ShanaStoryteller) The Intern (Lutte); 1994 (Vee); Red Heat (sciencefictioness); Street Brat (Monsoon); Playing Favorites (Keita)
Table 3 Study 2—Sampled Fanfiction by Category and Fandom
An Awkward Afternoon (JediIlonaShepard); One Way Trip (Slaska); A Measure of Things (Ygrain); After the Fall (Reikalady); Body Image (championofnone) Carry Me (Emyly001); The Threat of Joy (alberthammondjr); Heroes are Eternal (Stefan42); Angst Fluffs (Pansexual of the Cosmos); Snowmen in Australia (Akimoto_Kumiko) Leaf Monarch (blackmage87); Night Owl (StarBerries); undertale one shots (scottyzelsnyder); The Eighth Soul (Skeleton_Tears); Bitter memories (Rexcaliburn)
High Hopes (Talliya); CollegeNAtwins (CollegeNAtwins); One More Night (blushingninja): Kirkland and Hyde (Shizuo_Heiwajimal); Early to Rise (Restored_Azure) Growing Up (NoticedKohai); The Bood of the Dead (makaragamzee); Resurection (0Lauren0 [MangaAnimeZoo]); Ningen (sangchi); Homeless Hearts: Journey’s End (Ghost_of_a_Chance_13) Jean the Dragon (ChiliWolf211); birthday twins (SomeRandomHuman); Bewilderment (ThreeHats); Pure (Verbal_0); What if? (Sin_Queen) The 100 From Lexa’s Point of View (holsteinclexa); Blur (Simmyx1); 7 Years (DonnaJane54); Modern Days (Zeyho); Surviving Earth (moriartyswife) Finders Keepers (Where_The_Owl_Fly); True Love’s Color (Goddess Stevie); Don’t Grow Up (Yaoi_Lover); What Hurts the Most (Streep_parrilla92); Still Around (neryloreana) Right & Wrong is as simple as black & white . . . right? (Fallingstars); Pride and Punishment (Superfreek); The Descent of Cas (Keenir); It Starts with a Kiss (Min_SD); Substitution (impertinence)
Low-Kudos fanfiction (author)
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
DIAMONDS AND THE DROSS
7
MCCULLOUGH
8 Table 4 Study 2—Mean Scores by Category
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
High Kudos mean scores
Low Kudos mean score
Category
IC
DIAL
ELAB
IC
DIAL
ELAB
ps
Anime/Manga (N ⫽ 300)a Live-Action TV (N ⫽ 300)b Video Games (N ⫽ 300)c
2.09 1.90 2.02
1.88 1.69 1.80
1.42 1.36 1.35
1.50 1.48 1.43
1.39 1.38 1.33
1.16 1.13 1.13
.000 .000 .000
Note. IC ⫽ integrative complexity; DIAL ⫽ dialectical complexity; ELAB ⫽ elaborative complexity. a Integrative complexity, F(1, 298) ⫽ 57.67, p ⬍ .000; dialectical complexity, F(1, 298) ⫽ 41.67, p ⬍ .000; elaborative complexity, F(1, 298) ⫽ 15.54, p ⬍ .000. b Integrative complexity, F(1, 298) ⫽ 72.64, p ⬍ .000; dialectical complexity, F(1, 298) ⫽ 57.40, p ⬍ .000; elaborative complexity, F(1, 298) ⫽ 32.04, p ⬍ .000. c Integrative complexity, F(1, 298) ⫽ 30.83, p ⬍ .000; dialectical complexity, F(1, 298) ⫽ 20.43, p ⬍ .000; elaborative complexity, F(1, 298) ⫽ 17.75, p ⬍ .000.
What are we to make of these findings and their divergence from expectations? The following sections discuss potential interpretations for these findings.
