Page 1 of 3

Magbag, Abygail P. Literature & Psychology

FLA #1: Annotated Bibliography July 6, 2018

Aras, G. (2015). Personality and Individual Differences: Literature in Psychology- Psychology in

Literature. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 185, 250-257. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.03.452.
This journal articles asserts that literature, which intertwines within such fields as history, philosophy,
sociology, psychology and so on, is a discipline wherein language is used as a medium of expression to
interpret man, existence and culture. The paper discusses literature in terms of its interdisciplinary
structure, psychology considering man and existence, personality and individual differences which
have always been studied by writers, philosophers, artists, psychologists and psychiatrists. Several
complex notions, unfathomable personalities and ambiguous motives have been associated with
characters in literary genres: For example, the term Bovarism is explained by means of Flaubert's
Madame Bovary. Similar examples in literary works could be multiplied. Man, and existence have been
fundamental themes in literature, which has existed even before psychology. The paper likewise, puts
emphasis on how works of literature and art enable individuals to be aware of their personalities and
individual differences and to question life and existence, the main data in the field of psychology as
well. It asserts therefore, the very strong correlation between literature and psychology since both
deal with human beings and their reactions, miseries, desires, and their individual and social concerns
by means of different concepts, methods, and approaches.
Emir, B. (2016). Literature and Psychology in the Context of the Interaction of Social Sciences. Khazar
Journal Of Humanities And Social Sciences, 19(4), 49-55. This journal article discusses literature and
psychology as two branches of science that study human soul. It posits that while Psychology
researches human behaviors and their causes, literature depicts human behavior through fiction.
These two branches of social science studying human behavior are interrelated and mutually
beneficial. And the basic building block of the correlation between literature and psychology is a
literary work. Literary works study human beings and describe their inner world with all its aspects.
The reason is that a literary work is at the same time a product of a certain psychological condition. A
literary work supports psychology in terms of depicting human psychological conditions, as we see in
the example of Dostoevsky’s characters. At the same time, Jung noted, psychology also provides
insights into literature by exploring mental processes. A literary work benefits from psychology in
terms of successfully presenting characters, expressing their moods, and bringing the reader into the
psychological dimension of human reality. Psychology and study of literature meet in their focus on
phantasies, emotions and human soul. Thus, there exists a two-way relationship based on mutual
interaction between literature and psychology, in the form of evaluation of a literary work with the
resources of psychology and obtaining psychological truths from a literary work
Gilmore, J. (2013). Philosophy of Literature. Oxford Bibliographies Online Datasets. doi:
10.1093/obo/9780195396577-0213. This journal article addresses the most fundamental questions
about the nature of literature as an art. Some of these questions address the metaphysics and ontology
of literary works: What, if anything, essentially distinguishes literary works of art (such as epics,
novels, drama, and poetry) from other kinds of writings, such as scientific reports, historical treatises,
religious texts, guides, and manuals, which may happen to be written in a literary manner? In addition,
what kinds of things are literary works of art that seem to exist over time in some way independently
of any of their printed editions? Other questions address our ways of engaging with literature, such as:
What norms govern our interpretation and understanding of such works? Is the meaning of a work
fixed, or does it change with the changes in the contexts in which it is read? Can we have a genuine
emotional response to the characters, events, and states of affairs represented in such works even
when we believe that they are not real? Finally, some questions address the value of works of
 Page 2 of 3

