@mastersthesis{bal2025literary,
  author = {Bal, Onur},
  title = {Literary Work Readership and Its Relationship with Mentalisation and Empathy},
  school = {Yeditepe University},
  year = {2025},
  type = {Master's thesis},
  url = {https://onurbal.com/en/academics/thesis/}
}

4.2. Correlation Analysis

Correlation analysis was conducted to examine the connection between the variables of the present study, the results of which revealed several statistically significant relationships. Refer to Table 4 for the correlation matrix. Since all scales used in the study had 13 subscales in total, as well as their overall score, which adds up to 16 variables, only their overall scores are presented in the table. The subscales’ and components’ correlation results with literary exposure can be seen in Table 5. All other significant findings not present in either table are discussed below.

Variable	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10
1. Age	—
2. Books count	.08	—
3. Academic hours	-.08	.22**	—
4. Nonfiction hours	.12	.32**	.29**	—
5. Internet hours	.03	-.01	.13*	.01	—
6. STAI–S	-.08	.09	.03	.03	.03	—
7. STAI–T	-.15*	.02	.03	-.02	.02	.61**	—
8. ECQ	-.21**	.08	.10	.09	.04	.47**	.66**	—
9. MentS	.16*	.08	-.03	.03	-.03	-.17*	-.34**	-.18*	—
10. QCAE	-.04	.17*	-.01	.14*	.03	.12	.12	.25**	0.52**	—

Table 4\ Correlation matrix for key variables

Note. * p < .05; ** p < .001; Academic hours = average of textbook hours and academic hours; Nonfiction hours = average of Magazine and Newspaper hours; Internet hours = average of E-Mail and Internet hours.

Age was found to be significantly correlated with a number of psychological and behavioural variables. It was negatively correlated with trait anxiety (r = -.15, p < .05). It was also negatively correlated with overall existential concerns (r = -.21, p < .001), and each of its subscales; namely, general existential anxiety (r = -.22, p < .001), death anxiety (r = -.14, p < .05), and avoidance (r = -.17, p < .05). Additionally, age was positively correlated with overall mentalisation (r = .16, p < .05) and its self-related subscale (r = .18, p < .05). Age was not correlated with overall empathy and any of its subscales or components.

The number of books read by the participant was significantly correlated with time spent reading academic materials, such as textbooks and academic journal articles, (r = 0.22, p < .001) and nonfiction reading material (newspapers and magazines) (r = 0.32, p < .001), reflecting a broader pattern of reading engagement across formats.

Scale	Subscale	Component	r
ECQ			.08
	General EA		.12*
	Death		.00
	Avoidance		.03
MentS			.08
	Self		-.02
	Other		.10
	Motivation		.13*
QCAE			.17*
	Cognitive		.14*
		Perspective Taking	.09
		Online Simulation	.16*
	Affective		.16*
		Emotion Contagion	.07
		Proximal Responsivity	.17*
		Peripheral Responsivity	.14*

Table 5\ Correlation analysis for the questionnaires and literary exposure

Note. * p < .05.

Literary exposure was positively correlated with the ECQ’s general existential anxiety subscale (r = 0.12, p < .05) and MentS’ other-related mentalisation (r = 0.13, p < .05) and motivation to mentalise (r = .13, p < .05) subscales. As for empathy, book count was positively correlated with overall empathy (r = .17, p < .05), cognitive empathy (r = .14, p < .05), online simulation (r = .16, p < .05), affective empathy (r = .16, p < .05), proximal responsivity (r = .17, p < .05), and peripheral responsivity (r = .14, p < .05).