Complexity Over Simplicity The preference for complexity over simplicity seen in fanfiction, although uncommon and rare, is not wholly unique to the above studies (for details, see Conway et al., 2016 and McCullough, 2018); however, this divergence does raise the question of why. Why do fanfiction readers prefer complexity over simplicity? The following subsections discuss four possible explanations. The quality of writing. One potential explanation could be the possibility that good, high-quality writing in terms of fiction naturally and normally produces higher levels of integrative complexity. If this explanation is actually true, then one would expect higher levels of integrative complexity to be preferred across all types of fictional writing, not just fanfiction: TV shows, comics, films, novels, and so forth. Although currently no data exist to conclusively prove or disprove this explanation, it does seem unlikely. As previously discussed, when testing the complexity of film dialogue, McCullough and Conway (2017a) discovered a correlation between lower levels of integrative complexity and the increased likelihood of winning during the film award season. It would be difficult to argue that institutions like the Academy Awards and the Golden Globes reward poor writing. Visuals versus text. McCullough and Conway (2017a) found a preference for simplicity in the writing of films, and these studies found a preference for complexity in the writing of fanfiction. These opposite trends suggest that what level of complexity that corresponds with good or bad writing is not consistent across the various writing contexts. So why is complexity preferred in some writing contexts, whereas simplicity is preferred in others? Why is simplicity preferred in films but complexity is preferred in fanfiction? One explanation may be differing nature of the mediums: Film is visually based, whereas fanfiction is text-based. Film presents actual visuals alongside the narrative, the story and the dialogue, but in most cases, the creation of visuals for fanfiction is dependent wholly on the imagination of individual readers. This lack of visual stimulation may explain the preference toward complexity over simplicity. Visual stimuli (body language, facial expressions, etc.) are a key component of standard human communication (Duncan, 1972),
and its absence may promote persons to seek cognitive stimulation in other forms. Anecdotally speaking, many people explain their propensity toward pacing while talking on the phone as a consequence of the lack of face-to-face communication. Because fanfiction naturally lacks a visual component, it may force readers to seek satisfying levels of cognitive stimulation elsewhere which may subsequently promote the preference for higher levels of integrative complexity. The complexity of critique. The preference toward complexity in fanfiction may have less to do with its nature as a predominantly text-based medium and more with the nature of criticism. Both the findings of McCullough (2018) and these studies show a preference toward complexity and both analyze some form of critique: McCullough (2018) looked at the complexity of film review on YouTube, and fanfiction is a form of cultural critique (Jenkins, 2006). As such, higher levels of integrative complexity may be inherent to the execution of well-done criticism. This seems to be a reasonable conclusion considering what dialectical and elaborative complexity are designed to quantify. As Conway et al. (2008) explained, dialectical complexity describes when a person explores an issue from differing viewpoints like when a film reviewer points out the strengths and weakness in a film (“The film’s acting was phenomenal but the special effects were horrid”). Conversely, elaborative complexity describes when a person explores issue in a multidimensional fashion like when a film reviewer strictly points out either the many strengths or the many weaknesses in a film (“Both the acting and the special effects were great in that film”). Criticism, at its core, involves assessment and analysis, and both dialectical complexity and elaborative complexity embody predominant methods to accomplish either. The frustration of fans. As previously discussed, fanfiction is often times born from the dual nature of the fan experience: Both the extreme passion for and frustration with pop cultural works (Jenkins, 1992, 2006). One such area fans experience this frustration is the demand for representation. There is a reason that there are more fanfictions that romantically and sexually pair Iron Man and Captain America together than those that pair them with their female, canonical love interests. There is a reason Pidge from Voltron: Legendary Defender is predominantly genderfluid or nonbinary within the realms of fanfiction rather than female like in the show. There is a reason that nonheteronormative narratives are presented as commonplace, the norm in most fanfictions.
