Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Who Reads Science Fiction and Fantasy, and How Do They Feel About Science? Preliminary Findings From an Online Survey:

Who Reads Science Fiction and Fantasy, and How Do They Feel About Science? Preliminary Findings... This article describes findings from an online survey Science Fiction & Fantasy: Your Experiences, launched in November 2015 and closed 1 year later, which received 909 unique responses. The survey identified characteristics of readers of science fiction, their knowledge and experiences of works, authors, and subgenres. It examined their attitudes to science and science fiction and their judgment of the similarity between real and fictional scientists. Contrary to declining reading habits, the science fiction and fantasy audience read consistently high volumes of books, as well as watching genre TV and film. We discovered that reading science fiction and fantasy may have a role in sustained, and cognitively beneficial, adoption of reading by young people and is complementary to other forms of consumption, rather than competitive. Science fiction was also found to be an important influence on the perception and acceptance of science by the public. Implications of this are that science fiction and fantasy are now a normal part of life for a wide range of people, and science fiction has a positive influence on popular interpretation, acceptance, and support of scientific endeavors. These results support earlier work that suggests science fiction is a valuable research tool for public engagement with science. Keywords science communication, literature, demography, literacy, reading, culture, science fiction, fantasy, descriptive statistics, education of the public and exclude others that do not meet the theoreti- Introduction cal requirements. For the purposes of our analysis, we take Science fiction and fantasy have been argued to be part of a the position that “science fiction” refers to a broad range of mutable continuum of speculative genre fiction (Rieder, texts, but for readers this cannot be assumed, and conse- 2010). Since Darko Suvin’s (1979) landmark study quently the survey title includes both “science fiction” and Metamorphoses of Science Fiction: On the Poetics and “fantasy.” History of a Literary Genre, it is now common in science Existing theoretical, or academic, definitions may not fiction studies to use the term science fiction to refer to any reflect popular readership, as they do not necessarily present speculative fiction—whether it might otherwise be consid- reader perspectives, which influence the response given to ered science fiction, fantasy, or another form—which embod- survey questions. A recent survey (Menadue, 2017a) identi- ies novelty and estrangement, the sources of cognitive fied that the popular definitions of science fiction and fantasy dissonance. Suvin’s description is more explicit than earlier are very sharply defined compared with the academic discus- genre theory which presented science fiction as a subset of sion, and the findings indicate that in the imagination of fantasy (Todorov & Berrong, 1976), and Suvin suggested readers of science fiction it is not considered to be a subset of that there are special characteristics of science fiction that can be used to isolate it from other forms of fiction. Suvin stated that “SF is distinguished by the narrative dominance James Cook University, Cairns, Queensland, Australia of a fictional novelty (novum / innovation) validated by cog- Corresponding Author: nitive logic” (Suvin, 1979, p. 63). This definition is inclusive Christopher Benjamin Menadue, The Cairns Institute, James Cook across genres and may include narratives that would be clas- University, McGregor Road, Cairns, QLD 4870, Australia. sified specifically as science fiction or fantasy by members Email: ben.menadue@jcu.edu.au Creative Commons CC BY: This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License (http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits any use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage). 2 SAGE Open fantasy literature but a companion by contrast. Classification concepts and real science overlap, it is especially important tree analysis found that in placing a work in a specific genre, to investigate the characteristics of the science fiction audi- the word “magic” occurred in 94% of responses to the ques- ence and their attitudes toward science. This information tion “what makes it fantasy,” and the word “science” occurred may aid researchers in improving the design of research that in 96% of responses to “what makes it science fiction,” and includes science fiction as an enabling tool, to enhance the “technology” occurred in 100% of responses that did not connection between researchers and the public. include the word “science” (Menadue & Giselsson, 2017; Menadue & Guez, 2017). Responses that refer to science fic- Research Aims tion or fantasy in this survey are founded on a popular under- standing of these genres, and although the survey title and The aims of the survey were to seek answers to the following some questions combine science fiction and fantasy, we con- questions: sider it would be clear to respondents what they consider to be “science fiction,” rather than “fantasy” when answering 1. The demographic characteristics of the science fic- questions about how science fiction is related to various tion and fantasy audience. topics. 2. How respondents perceive that science fiction is In its relationship with science, science fiction has been influencing attitudes to real science. described as a “cultural wallpaper” (Aldiss & Wingrove, a. what are their own perspectives on the benefits 1986, p. 14) that has an impact on our vision of science and science fiction generates for science, technology, and the directions in which we pursue scientific b. how do they think science fiction might affect progress (Kirby, 2010; Stableford, 1979). Moreover, other people’s attitudes to science, and Miroslav Kotasek (2015) states, “In today’s cultural situation c. do science fiction representations of scientists it is almost impossible to have clearly defined borders differ from the perceptions they have of real sci- between scientific ‘concepts and terms’ and their ‘vulgar’ entists. usage in everyday discourse” (p. 64). Science fiction has also been found to reflect and track cultural change (Menadue, 3. Are there significant correlations between the charac- 2017b, 2018a, 2018b), and the relationship between science teristics of respondents, their answers regarding the and science fiction is one that is becoming more relevant to science fiction genre, and attitudes toward science research as science fiction is increasingly used to enhance and scientists. research outcomes across many disciplines, most especially for education and advocacy (Menadue & Cheer, 2017). The Survey Reader surveys have been conducted by science fiction magazines since 1948 (Adams & Wallace, 2011; Campbell, The Science Fiction & Fantasy: Your Experiences survey 1949, 1958; Carnell, 1955, 1964; Hamilton, 1954; Van was designed to gather information on who the readers of Gelder, 2003). Generally, these surveys are a form of tar- science fiction and fantasy are today, their attitudes toward geted marketing, focusing on obtaining demographics, and science and scientists, and their reading preferences. To this other useful market research assessments. Analysis has been purpose, the survey included questions on reading habits and made of some early surveys, including the comparative genre preferences, attitudes toward science, and demograph- demographics of convention attendees (Bainbridge, 1980; ics. This survey was intended to augment and extend the Berger, 1977). The most recently cited magazine survey was results of prior surveys and elicit a wider range of responses by John Adams and Sean Wallace for Lightspeed in 2011; it to assess the relationship between people’s science fiction focused on quantifying advertising market segments and experiences and real-world science. As well as providing technology purchasing habits. The historic surveys portray a information of use to researchers who employ science fiction demographic dominated by young male readers (93.3% male to assist in achieving their research aims, it will add to the in 1949, average