literature: Do they offer any distinctive form of knowledge or insight? Can their cognitive and moral
merits and defects count as artistic merits and defects? According to this article, philosophy of
literature is not alone in pursuing these questions, for literary history, criticism, and other modes of
scholarship address these concerns, as do readers when they reflect on their own and others’ practices
of attending to works of art. However, the philosophical approach to literature, while often
productively drawing on the practical study and first-order analysis of literary works, tends to adopt
a more systematic, theoretical, ahistorical, and foundational approach than commonly found in other
fields. Also, while the philosophy of literature tends to address the nature of literature as an art, it has
been profoundly shaped by work in other areas of philosophy far from aesthetics such as analytic
metaphysics and philosophy of language, which since their inception have addressed such topics as
the metaphysics of fictional characters.
Holland, N. (2006). Holland's Guide to Psychoanalytic Psychology and Literature-and-Psychology. New York:
Oxford University Press. As psychoanalysis becomes more and more important to literary studies and
the accompanying literature bulks larger and larger, students often feel overwhelmed, not knowing
where to turn for readings that will open the subject. The book Holland's Guide to Psychoanalytic
Psychology and Literature-and-Psychology offers an ingenious solution to this problem. It provides
concise outlines of all types of psychoanalytic theory and shows how they apply to literary criticism.
The outlines point in turn to further, more specific readings--articles, essays, and books--which can
then be located by two extensive bibliographies that follow the discussion. These offer materials that
range from the earliest Freud to the latest cognitive science and include dozens of bibliographic aids.
Holland integrates these suggested readings with comments on various psychologies as they relate to
literature. He is thus able to guide students easily to the precise subject they wish to study, be it Jungian
criticism, ego psychology, feminist psychoanalysis, psychoanalytic film theory, or interpretation of
some specific text. Holland also offers a bracing discussion of reader-response criticism and a lucid
guide to the work of Jacques Lacan. A foreword defends the psychological approach, suggesting which
points in psychoanalytic theory will work for literary critics, and which will not.
John, E., & Lopes, D. (2004). Philosophy of literature (1st ed.). Malden, MA: Blackwell Pub. Forty-five
essential readings in the philosophy of literature are brought together for the first time in this
anthology to provide a balanced and coherent overview of developments in the field during the past
30 years. They include substantial and carefully chosen essays and extracts which highlight influential
work on fiction, emotion, interpretation, metaphor, literary value, and the definition and ontology of
literature. An additional historical section features generous selections of the writings of early
pioneers such as Plato, Aristotle, Nietzsche, and Hume. This authoritative volume offers a handy
compilation of contributions to the field by its leading figures. It is an indispensable resource for
anyone interested in the philosophy of literature or the philosophy of art.
Moghaddam, F. (2004). From ‘Psychology in Literature’ to ‘Psychology is Literature’: An Exploration of
Boundaries and Relationships. Theory & Psychology, 14(4), 505-525. doi:
https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0959354304044922. This journal article discusses the three categories,
varying from lowest to highest levels of abstraction, of possible relationships between psychology and
literature are critically examined. The first category represents the lowest level of abstraction and
involves ‘psychology in literature’: literature as a source of psychological data; literature as a source
of insights for psychology. The second involves literature as an independent variable; literature as a
dependent variable; literature as understood through psychology. The third, at the highest level of
abstraction, involves psychology as nomothetic and literature as idiographic; psychology as culture-
free and literature as culture-bound; psychology as concerned with actual worlds and literature with
possible worlds; and, finally, ‘psychology is literature’. Each option is viable at a level of abstraction,
although ‘psychology is literature’ is particularly provocative, and nurturing of cultural research.
 Page 3 of 3

Olsen, S. (2011). Structure of Literary Understanding. Cambridge, GBR: Cambridge University Press. How
does a reader respond to a work of literature and how does he begin to evaluate it? Mr Olsen attempts
to answer these and related questions. The book is in two parts. In the first three chapters, the author
beats established theories that literature has a special language, provides a heightened insight into
'truth' and has emotion as its prime currency. In the remaining chapters, Mr Olsen constructs and fully
illustrates the theory that understanding of a work of literature comes in two complementary stages:
first, judgements about the author's aesthetic intentions (interpretation); second, appreciation of the
aesthetic qualities of the work (evaluation). At the end of his argument, attempting an answer to the
question 'Why is literature important?', Mr Olsen characterizes literature as an institution and thus
forges links with contemporary philosophy which sees all human action as ordered and defined by
social institutions.
Vidmar, I. (2014). Literature and Philosophy: Intersection and Boundaries. Arts, 4(1), 1-22. doi:
10.3390/arts4010001. This paper is inspired by the manuscript of Philip Kitcher’s forthcoming book
Deaths in Venice: The Cases of Gustav von Aschenbach, in which he offers a brilliant, philosophically
inspired reading of Thomas Mann’s novel, as well as his views on the relationship between literature
and philosophy. One of Kitcher’s claims, is that philosophy can be done not only by philosophers but
also within some art forms, such as literature and music. Within the literary text, Kitcher claims,
philosophy lies in the showing and the text can influence the way readers think and perceive the world.
Due to this claim, Kitcher pertains to the group of literary cognitivists. He offers some powerful
arguments in support of the cognitive value of literature, although his approach is substantially
different from the arguments usually put forward in defence of literary cognitivism. The paper aims to
analyze the relationship between philosophy and literature despite some overlap between the two
disciplines, they must be separated. Secondly, the paper explores what implications this has for
literary cognitivism.