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
DIAMONDS AND THE DROSS
These differences between the canonical representation of a character and his or her/their fanfiction representation may explain the presence of higher levels of complexity in popular fanfictions. According to the value pluralism model (Tetlock, 1986), integrative complexity emerges when core beliefs come into conflict. The more core beliefs an individual has the more likely said individual is to be complex. By adding new dimensions and nuances to fictional characters, fanfiction writers are creating environments that are predisposed to higher levels of integrative complexity: The fanfiction version of Captain America must contend with both being the symbol of American ideals and his own personal sexuality. The fanfiction version of Pidge openly expresses a gender identity that culturally is sometimes viewed with confusion and apprehension. As Tishelman et al. (2015) explained, “many gender variant individuals have lived in a chronic state of conflict between self-understanding and physical being, with a continual misalignment between others’ perceptions of them and their internal selfperception of gender” (p. 37). Because fanfiction like most fan-spawned content is not viewed with respect by outsiders to the community (Costello & Moore, 2007), writers of fanfiction are not intrinsically bound by the conventions of the mainstream. They can openly and deeply explore concepts, identities, and boundaries of the culture that are not always accepted or are viewed as deviant, unnatural, or disturbed. This potential for nuance allows for core beliefs, whether at the character level, narrative level, or thematical level, to more readily come into conflict, likely promoting higher levels of integrative complexity. And this potential may also prime readers to expect and desire these higher levels. Of course, all of these explanations are merely suggestions at this point, potentially correct or potentially incorrect, with no conclusive empirical backing. They are but some of the myriad of possible explanations and they require further exploration and examination to determine their accuracy.
Concluding Thoughts Undoubtedly, these findings are both impactful and insightful; however, this research is not without limitation. Because of the exploratory nature of this research, for instance, both Study 1 and Study 2 by intentional design used relatively condensed samples. As such, these newly discovered effect may only extend to strictly Archive of Our Own or even more strictly to only the tested categories and fandoms of fanfiction. Also, only English-written fanfictions were tested, and although fanfiction is highly common throughout the various English-dominant countries and cultures, fanfiction can be found to varying degrees across most developed nations. However, these limitations do not negate the importance nor the impact of these two studies. As previously discussed, fanfiction as a research topic has been a largely ignored by researchers and scholars outside the qualitative humanities’ scholarship, and only a few studies focus specifically on examining and understanding the underlining psychology of fanfiction, most notably Vinney and Dill-Shackleford (2018). Alongside that article, these studies begin filling this particularly research gap and provides a strong foundation going forward. It is the responsibility of future researcher to continue filling the research gap and build up these studies.
9 References
Archive FAQ. (n.d.). What are kudos? Archive of Our Own. Retrieved from http://archiveofourown.org/faq/comments-and-kudos?language_id⫽en# whatiskudos Baker-Brown, G., Ballard, E. J., Bluck, S., DeVries, B., Suedfeld, P., & Tetlock, P. E. (1992). The conceptual/integrative complexity scoring manual. In C. P. Smith (Ed.), Motivation and personality: Handbook of thematic content analysis (pp. 401– 418). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511527937.029 Ballard, E. J. (1983). Canadian prime ministers: Complexity in political crises. Canadian Psychology/Psychologie canadienne, 24, 125–129. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0080701 Bartsch, A., & Hartmann, T. (2017). The role of cognitive and affective challenge in entertainment experience. Communication Research, 44, 29 –53. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0093650214565921 Brennan, J., & Large, D. (2014). ‘Let’s get a bit of context’: Fifty Shades and the phenomenon of ‘pulling to publish’ in Twilight fan fiction. Media International Australia, 152, 27–39. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/ 1329878X1415200105 Carruthers, F. (2004). ‘Fanfic is good for two things—Greasing engines and killing brain cells’. Participations, 1. Retrieved from http://www .participations.org/volume%201/issue%202/1_02_carruthers_article .htm Conway, L. G., III, & Conway, K. R. (2011). The terrorist rhetorical style and its consequences for understanding terrorist violence. Dynamics of Asymmetric Conflict, 4, 175–192. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17467586 .2011.627940 Conway, L. G., III, Conway, K. R., Gornick, L. J., & Houck, S. C. (2014). Automated integrative complexity. Political Psychology, 35, 603– 624. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/pops.12021 Conway, L. G., III, Gornick, L. J., Burfeind, C., Mandella, P., Kuenzli, A., Houck, S. C., & Fullerton, D. T. (2012). Does simple rhetoric win elections? An integrative complexity analysis of U.S. presidential campaigns. Political Psychology, 33, 599 – 618. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j .1467-9221.2012.00910.x Conway, L. G., III, Houck, S. C., Gornick, L. J., & Repke, M. A. (2016). Ideologically-motivated perceptions of complexity: Believing those who agree with you are more complex than they are. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 35, 708 –718. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/ 0261927X16634370 Conway, L. G., III, Suedfeld, P., & Clements, S. M. (2003). Beyond the American reaction: Integrative complexity of Middle Eastern leaders during the 9/11 crisis. Psicología Política, 27, 93–103. Conway, L. G., III, Suedfeld, P., & Tetlock, P. E. (2001). Integrative complexity and political decisions that lead to war or peace. In D. J. Christie (Ed.), Peace, conflict, and violence: Peace psychology for the 21st century (pp. 66 –75). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall/Pearson Education. Conway, L. G., III, Thoemmes, F., Allison, A. M., Towgood, K. H., Wagner, M. J., Davey, K., . . . Conway, K. R. (2008). Two ways to be complex and why they matter: Implications for attitude strength and lying. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95, 1029 –1044. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0013336 Coppa, F. (2006). A brief history of media fandom. In K. Busse & K. Hellekson (Eds.), Fan fiction and fan communities in the age of the Internet: New essays (pp. 41–59). Jefferson, NC: McFarland & Company. Costello, V., & Moore, B. (2007). Cultural outlaws: An examination of audience activity and online television fandom. Television and New Media, 8, 124 –143. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1527476406299112 Dill, K. E. (2009). How fantasy becomes reality: Seeing through media influence. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
10
MCCULLOUGH
Duncan, S. (1972). Some signals and rules for taking speaking turns in conversations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 23, 283– 292. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0033031 Gabaldon, D. (2010). Fan-fiction and moral conundrums. Voyages of the Artemis. Retrieved from http://web.archive.org/web/20100507173749/ http://voyagesoftheartemis.blogspot.com/2010/05/fan-fiction-andmoral-conundrums.html? Gray, J., Sandvoss, C., & Harrington, C. L. (2007). Introduction: Why study fans? In J. Gray, C. Sandvoss, & C. L. Harrington (Eds.), Fandom: Identities and communities in a mediated world (pp. 1–16). New York: New York University Press. Houck, S. C., Conway, L. G., III, & Gornick, L. J. (2014). Automated integrative complexity: Current challenges and future directions. Political Psychology, 35, 647– 659. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/pops.12209 Jenkins, H. (1992). Textual poachers: Television fans and participatory culture. New York, NY: Routledge. Jenkins, H. (2006). Fans, bloggers, and gamers: Exploring participatory culture. New York: New York University Press. Lantagne, S. M. (2011). The better angels of our fanfiction: The need for true and logical precedent. Hastings Communications & Entertainment Law Journal, 33, 159 –180. Larsen, K., & Zubernis, L. S. (2013). Fangasm: Supernatural fangirls. Iowa City: University of Iowa Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/j .ctt20q218t McCullough, H. (2018). The new American dream: YouTube, movie review and integrative complexity. Paper presented at the 6th Annual University of Albany—SUNY Institutions & Societies Conference, Albany, NY. McCullough, H. (in press). “Hey! Listen!”: Video game dialogue, integrative complexity and the perception of quality. Press Start. McCullough, H., & Conway, L. G., III. (2017a). “And the Oscar goes to . . .”: Integrative complexity’s predictive power in the film industry. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts. Advance online publication. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/aca0000149 McCullough, H., & Conway, L. G., III. (2017b). The cognitive complexity of Miss Piggy and Osama Bin Laden: Examining linguistic differences between fiction and reality. Psychology of Popular Media Culture. Advance online publication. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/ppm0000150 Rotham, L. (2014). One direction fanfiction writer gets book deal, but not much respect. Time.com. Retrieved from http://time.com/2822591/onedirection-fanfiction-writer-gets-book-deal-but-not-much-respect/ Schneider, G. A., & Giambra, L. M. (1971). Performance in concept identification as a function of cognitive complexity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 19, 261–273. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/ h0031364 Smith, A. G., Suedfeld, P., Conway, L. G., III, & Winter, D. G. (2008). The language of violence: Distinguishing terrorist from nonterrorist groups by. Dynamics of Asymmetric Conflict, 1, 142–163. http://dx.doi.org/10 .1080/17467580802590449 Stein, L., & Busse, K. (2009). Limit play: Fan authorship between source text, intertext, and context. Popular Communication: The International Journal of Media and Culture, 7, 192–207. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 15405700903177545 Suedfeld, P., & Bluck, S. (1988). Changes in integrative complexity prior to surprise attacks. The Journal of Conflict Resolution, 32, 626 – 635. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022002788032004002
Suedfeld, P., Conway, L. G., III, & Eichhorn, D. (2001). Studying Canadian leaders at a distance. In O. Feldman & L. Valenty (Eds.), Political leadership for the new century: Lessons from the cross-cultural study of personality and behavior (pp. 3–19). Westport, CT: Greenwood. Suedfeld, P., & Leighton, D. C. (2002). Early communications in the war against terrorism: An integrative complexity analysis. Political Psychology, 23, 585–599. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/0162-895X.00299 Suedfeld, P., & Rank, A. D. (1976). Revolutionary leaders: Long-term success as a function of changes in conceptual complexity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34, 169 –178. http://dx.doi.org/10 .1037/0022-3514.34.2.169 Suedfeld, P., & Tetlock, P. (1977). Integrative complexity of communications in international crises. The Journal of Conflict Resolution, 21, 169 –184. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/002200277702100108 Tetlock, P. E. (1981). Pre- to postelection shifts in presidential rhetoric: Impression management or cognitive adjustment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 207–212. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/00223514.41.2.207 Tetlock, P. E. (1986). A value pluralism model of ideological reasoning. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 819 – 827. http://dx .doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.50.4.819 Thoemmes, F., & Conway, L. G., III. (2007). Integrative complexity of 41 U.S. presidents. Political Psychology, 28, 193–226. http://dx.doi.org/10 .1111/j.1467-9221.2007.00562.x Thomas, B. (2011). What is fanfiction and why are people saying such nice things about it? StoryWorlds: A Journal of Narrative Studies, 3, 1–24. http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/stw.2011.0001 Tishelman, A. C., Kaufman, R., Edwards-Leeper, L., Mandel, F. H., Shumer, D. E., & Spack, N. P. (2015). Serving transgender youth: Challengers, dilemmas, and clinical examples. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 46, 37– 45. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0037490 Tryon, W. W. (2016). Replication is about effect size: Comment on Maxwell, Lau, and Howard (2015). American Psychologist, 71, 236 – 237. Tuckman, B. W. (1966). Interpersonal probing and revealing and systems of integrative complexity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 3, 655– 664. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0023300 Vinney, C., & Dill-Shackleford, K. E. (2018). Fan fiction as a vehicle for meaning making: Eudaimonic appreciation, hedonic enjoyment, and other perspectives on fan engagement with television. Psychology of Popular Media Culture, 7, 18 –32. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/ppm 0000106 Wasike, B. (2017). Charismatic rhetoric, integrative complexity and the U.S. Presidency: An analysis of the State of the Union Addresses (SOTU) from George Washington to Barack Obama. The Leadership Quarterly, 28, 812– 826. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2017.04.002 Winter, D. G. (2007). The role of motivation, responsibility, and integrative complexity in crisis escalation: Comparative studies of war and peace crises. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92, 920 – 937. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.92.5.920
Received March 11, 2018 Revision received September 12, 2018 Accepted September 21, 2018 䡲