age 29 years) but trending toward more bal- body of survey work in the tradition of large-scale general, anced gender and age ratios over time (92% male and 30.8 and noncommercial, genre-focused surveys such as the Lord years in 1963, 67% and 40 years in 2003 and, 59% and 43.5 of the Rings International Audience Research Project (Barker years in 2011: significant figures are given from original sur- & Mathijs, 2006), and Berger’s work on convention attend- vey data). It should be noted that these surveys tend to favor ees (Berger, 1977). subscribers or buyers of these magazines and may not repre- The combination of science fiction and fantasy in the sur- sent the demographics of a broader science fiction audience. vey title, and for some survey questions, is related to the fact To date, no publication has addressed a general online that the peak writers body is the Science Fiction and Fantasy survey of this population in the literature, and the importance Writers of America (SFFWA, italics added), which does not of gathering empirical information on a demographic group discriminate in the usage of the terms, bestows its Nebula that has been theorized to have a significant influence on the Awards on writers who are considered to be in either cate- pursuit and success of science is clear. As science fiction gory, and was expected to be the source of a significant Menadue and Jacups 3 number of survey respondents. It was considered prudent to make it general included several broadly related terms. The not anticipate a clear separation between science fiction and question in full was, “Do you think scientists in science fic- fantasy in the marketing and presentation of this survey, and tion seem more grounded and understandable than scientists for a subsequent survey (Menadue, 2017a), which explicitly in real life?,” and the ends of the Likert-type scales were addressed genre definitions. At the time of preparation, and labeled with I think real scientists are more understandable without empirical evidence, it was not known to what extent at 1 and Yes, I can relate to them more easily at 5. This ques- the public make a distinction between science fiction and tion was intended to gain an impression on the part of the fantasy, or what reasons they might give for doing so. respondent rather than a very specific response to this ques- tion, but the clustering of responses around the center might reflect an insufficiently clear phrasing of this question, even Method though data analysis indicated meaningful correlations This article reports on the characteristics of a self-selecting between the variance present and other factors. audience on their attitudes to science fiction and science. The survey sought to address the research questions, and present Procedure findings alongside demographic characteristics to better iden- tify and describe the attitudes and preferences of respondents. The survey Science Fiction & Fantasy: Your Experiences was posted online on November 16, 2015, aimed at attracting a sample of science fiction readers. It was promoted via email, Design personal recommendations, and social media, including tar- The survey comprised 57 questions, in three successive sec- geting Facebook pages dedicated to science fiction and fan- tions: reading preferences; attitudes to science, science fic- tasy fans, readers, and writers. These included direct posting tion, and fantasy; and respondent demographics. The full in Facebook groups with membership in the hundreds, to the questionnaire for the survey, and the survey data, are avail- SFFWA closed group, for which a request to post was neces- able in an online research data repository (Menadue, 2016). sary. The SFFWA Facebook page has over 43,000 followers, Ethics approval was granted by the university human research and the timing and frequency of survey responses following ethics committee on October 19, 2015, approval No. H6299. posting with the SFFWA indicated that a majority of respon- Completion of the survey was not mandatory: Questions dents may have come to the survey via that link. Survey could be missed, and respondents could exit prior to comple- responses were collated on November 17, 2016. tion. Information was collected on reading values, prefer- ences and volume of reading, reading habits of other Data Storage and Analysis members of the household, general consumption of other sci- ence fiction media, self-perception of manual and mental Survey data were collected using Google Forms and exported agility, strength of personal opinions, and history of reading as comma-separated values for statistical analysis. The ques- science fiction. Questions were also asked on attitudes to sci- tionnaire and anonymized results of the survey are stored in ence, and demographic information was collected on age, a public research data repository (Menadue, 2016). country of residence, first language spoken, gender, educa- Spearman’s correlation tables were created using tion, employment status, income satisfaction, and relation- GraphPad Prism version 7.00 for Mac. We report only cor- ship status. The survey questions were both closed, relation coefficients above 0.20 with a p value < .01. employing 5-point Likert-type scales, ranges (for age-related Significant relationships between questions on attitudes to questions), and open-ended questions prompting free text science and all other questions, and significant correlations responses—this article only reports findings from closed and related to age and gender are presented separately. ranged questions. Further questions asked for respondent Correlations have been omitted for clarity where the logic of attitudes toward science as well as how they imagined sci- the relationship is obvious and of no clear significance (e.g., ence fiction might influence the attitudes of other people. a strong correlation between geographical location and Survey questions were accompanied by an explanation for native language, a correlation between enjoying science fic- each question, which were informally written to encourage tion and reading large numbers of science fiction books). respondents to complete the entire survey. The survey was written in English and no translations were provided. Findings One question asked if there was a difference between how “grounded” scientists in science fiction were, compared with Sample Characteristics real-world scientists. A deliberately neutral term was used After the survey closed, a total of 909 survey responses were for this question to reduce response bias, as an alternative to collected. As the questions were not mandatory, there are one of the value-laden terms such as “mad,” “eccentric,” or variations in response numbers, as shown in the tables. Due “absent-minded” that are often applied to real or fictional to a significant number of respondents neglecting to answer scientists. This question was problematic, as attempts to 4 SAGE Open Table 1. Demographic Characteristics of Survey Participants. n % Geographical area residing (n = 902) North America (USA and Canada) 386 42.8 Australia or New Zealand 256 28.4 Western Europe 164 18.2 Eastern Europe 33 3.7 Southeast Asia 9 1.0 Other (15 Locations) 54 6.0 Native language (n = 891) English 728 81.7 Other (15 languages) 163 18.3 In a relationship with someone(s) (n = 898) Yes 633 70.5 No 222 24.7 Rather not say 30 3.3 Maybe 13 1.5 Gender identification (n = 901) Female 491 54.5 Male 400 44.4 Other 10 1.1 Age (n = 900) <15 2 0.2 15-19 28 3.1 20-29 153 17.0 30-39 229 25.4 40-49 215 23.9 50-59 180 20.0 60-69 82 9.1 70-79 9 1.0 80+ 2 0.2 Mean age (all) 42.3 Median age (all) 45 Mode age (all) 35 Female Male Mean age 41.0 44.2 Median age 35 45 Mode age 35 45 Education (n = 902) University 391 43.3 Postgraduate university 353 39.1 School 90 10.0 Technical/professional 68 7.5 Employment status (n = 894) Employed 513 57.4 Self-employed 132 14.8 Student 121 13.5 Retired 77 8.6 Unemployed 32 3.6 Parent/carer 10 1.1 Disabled 9 1.0 Income satisfaction level (n = 889) I never have enough money 102 11.5 I do well enough 481 54.1 (Continued) Menadue and Jacups 5 Table 1. (Continued) Female Male I’m happy with what I have 229 25.8 I have more than I need 55 6.2 I don’t have to think about it 22 2.5 How important do you think your life experience and learned skills are compared with your formal education (n = 902) Not important (1) 4 0.4 (2) 15 1.7 (3) 123 13.6 (4) 323 35.8 Very important (5) 437 48.5 How good are you at working with your hands (n = 902) It all falls apart (1) 67 7.4 (2) 169 18.7 (3) 300 33.3 (4) 290 32.2 I could build a space-station (5) 76 8.4 How good are you at solving puzzles and working things out in your head (n = 900) I solve puzzles with a hammer (1) 13 1.4 (2) 66 7.3 (3) 254 28.2 (4) 512 56.9 I’m the world chess champion (5) 55 6.1 Do you learn new physical or manual skills easily (n = 897) Yes 672 74.9 No 225 25.1 Do you find it easy to understand new and unfamiliar ideas (n = 898) Yes 855 95.2 No 43 4.8 Do you think of yourself as happy to consider all sides of an argument, or do you have strong opinions of what you think is right and wrong (n = 895) I’m happy to consider all the options 759 84.8 I prefer my own opinions 136 15.2 one or more questions, the analysis includes all responses reading habits (Table 2), and those regarding science and sci- given to each question rather than filtering for those in which entists (Table 3). respondents answered all survey questions. The mean age of respondents is 42.3 years and the gender balance favors Reading habits and self-identification. Respondents prefer read- female respondents, who make up 54.5% of the total. Mean, ing to other activities, with 85.1% reporting a preference for median, and mode ages were lower for females than males reading. Almost all (95.5%) stated that they are always read- (Table 1). ing something, with the average respondent reading five Respondents are globally distributed, with 42.8% of books per month and between one and two magazines. Most responses coming from North America. Most respondents readers (87.3%) had started reading science fiction before (81.7%) report their first language as English, the remainder the age of 15 years, and 76.5% read as much or more now as are distributed between 15 different languages including a when they started. Genre preferences between fantasy and cluster of 1.1% Finnish speakers. The majority of respon- science fiction are generally spread evenly, with a small pref- dents (82.4%) have a university-level education, and 72.2% erence for science fiction among older and male respondents. of the sample are employed or self-employed. The measure Most (80.1%) come from families of readers, and 92.1% also of attitude toward personal income indicated that the major- watch science fiction and fantasy films and TV shows. Sci- ity (88.6%) are neutral about, or satisfied with, their financial ence fiction and fantasy are the preferred form of literature circumstances. The majority of respondents (70.5%) also for 85.6%, and the same proportion state that science fiction reported being in a relationship with someone. Other ques- and fantasy are as good as or better than other forms of writ- tions are separated into two groups: responses concerning ing. Respondents describe themselves as “dreamers” more 6 SAGE Open Table 2. Background Questions on Reading and Other Activities. n % How much do you enjoy reading compared to doing other things (n = 846) I’d much rather be reading (1) 345 40.8 (2) 375 44.3 (3) 90 10.6 (4) 27 3.2 I don’t read much (5) 9 1.0 Do you always have something around that you are reading (n = 908) Yes 867 95.5 No 41 4.5 About how many books have you read in the past month (n = 898) Average 5.06 Median 4 Mode 2 How many magazines do you read in a month (n = 880) Average 1.69 Median 1 Mode 0 How old were you when you first started reading science fiction (n = 900) n % Below 15 786 87.3 15-20 81 9.0 20-30 24 2.7 30-40 5 0.6 40-50 4 0.4 Do you read [SF] as much now as when you first started reading it (n = 907) I read more now (1) 250 27.6 (2) 215 23.7 (3) 229 25.2 (4) 151 16.7 I don’t read much SF&F these days (5) 62 6.8 Do you generally prefer Science Fiction or Fantasy (n = 901) Mainly Fantasy (1) 112 12.4 (2) 187 20.8 (3) 235 26.1 (4) 194 21.5 Mainly Science Fiction (5) 173 19.2 Do other people in your family read a lot (n = 905) Yes 725 80.1 No 180 19.9 Do you also like science fiction and fantasy films and TV shows (n = 901) Yes 830 92.1 No 71 7.9 How much do you like science fiction and fantasy (n = 890) About the same as other things I read (1) 30 3.4 (2) 16 1.8 (3) 82 9.2 (4) 352 39.5 It’s the best thing ever (5) 410 46.1 How special is good SF&F compared with other writing (n = 891) It’s trashy (1) 5 0.6 (2) 12 1.3 (3) 111 12.5 (4) 284 31.9 (Continued) Menadue and Jacups 7 Table 2. (Continued) How old were you when you first started reading science fiction (n = 900) n % It’s as good, if not better (5) 479 53.8 Would you say you’re a bit of a dreamer, or more of a realist (n = 901) Realist (1) 62 6.9 (2) 134 14.9 (3) 282 31.3 (4) 268 29.7 Dreamer (5) 155 17.2 Do you think reading SF&F opens you up to new ideas (n = 902) Not really (1) 12 1.3 (2) 12 1.3 (3) 42 4.7 (4) 187 20.7 Definitely (5) 649 72.0 Do you ever find yourself feeling a bit ashamed to be reading SF&F (n = 901) I should be reading something more worthwhile (1) 11 1.2 (2) 53 5.9 (3) 56 6.2 (4) 131 14.5 Not at all, I’m proud of what I read (5) 650 72.1 Note. SF = science fiction. than “realists,” 72.1% are proud to be seen reading science together with moderate interactions. There are, however, fiction, and 84.3% believe that life experience and learned only very weak correlations between scientists in science fic- skills are more important than education. Respondents per- tion and real scientists being comparatively more or less ceive themselves as having good manual skills and to be very “grounded” and other responses (Table 4). good at puzzle-solving. Many believe that they are very good to excellent at learning new manual skills and learning new Other Findings and unfamiliar ideas. Most respondents consider themselves to be open to all sides of an argument (84.8%) rather than There is a moderate correlation between both age and gender relying primarily on their own opinions. There was a very and preferences for science fiction or the specific fantasy strong positive response to the suggestion that science fiction subgenre, with older males more likely to prefer science fic- opens readers up to new ideas in general. This is believed by tion rather than fantasy (Table 5), and older respondents gen- 92.7% of respondents. erally read more than younger ones. Attitudes to science and scientists. Responses to questions on Discussion science and scientists are presented in Table 3. Significant relationships discovered between questions on attitudes to The survey generated a significant response, with 909 forms science and all other questions, and significant correlations completed between November 2015 and November 2016. related to age and gender, are presented as Spearman’s cor- The survey was far-reaching, with responses given from 21 relations in Tables 4 and 5. The number of respondents to geographical locations, and 18.3% of participants do not each question in Tables 4 and 5 is identical to that for the speak English as a first language, suggesting a diverse range corresponding entries in Tables 1 to 3. of respondents. The survey responses indicate that the sci- Respondents agree that there is a positive relationship ence fiction audience has a more balanced gender and age between science and science fiction: 68.6% believe that sci- profile today than is indicated by previous surveys. The aver- ence fiction helps them relate to science in general, 62.0% age reader is in their 40s, employed and in a relationship, believe that reading science fiction makes them more likely with female respondents tending to be younger than males. A to believe in real science, and 53.2% believe that the people significant majority of respondents report being educated to who doubt science would be more positive about it if they university level or above. This reinforces previous audience were to read science fiction. data that found “astonishing” high levels of education among Spearman’s correlations between the positive responses fans (Berger, 1977, p. 236). A similar proportion of respon- to science and familiarity with science fiction are clustered dents, however, also believe that life experience and learned 8 SAGE Open Table 3. Attitudes to Science. n % Does SF help you relate to science in general (n = 897) Not really (1) 69 7.7 (2) 72 8.0 (3) 141 15.7 (4) 302 33.7 