Overall mentalisation was associated with diminished state anxiety (r = -.17, p < .05), trait anxiety (r = -.34, p < .001), overall existential concerns (r = -.18, p < .05), general existential anxiety (r = -.17, p < .05), and avoidance (r = -.31, p < .001). On the other hand, overall mentalisation was linked to heightened overall empathy (r = .52, p < .001), cognitive empathy (r = .54, p < .001), perspective taking (r = .50, p < .001), online simulation (r = .41, p < .001), affective empathy (r = .32, p < .001), proximal responsivity (r = .38, p < .001), and peripheral responsivity (r = .29, p < .001), though not emotion contagion (r = .09, p ≥ .05). An important finding here is that self-related mentalisation and other-related mentalisation differed in their relationship to both state anxiety and trait anxiety. Self-related mentalisation was much more strongly negatively associated with both (r = -.36, p < .001 and r = -.58, p < .001, respectively), while other mentalisation showed either non-significant or weak results (r = -.02, p ≥ .05 and r = -.13, p < .05, respectively). The same pattern emerges in relation to existential concerns as well. Self-related mentalisation is negatively associated with the overall score as well as each of its subscales (-.55 ≥ rs ≥ -.35, ps < .001), whereas other-related mentalisation is not (-.07 ≤ rs ≤ 12, ps ≥ .05).

Overall empathy was significantly correlated with overall existential concerns (r = 0.25, p < .001) as well as its subscales general existential anxiety (r = .26, p < .001) and death anxiety (r = .24, p < .001), though not avoidance (r = .09, p ≥ .05). This reveals a connection between empathy and heightened sensitivity to existential themes, without an inclination to avoid such themes. While overall empathy and cognitive empathy were not associated with either state anxiety or trait anxiety, affective empathy was associated with both (r = .22, p < .001 and r = .27, p < .001, respectively).

To summarise and clarify these distinct patterns regarding mentalisation and empathy, Table 6 presents a side-by-side comparison of the correlations between each key construct and the primary distress-related variables. This layout highlights their divergent associations and functional profiles.

Table 6

Correlation analysis for key variables across MentS and QCAE subscales

	MentS		QCAE
Variable	Self	Other	Cognitive	Affective
STAI–S	-.36**	-.02	.03	.22**
STAI–T	-.58**	-.13*	-.01	.27**
ECQ – Overall	-.55**	.06	.16*	.31**
ECQ – General EA	-.54**	.07	.18*	.30**
ECQ – Death	-.35**	.12	.14*	.32**
ECQ – Avoidance	-.55**	-.07	.02	.16*
MentS – Overall	.73**	.76**	.54**	.32**
QCAE – Overall	.04	.64**	.92**	.81**

Note. * p < .05; ** p < .001

Table 6 displays a consistent pattern of associations: self-related mentalisation was negatively correlated with all anxiety and existential concern variables, while affective empathy was positively correlated with the same variables. In contrast, other-oriented mentalisation and cognitive empathy showed weak or non-significant correlations with distress-related outcomes. These results suggest that, within this sample, the self-related and affective dimensions of these constructs are more closely linked to reported anxiety and existential concern than their other-related or cognitive counterparts. Additionally, Table 6 highlights a clear distinction between self- and other-related Mentalisation in their associations with overall empathy. While other-related mentalisation was strongly correlated with overall empathy (r = .64, p < .001), self-related mentalisation showed no significant relationship (r = .04, p ≥ .05). This is also the case with empathy’s subscales and their components. This suggests that individual differences in empathy, as measured by the QCAE, are more closely aligned with other-related mentalising capacities than with self-related ones, supporting the theoretical linkage between the ability to reflect on others’ mental states and empathy.

Trait anxiety was positively correlated with state anxiety (r = .61, p < .001). Both showed significant positive correlation with existential concerns (STAI–S with ECQ – Overall, r = .47, p < .001; STAI–T with ECQ – Overall, r = .66, p < .001), and all of its subscales, supporting the conceptual overlap between trait anxiety and existential insecurity. Notably, trait anxiety showed consistently stronger correlations across all existential concern subdimensions, including general existential anxiety (r = .66, p < .001), death anxiety (r = .45, p < .001), and avoidance (r = 0.54, p < .001), compared to state anxiety (general existential anxiety: r = .48, p < .001; death anxiety: r = 0.32, p < .001; avoidance: r = .39, p < .001). These differences suggest that while both forms of anxiety are connected to existential concerns, trait anxiety, which reflects a stable predisposition to experience anxiety, may be more strongly linked to existential distress than situational anxiety, represented by State Anxiety.