# Mentalisation and Literary Exposure

## 5.2. Mentalisation and Literary Exposure

Contrary to Hypothesis 4, literary exposure did not significantly
predict mentalisation, either at the overall level or in its self- and
other-oriented components. After accounting for demographic variables,
existential concerns, and anxiety, the number of books read from the
literary fiction list failed to show any independent or interaction
effects in any of the models. These findings challenge the commonly
proposed link between literary fiction and enhanced theory of mind
abilities, particularly those captured by mentalisation measures such as
the MentS. These results stand in contrast to prior claims that literary
engagement enhances mentalising capacity, particularly in terms of
understanding others’ intentions and perspectives. One possibility is
that participants’ recollection of having read these works may not
reflect current or immersive reading habits capable of influencing
mentalising ability.

Although literary exposure did not emerge as a significant predictor,
trait anxiety and existential concerns were robustly associated with
mentalisation scores, with differential patterns across subdomains.
Specifically, self-oriented mentalisation was strongly negatively
predicted by both existential concerns (_β_ = -.30) and trait anxiety
(_β_ = -.40), suggesting that heightened internal distress or
existential uncertainty may impair reflective capacity about one’s own
mental states. By contrast, other-oriented mentalisation was positively
predicted by existential concerns (_β_ = .23) and negatively by trait
anxiety (_β_ = –.33), indicating that awareness of existential issues
may sensitise individuals to others’ inner worlds, while chronic anxiety
may impede this process.

Age also emerged as a significant predictor in the self-oriented and
overall mentalisation models, with older participants reporting greater
reflective capacity. Male sex was associated with lower mentalisation
scores in overall and other-oriented domains. Education level and income
did not significantly contribute to any mentalisation outcomes. No
interaction terms, between literary exposure and existential concerns or
anxiety, reached significance, and none improved the models’ explanatory
power.

In sum, these findings suggest that mentalisation, particularly in its
self- and other-related aspects, is more closely linked to psychological
distress and existential sensitivity than to literary engagement. While
literary fiction may contribute to empathic capacities, its role in
supporting the reflective dimensions of mentalisation appears limited
within the context of this study.