Yes it does (5) 313 34.9 Do you think reading SF&F makes you more likely to believe in “real” science (n = 893) Not at all (1) 74 8.3 (2) 68 7.6 (3) 198 22.2 (4) 214 24.0 Yes, very much so (5) 339 38.0 Do you think that other people who have doubts about science might be more open to it if they read Science Fiction? (n = 896) Probably not (1) 84 9.4 (2) 100 11.2 (3) 236 26.3 (4) 263 29.4 It would definitely help (5) 213 23.8 Do you think scientists in science fiction seem more grounded and understandable than scientists in real life? (n = 894) I think real scientists are more understandable (1) 103 11.5 (2) 168 18.8 (3) 425 47.5 (4) 153 17.1 Yes, I can relate to them more easily (5) 45 5.0 Note. SF = science fiction. Table 4. Spearman’s Correlations: Attitudes to Science and Scientists. Readers doubt Quality Categories How much enjoy Helps relate Opens to Makes science science less than compared with (p < .0001) SFF science new ideas believable others other writing SFF helps relate to science 0.27 SFF opens to new ideas 0.31 0.49 SFF makes science believable 0.30 0.56 0.45 Other people may doubt science 0.22 0.43 0.37 0.56 less if they read SFF SF scientists vs. real scientists 0.28 0.26 Not ashamed to read SFF 0.21 0.20 0.25 0.32 SFF compared with other writing 0.48 0.27 0.33 0.30 0.21 Read SFF as much as ever 0.39 0.20 0.20 0.22 0.30 Note. SFF = science fiction and fantasy. skills are more important than education, suggesting a more Although there are correlations between support of real balanced perspective than one focused on academic science and the benefits of science fiction as a form of pur- attainment. suit, there are only very weak correlations with scientists in Respondents watch science fiction films and TV shows as science fiction and real scientists being comparatively more well as read science fiction literature, self-assess as more or less “grounded.” This contrasts with the findings of a pre- likely to be good at puzzles than physical skills, and are vious study, focused on children’s literature, that indicated interested in and positive about real science. More strongly representations of science fiction scientists are negative and than this, however, they think that reading science fiction unrealistic (Van Gorp, Rommes, & Emons, 2014). The find- makes them receptive to new ideas in general. ings of this survey may suggest that negative representations Menadue and Jacups 9 Table 5. Spearman’s Correlations: Consumption Habits. Categories (p < .0001) Gender Age Prefer SF or F How much enjoy SFF No. of books read last month 0.22 No. of magazines read last month 0.22 Number of SFF books read last month 0.36 Like SFF TV/film also 0.23 Prefer SF or F 0.34 0.24 Dreamer or realist 0.20 SFF helps relate to science 0.31 Note. SFF = science fiction and fantasy. of fictional scientists have a limited impact on the attitudes research that discovered a positive link between reading vol- toward scientists expressed by the adult science fiction ume and academic success. Both reading volume and the reader. The use of the term grounded rather than a more presence of self-selected or selection-guided reading options clearly prejudicial term may have influenced a less radical influence this effect. Consequently, the above-average read- response to this question than might otherwise be expected, ing volume reported in the science fiction and fantasy experi- and could explain why the correlation is weak. ence survey may be related to the high levels of educational The response to the question about whether science fic- attainment of the sample population, with 82.4% reporting a tion opens the reader to new ideas is more positive than university education. This compares to 46% of the United responses to questions regarding the relationship between States population, 50% of Australians, and 46% of the U.K. science fiction and science. This suggests that readers absorb population (Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and more from science fiction than ideas about science, and sci- Development, 2017). The survey analysis ignores non-sci- ence fiction content is expected to discuss a wider range of ence fiction and fantasy reading habits, and total reading vol- “new” subjects. This is consistent with science fiction theo- ume may be even higher than reported here. Research carried ries that are not constrained by a science focus—such as out in the United Kingdom on childhood literacy also indi- Darko Suvin’s definition of the genre. cates that reading levels are low compared with those found Respondents report strong preferences for reading com- in our survey (Clark, 2014). pared with other forms of activity, with 40.8% reporting an In the survey, reading was in addition to interest in sci- absolute preference for reading. This is combined with a high ence fiction in TV and film, and this suggests that the read- average monthly volume of books (5.06). Almost all (96.3%) ing of science fiction is complementary to other forms of respondents started reading science fiction before age 20, genre consumption, rather than competitive. These findings and 76.5% reported reading the same or more as when they indicate a population that is not following a more recent started. This pattern of consistent high-volume lifetime read- trend of declining reading that is particularly concerning to ing contrasts with general reading surveys in Australia, some educationists, as Sandra Stotsky has described in America, and the United Kingdom, the geographical loca- “What American Kids Are Reading Now” (Stotsky, 2016), tions from which the majority of responses to the survey and the significant impact of literacy upon quality of life has originated. American readers report reading nine books per been discussed elsewhere (Dugdale & Clark, 2008). We year in the 18- to 29-year-old age category and 13 for older were surprised to find no strong Spearman’s correlations readers (Scardilli, 2014). Jacqueline Manuel and Don Carter, between family reading and the reading habits of respon- in their comprehensive review of current and historical read- dents. There were extremely weak correlations between ing practices of a population of native English speaking teen- family reading, geographical location (0.13), native lan- agers in Australia (Manuel & Carter, 2015), found that since guage (0.12), and gender (0.1) but no other categories. A 1952, year 7 to year 12 teenager reading averaged between previous review of the literature on home and family influ- 1.6 and 2.0 books per month, and in their own 2006-2010 ence on reading has indicated that socioeconomic status survey that reading volume is remarkably consistent between (SES) has a significant influence on reading habits, but also the 1950s and the present. Monthly book reading by respon- that home literacy levels have a limited impact on childhood dents to the science fiction experience survey is more than reading motivation regardless of SES, a result that intrigued twice these values. Manuel and Carter (2015) also found that Linda Baker, Deborah Scher, and Kirsten Mackler who have science fiction was not especially popular with teens, rank- called for further research into these effects (Baker, Scher, ing 6 out of 12 for boys (42%) and 8 out of 12 for girls (12%). & Mackler, 1997, p. 73). In their exhaustive examination of Fantasy was the first preference for girls and second prefer- the relevant literature, Baker et al. (1997) state “we cannot ence for boys (p. 123). They further describe a body of determine whether certain factors were more important than 10 SAGE Open others in contributing to leisure reading” (p. 74). It is sug- and response characteristics of online surveying gested that influences on reading practices are not easily (Callegaro, Lozar, & Vehovar, 2015) can only be reduced disentangled. In this instance, however, we seem to have by multimethod sampling beyond the resources available found strong statistical evidence that respondent’s percep- to this study. tion of the volume of reading exhibited by other family A potential additional limitation is that responses col- members has little influence on their own reading habits and lected as free-text, or open questions regarding the science experiences. fiction genre, are not reported here. The richness of these A method for increasing literacy among young people data is yet to be explored and will be the topic of a future might be simply to encourage them to read science fiction article. and fantasy, perhaps as an alternative to employing more complex and time-consuming behavioral interventions to the Conclusion same ends (Cockroft & Atkinson, 2017). One approach to addressing declines in reading has been to recommend a The audience identified in this survey is characterized by more popular, public investigation of reading characteristics openness to and belief in science, consistently high-volume to identify the issues that exist (Albalawi, 2015). As a contri- reading, and a very high level of education. Respondents are bution to this effort, this survey seems to identify one reading sympathetic toward science and scientists, and believe that group that is not in decline. reading science fiction inspires scientific comprehension and positive attitudes to science and that reading science fiction also has the potential to positively change new readers’ atti- Survey Limitations tudes toward science. Respondents watch TV and film sci- There are several study limitations of note for this study. ence fiction and fantasy as well as reading, and the volume of Research on the comparison of characteristics of online sur- books read by respondents is high in comparison to the find- veys compared with survey by mail have found that online ings of general reading surveys and appears to be indepen- surveys exhibit a comparatively low dropout rate and more dent of their family reading habits. Reading is also complete data responses but are similarly subject to self- complementary to other forms of participation with genre selection variation (Dolnicar, Laesser, & Matus, 2009). rather than competitive. It has been found elsewhere that sci- Martine Van Selm and Nicholas Jankowski have identified ence fiction and fantasy are popular among younger readers the value of specific online communities in generating sur- and that self- or guided-selection of reading creates the most vey data, and specifically for what Walter Swoboda, Nikola educational benefits from reading. Open acceptance, and Mühlberger, Rolf Weitkunat, and Sebastian Schneeweiß encouragement, of science fiction and fantasy reading at a termed “expert interrogations” (Swoboda, Mühlberger, young age might therefore improve the adoption of persis- Weitkunat, & Schneeweiß, 1997, p. 243; Van Selm & tent and high-volume reading habits that are of benefit to Jankowski, 2006, p. 437). Selm and Jankowski (2006) also cognitive development and academic success. identify the cost-effectiveness of this approach and the ben- This is the first article to describe the findings of a gen- efits of anonymity in encouraging frank responses, but also eral online science fiction and fantasy audience survey that acknowledge the limitations associated with technological was not distributed by a science fiction publisher, and adds access, and the risk of “losing sight” of the respondents (p. to the literature by providing a more neutral and broad 438) due to lack of control over the dissemination of the reaching account of the interests and attitudes of this audi- survey—we might consider the cluster of 1.1% of ence than might be found in surveys with a more commer- respondents to our survey who reported from Finland to be cial intent. Previous work has discovered the increasingly an example of this effect, rather than reflecting a true important role science fiction has gained in the fields of geographical proportionality of science fiction readers. The education and advocacy and how it responds to the evolu- survey was written and promoted in English only, which tion of cultural change. The gathering of popular opinions restricts the opportunities for responses by nonnative and attitudes based on empirical data adds to the resources speakers of English and will impact survey dissemination available to researchers who intend to integrate science fic- patterns. tion into their research. Researchers may be able to use a An online survey cannot reflect the attitudes of a more accurate knowledge of what science fiction and fan- broader segment of a science fiction audience who are not tasy audiences think about science to increase the effective- regular users of the Internet or are not followers of social ness of the applications of science fiction in research media. The complexity of interactive media engagement contexts. exhibited by online audiences has been theorized to make Acknowledgments analysis by online survey both particularly challenging, and despite superficial similarities, unlike previous audi- We would like to thank Todd Vandermark, Web Editor, Science ence research paradigms (Livingstone, 2013; Yun & Fiction and Fantasy Writers of America, for his kind assistance in Trumbo, 2000). These limitations of the technical resource promoting our survey. Menadue and Jacups 11 Declaration of Conflicting Interests Hamilton, P. (1954, December). Research survey results. Nebula Magazine, pp. 123-128. The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect Kirby, D. (2010). The future is now: Diegetic prototypes and the to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. role of popular films in generating real-world technological development. Social Studies of Science, 40, 41-70. Funding Kotasek, M. (2015). Artificial intelligence in science fiction as a The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for model of the posthuman situation of mankind. World Literature the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: Menadue Studies, 7(4), 64-77. is the recipient of an Australian Postgraduate Award for his research. Livingstone, S. (2013). The participation paradigm in audience This research did not receive any specific grant from funding research. The Communication Review, 16, 21-30. doi:10.1080/ agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors. 10714421.2013.757174 Manuel, J., & Carter, D. (2015). Current and historical perspec- tives on Australian teenagers’ reading practices and prefer- ORCID iD ences. Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, 38, Christopher Benjamin Menadue https://orcid. 115-128. org/0000-0003-4794-8280 Menadue, C. B. (2016). Science fiction and fantasy experience sur- vey. Retrieved from https://researchdata.ands.org.au/science- References fiction-fantasy-experience-survey Menadue, C. B. (2017a). Science fiction and fantasy opinion sur- Adams, J. J., & Wallace, S. (2011, December). Lightspeed magazine vey. Retrieved from https://research.jcu.edu.au/researchdata/ / Fantasy magazine reader survey. Lightspeed Magazine, p. 19. default/detail/a302631ffee48370c97e561e04706e5f/ Albalawi, M. (2015). The decline of literature: A public perspec- Menadue, C. B. (2017b). Trysts tropiques: The torrid jungles tive. Advances in Language and Literary Studies, 6(3), 88-92. of science fiction. Etropic, 16, 125-140. doi:10.25120/ Aldiss, B. W., & Wingrove, D. (1986). Trillion year spree: The history etropic.16.1.2017.3570 of science fiction. London, England: Victor Gollancz. Menadue, C. B. (2018a). Cities in flight: A descriptive examination Bainbridge, W. S. (1980). The analytical laboratory, 1938-1976. of the tropical city imagined in twentieth century science fic- Analog, 100, 121-134. tion cover art. Manuscript submitted for publication. Baker, L., Scher, D., & Mackler, K. (1997). Home and family influ- Menadue, C. B. (2018b). Hubbard bubble, dianetics trouble: An ences on motivations for reading. Educational Psychologist, evaluation of the representations of dianetics and scientology 32, 69-82. doi:10.1207/s15326985ep3202_2 in science fiction magazines from 1949 to 1999. Manuscript Barker, M., & Mathijs, E. (2006). Lord of the rings international submitted for publication. audience research project: World questionnaire dataset, 2003- Menadue, C. B., & Cheer, K. D. (2017). Human culture and science 2004 [Data collection]. Colchester, England: UK Data Service. fiction: A review of the literature, 1980-2016. SAGE Open, Berger, A. I. (1977). Science-fiction fans in socio-economic per- 7(3), 1-15. doi:10.1177/2158244017723690 spective: Factors in the social consciousness of a genre. Science Menadue, C. B., & Giselsson, K. (2017). An empirical revi- Fiction Studies, 4, 232-246. sion of the definition of science fiction: It’s all in the techne. Callegaro, M., Lozar, M. K., & Vehovar, V. (2015). Web survey Manuscript submitted for publication. methodology. London, England: Sage. Menadue, C. B., & Guez, D. (2017). An empirical revision of Campbell, J. W. (1949). The analytical laboratory: Meet yourself. the definition of science fiction: Results of a reader survey. Astounding Science Fiction, 43, 161-162. Manuscript submitted for publication. Campbell, J. W. (1958). Portrait of you. Astounding Science Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development. (2017). Fiction, 61, 135-136. Education at a glance. Author. doi:10.1787/eag-2017-en Carnell, J. (1955). “Survey”—Preliminary report. New Worlds Rieder, J. (2010). On defining SF, or not: Genre theory, SF, and Science Fiction, 32, 2-3. history. Science Fiction Studies, 37, 191-209. Carnell, J. (1964). Survey report 1963. New Worlds Science Fiction, Scardilli, B. (2014, December). Americans’ reading habits. 47, 2-3, 121. Information Today, 31(3), p. 8. Clark, C. (2014). Accelerated reader and young people’s reading in Stableford, B. (1979). Notes toward a sociology of science fiction. 2013: Findings from the national literacy trust’s 2013 annual Foundation: The Review of Science Fiction, 15, 28-40. literacy survey on reading enjoyment, reading behaviour out- Stotsky, S. (2016). What American kids are reading now. Academic side class and reading attitudes. London, England: National Questions, 29, 188-197. doi:10.1007/s12129-016-9568-6 Literacy Trust. Suvin, D. (1979). Metamorphoses of science fiction: On the poet- Cockroft, C., & Atkinson, C. (2017). “I just find it boring”: Findings from an affective adolescent reading intervention. Support for ics and history of a literary genre. New Haven, CT: Yale Learning, 32, 41-59. doi:10.1111/1467-9604.12147 University Press. Dolnicar, S., Laesser, C., & Matus, K. (2009). Online versus paper: Swoboda, W. J., Mühlberger, N., Weitkunat, R., & Schneeweiß, S. Format effects in tourism surveys. Journal of Travel Research, (1997). Internet surveys by direct mailing: An innovative way 47, 295-316. doi:10.1177/0047287508326506 of collecting data. Social Science Computer Review, 15(3), Dugdale, G., & Clark, C. (2008). Literacy changes lives: An 242-255. doi:10.1177/089443939701500302 advocacy resource: Executive Summary. London, England: Todorov, T., & Berrong, R. M. (1976). The origin of genres. New National Literacy Trust. Literary History, 8, 159-170. doi:10.2307/468619 12 SAGE Open Van Gelder, G. (2003). Editorial [discussion of survey distrib- Author Biographies uted in spring 2002]. Fantasy & Science Fiction, 104(2), n.p. Christopher Benjamin Menadue research is based in the digital Retrieved from https://www.sfsite.com/fsf/2003/gvg0302.htm humanities and the applied analysis of ephemeral literature. He Van Gorp, B., Rommes, E., & Emons, P. (2014). From the currently works on how science fiction reflects human cultural wizard to the doubter: Prototypes of scientists and engineers values and experience, and how this can be inferred from people’s in fiction and non-fiction media aimed at Dutch children and responses to and interests in science fiction narratives. He teenagers. Public Understanding of Science, 23, 646-659. employs a combination of literary and digital methods in his doi:10.1177/0963662512468566 research analysis. Van Selm, M., & Jankowski, N. W. (2006). Conducting online surveys. Susan Jacups is an established statistician and epidemiologist Quality & Quantity, 40, 435-456. doi:10.1007/s11135-005-8081-8 with extensive experience in population analysis, and a provider Yun, G. W., & Trumbo, C. W. (2000). Comparative response of statistical advice and training services at postgraduate level. to a survey executed by post, E-mail, & web form. Journal She has also worked as a consultant for academic studies requir - of Computer-Mediated Communication, 6(1), n.p. Retrieved ing statistical analysis and has taught courses in applied from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/ biostatistics. j.1083-6101.2000.tb00112.x http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png SAGE Open SAGE

Who Reads Science Fiction and Fantasy, and How Do They Feel About Science? Preliminary Findings From an Online Survey:

Menadue, Christopher Benjamin; Jacups, Susan
SAGE Open , Volume 8 (2): 1 – Jun 5, 2018
Download PDF
12 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/sage/who-reads-science-fiction-and-fantasy-and-how-do-they-feel-about-xP2JTDueN6

References (45)

Publisher
SAGE
Copyright
Copyright © 2022 by SAGE Publications Inc, unless otherwise noted. Manuscript content on this site is licensed under Creative Commons Licenses.
ISSN
2158-2440
eISSN
2158-2440
DOI
10.1177/2158244018780946
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

This article describes findings from an online survey Science Fiction & Fantasy: Your Experiences, launched in November 2015 and closed 1 year later, which received 909 unique responses. The survey identified characteristics of readers of science fiction, their knowledge and experiences of works, authors, and subgenres. It examined their attitudes to science and science fiction and their judgment of the similarity between real and fictional scientists. Contrary to declining reading habits, the science fiction and fantasy audience read consistently high volumes of books, as well as watching genre TV and film. We discovered that reading science fiction and fantasy may have a role in sustained, and cognitively beneficial, adoption of reading by young people and is complementary to other forms of consumption, rather than competitive. Science fiction was also found to be an important influence on the perception and acceptance of science by the public. Implications of this are that science fiction and fantasy are now a normal part of life for a wide range of people, and science fiction has a positive influence on popular interpretation, acceptance, and support of scientific endeavors. These results support earlier work that suggests science fiction is a valuable research tool for public engagement with science. Keywords science communication, literature, demography, literacy, reading, culture, science fiction, fantasy, descriptive statistics, education of the public and exclude others that do not meet the theoreti- Introduction cal requirements. For the purposes of our analysis, we take Science fiction and fantasy have been argued to be part of a the position that “science fiction” refers to a broad range of mutable continuum of speculative genre fiction (Rieder, texts, but for readers this cannot be assumed, and conse- 2010). Since Darko Suvin’s (1979) landmark study quently the survey title includes both “science fiction” and Metamorphoses of Science Fiction: On the Poetics and “fantasy.” History of a Literary Genre, it is now common in science Existing theoretical, or academic, definitions may not fiction studies to use the term science fiction to refer to any reflect popular readership, as they do not necessarily present speculative fiction—whether it might otherwise be consid- reader perspectives, which influence the response given to ered science fiction, fantasy, or another form—which embod- survey questions. A recent survey (Menadue, 2017a) identi- ies novelty and estrangement, the sources of cognitive fied that the popular definitions of science fiction and fantasy dissonance. Suvin’s description is more explicit than earlier are very sharply defined compared with the academic discus- genre theory which presented science fiction as a subset of sion, and the findings indicate that in the imagination of fantasy (Todorov & Berrong, 1976), and Suvin suggested readers of science fiction it is not considered to be a subset of that there are special characteristics of science fiction that can be used to isolate it from other forms of fiction. Suvin stated that “SF is distinguished by the narrative dominance James Cook University, Cairns, Queensland, Australia of a fictional novelty (novum / innovation) validated by cog- Corresponding Author: nitive logic” (Suvin, 1979, p. 63). This definition is inclusive Christopher Benjamin Menadue, The Cairns Institute, James Cook across genres and may include narratives that would be clas- University, McGregor Road, Cairns, QLD 4870, Australia. sified specifically as science fiction or fantasy by members Email: ben.menadue@jcu.edu.au Creative Commons CC BY: This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License (http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits any use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage). 2 SAGE Open fantasy literature but a companion by contrast. Classification concepts and real science overlap, it is especially important tree analysis found that in placing a work in a specific genre, to investigate the characteristics of the science fiction audi- the word “magic” occurred in 94% of responses to the ques- ence and their attitudes toward science. This information tion “what makes it fantasy,” and the word “science” occurred may aid researchers in improving the design of research that in 96% of responses to “what makes it science fiction,” and includes science fiction as an enabling tool, to enhance the “technology” occurred in 100% of responses that did not connection between researchers and the public. include the word “science” (Menadue & Giselsson, 2017; Menadue & Guez, 2017). Responses that refer to science fic- Research Aims tion or fantasy in this survey are founded on a popular under- standing of these genres, and although the survey title and The aims of the survey were to seek answers to the following some questions combine science fiction and fantasy, we con- questions: sider it would be clear to respondents what they consider to be “science fiction,” rather than “fantasy” when answering 1. The demographic characteristics of the science fic- questions about how science fiction is related to various tion and fantasy audience. topics. 2. How respondents perceive that science fiction is In its relationship with science, science fiction has been influencing attitudes to real science. described as a “cultural wallpaper” (Aldiss & Wingrove, a. what are their own perspectives on the benefits 1986, p. 14) that has an impact on our vision of science and science fiction generates for science, technology, and the directions in which we pursue scientific b. how do they think science fiction might affect progress (Kirby, 2010; Stableford, 1979). Moreover, other people’s attitudes to science, and Miroslav Kotasek (2015) states, “In today’s cultural situation c. do science fiction representations of scientists it is almost impossible to have clearly defined borders differ from the perceptions they have of real sci- between scientific ‘concepts and terms’ and their ‘vulgar’ entists. usage in everyday discourse” (p. 64). Science fiction has also been found to reflect and track cultural change (Menadue, 3. Are there significant correlations between the charac- 2017b, 2018a, 2018b), and the relationship between science teristics of respondents, their answers regarding the and science fiction is one that is becoming more relevant to science fiction genre, and attitudes toward science research as science fiction is increasingly used to enhance and scientists. research outcomes across many disciplines, most especially for education and advocacy (Menadue & Cheer, 2017). The Survey Reader surveys have been conducted by science fiction magazines since 1948 (Adams & Wallace, 2011; Campbell, The Science Fiction & Fantasy: Your Experiences survey 1949, 1958; Carnell, 1955, 1964; Hamilton, 1954; Van was designed to gather information on who the readers of Gelder, 2003). Generally, these surveys are a form of tar- science fiction and fantasy are today, their attitudes toward geted marketing, focusing on obtaining demographics, and science and scientists, and their reading preferences. To this other useful market research assessments. Analysis has been purpose, the survey included questions on reading habits and made of some early surveys, including the comparative genre preferences, attitudes toward science, and demograph- demographics of convention attendees (Bainbridge, 1980; ics. This survey was intended to augment and extend the Berger, 1977). The most recently cited magazine survey was results of prior surveys and elicit a wider range of responses by John Adams and Sean Wallace for Lightspeed in 2011; it to assess the relationship between people’s science fiction focused on quantifying advertising market segments and experiences and real-world science. As well as providing technology purchasing habits. The historic surveys portray a information of use to researchers who employ science fiction demographic dominated by young male readers (93.3% male to assist in achieving their research aims, it will add to the in 1949, average age 29 years) but trending toward more bal- body of survey work in the tradition of large-scale general, anced gender and age ratios over time (92% male and 30.8 and noncommercial, genre-focused surveys such as the Lord years in 1963, 67% and 40 years in 2003 and, 59% and 43.5 of the Rings International Audience Research Project (Barker years in 2011: significant figures are given from original sur- & Mathijs, 2006), and Berger’s work on convention attend- vey data). It should be noted that these surveys tend to favor ees (Berger, 1977). subscribers or buyers of these magazines and may not repre- The combination of science fiction and fantasy in the sur- sent the demographics of a broader science fiction audience. vey title, and for some survey questions, is related to the fact To date, no publication has addressed a general online that the peak writers body is the Science Fiction and Fantasy survey of this population in the literature, and the importance Writers of America (SFFWA, italics added), which does not of gathering empirical information on a demographic group discriminate in the usage of the terms, bestows its Nebula that has been theorized to have a significant influence on the Awards on writers who are considered to be in either cate- pursuit and success of science is clear. As science fiction gory, and was expected to be the source of a significant Menadue and Jacups 3 number of survey respondents. It was considered prudent to make it general included several broadly related terms. The not anticipate a clear separation between science fiction and question in full was, “Do you think scientists in science fic- fantasy in the marketing and presentation of this survey, and tion seem more grounded and understandable than scientists for a subsequent survey (Menadue, 2017a), which explicitly in real life?,” and the ends of the Likert-type scales were addressed genre definitions. At the time of preparation, and labeled with I think real scientists are more understandable without empirical evidence, it was not known to what extent at 1 and Yes, I can relate to them more easily at 5. This ques- the public make a distinction between science fiction and tion was intended to gain an impression on the part of the fantasy, or what reasons they might give for doing so. respondent rather than a very specific response to this ques- tion, but the clustering of responses around the center might reflect an insufficiently clear phrasing of this question, even Method though data analysis indicated meaningful correlations This article reports on the characteristics of a self-selecting between the variance present and other factors. audience on their attitudes to science fiction and science. The survey sought to address the research questions, and present Procedure findings alongside demographic characteristics to better iden- tify and describe the attitudes and preferences of respondents. The survey Science Fiction & Fantasy: Your Experiences was posted online on November 16, 2015, aimed at attracting a sample of science fiction readers. It was promoted via email, Design personal recommendations, and social media, including tar- The survey comprised 57 questions, in three successive sec- geting Facebook pages dedicated to science fiction and fan- tions: reading preferences; attitudes to science, science fic- tasy fans, readers, and writers. These included direct posting tion, and fantasy; and respondent demographics. The full in Facebook groups with membership in the hundreds, to the questionnaire for the survey, and the survey data, are avail- SFFWA closed group, for which a request to post was neces- able in an online research data repository (Menadue, 2016). sary. The SFFWA Facebook page has over 43,000 followers, Ethics approval was granted by the university human research and the timing and frequency of survey responses following ethics committee on October 19, 2015, approval No. H6299. posting with the SFFWA indicated that a majority of respon- Completion of the survey was not mandatory: Questions dents may have come to the survey via that link. Survey could be missed, and respondents could exit prior to comple- responses were collated on November 17, 2016. tion. Information was collected on reading values, prefer- ences and volume of reading, reading habits of other Data Storage and Analysis members of the household, general consumption of other sci- ence fiction media, self-perception of manual and mental Survey data were collected using Google Forms and exported agility, strength of personal opinions, and history of reading as comma-separated values for statistical analysis. The ques- science fiction. Questions were also asked on attitudes to sci- tionnaire and anonymized results of the survey are stored in ence, and demographic information was collected on age, a public research data repository (Menadue, 2016). country of residence, first language spoken, gender, educa- Spearman’s correlation tables were created using tion, employment status, income satisfaction, and relation- GraphPad Prism version 7.00 for Mac. We report only cor- ship status. The survey questions were both closed, relation coefficients above 0.20 with a p value < .01. employing 5-point Likert-type scales, ranges (for age-related Significant relationships between questions on attitudes to questions), and open-ended questions prompting free text science and all other questions, and significant correlations responses—this article only reports findings from closed and related to age and gender are presented separately. ranged questions. Further questions asked for respondent Correlations have been omitted for clarity where the logic of attitudes toward science as well as how they imagined sci- the relationship is obvious and of no clear significance (e.g., ence fiction might influence the attitudes of other people. a strong correlation between geographical location and Survey questions were accompanied by an explanation for native language, a correlation between enjoying science fic- each question, which were informally written to encourage tion and reading large numbers of science fiction books). respondents to complete the entire survey. The survey was written in English and no translations were provided. Findings One question asked if there was a difference between how “grounded” scientists in science fiction were, compared with Sample Characteristics real-world scientists. A deliberately neutral term was used After the survey closed, a total of 909 survey responses were for this question to reduce response bias, as an alternative to collected. As the questions were not mandatory, there are one of the value-laden terms such as “mad,” “eccentric,” or variations in response numbers, as shown in the tables. Due “absent-minded” that are often applied to real or fictional to a significant number of respondents neglecting to answer scientists. This question was problematic, as attempts to 4 SAGE Open Table 1. Demographic Characteristics of Survey Participants. n % Geographical area residing (n = 902) North America (USA and Canada) 386 42.8 Australia or New Zealand 256 28.4 Western Europe 164 18.2 Eastern Europe 33 3.7 Southeast Asia 9 1.0 Other (15 Locations) 54 6.0 Native language (n = 891) English 728 81.7 Other (15 languages) 163 18.3 In a relationship with someone(s) (n = 898) Yes 633 70.5 No 222 24.7 Rather not say 30 3.3 Maybe 13 1.5 Gender identification (n = 901) Female 491 54.5 Male 400 44.4 Other 10 1.1 Age (n = 900) <15 2 0.2 15-19 28 3.1 20-29 153 17.0 30-39 229 25.4 40-49 215 23.9 50-59 180 20.0 60-69 82 9.1 70-79 9 1.0 80+ 2 0.2 Mean age (all) 42.3 Median age (all) 45 Mode age (all) 35 Female Male Mean age 41.0 44.2 Median age 35 45 Mode age 35 45 Education (n = 902) University 391 43.3 Postgraduate university 353 39.1 School 90 10.0 Technical/professional 68 7.5 Employment status (n = 894) Employed 513 57.4 Self-employed 132 14.8 Student 121 13.5 Retired 77 8.6 Unemployed 32 3.6 Parent/carer 10 1.1 Disabled 9 1.0 Income satisfaction level (n = 889) I never have enough money 102 11.5 I do well enough 481 54.1 (Continued) Menadue and Jacups 5 Table 1. (Continued) Female Male I’m happy with what I have 229 25.8 I have more than I need 55 6.2 I don’t have to think about it 22 2.5 How important do you think your life experience and learned skills are compared with your formal education (n = 902) Not important (1) 4 0.4 (2) 15 1.7 (3) 123 13.6 (4) 323 35.8 Very important (5) 437 48.5 How good are you at working with your hands (n = 902) It all falls apart (1) 67 7.4 (2) 169 18.7 (3) 300 33.3 (4) 290 32.2 I could build a space-station (5) 76 8.4 How good are you at solving puzzles and working things out in your head (n = 900) I solve puzzles with a hammer (1) 13 1.4 (2) 66 7.3 (3) 254 28.2 (4) 512 56.9 I’m the world chess champion (5) 55 6.1 Do you learn new physical or manual skills easily (n = 897) Yes 672 74.9 No 225 25.1 Do you find it easy to understand new and unfamiliar ideas (n = 898) Yes 855 95.2 No 43 4.8 Do you think of yourself as happy to consider all sides of an argument, or do you have strong opinions of what you think is right and wrong (n = 895) I’m happy to consider all the options 759 84.8 I prefer my own opinions 136 15.2 one or more questions, the analysis includes all responses reading habits (Table 2), and those regarding science and sci- given to each question rather than filtering for those in which entists (Table 3). respondents answered all survey questions. The mean age of respondents is 42.3 years and the gender balance favors Reading habits and self-identification. Respondents prefer read- female respondents, who make up 54.5% of the total. Mean, ing to other activities, with 85.1% reporting a preference for median, and mode ages were lower for females than males reading. Almost all (95.5%) stated that they are always read- (Table 1). ing something, with the average respondent reading five Respondents are globally distributed, with 42.8% of books per month and between one and two magazines. Most responses coming from North America. Most respondents readers (87.3%) had started reading science fiction before (81.7%) report their first language as English, the remainder the age of 15 years, and 76.5% read as much or more now as are distributed between 15 different languages including a when they started. Genre preferences between fantasy and cluster of 1.1% Finnish speakers. The majority of respon- science fiction are generally spread evenly, with a small pref- dents (82.4%) have a university-level education, and 72.2% erence for science fiction among older and male respondents. of the sample are employed or self-employed. The measure Most (80.1%) come from families of readers, and 92.1% also of attitude toward personal income indicated that the major- watch science fiction and fantasy films and TV shows. Sci- ity (88.6%) are neutral about, or satisfied with, their financial ence fiction and fantasy are the preferred form of literature circumstances. The majority of respondents (70.5%) also for 85.6%, and the same proportion state that science fiction reported being in a relationship with someone. Other ques- and fantasy are as good as or better than other forms of writ- tions are separated into two groups: responses concerning ing. Respondents describe themselves as “dreamers” more 6 SAGE Open Table 2. Background Questions on Reading and Other Activities. n % How much do you enjoy reading compared to doing other things (n = 846) I’d much rather be reading (1) 345 40.8 (2) 375 44.3 (3) 90 10.6 (4) 27 3.2 I don’t read much (5) 9 1.0 Do you always have something around that you are reading (n = 908) Yes 867 95.5 No 41 4.5 About how many books have you read in the past month (n = 898) Average 5.06 Median 4 Mode 2 How many magazines do you read in a month (n = 880) Average 1.69 Median 1 Mode 0 How old were you when you first started reading science fiction (n = 900) n % Below 15 786 87.3 15-20 81 9.0 20-30 24 2.7 30-40 5 0.6 40-50 4 0.4 Do you read [SF] as much now as when you first started reading it (n = 907) I read more now (1) 250 27.6 (2) 215 23.7 (3) 229 25.2 (4) 151 16.7 I don’t read much SF&F these days (5) 62 6.8 Do you generally prefer Science Fiction or Fantasy (n = 901) Mainly Fantasy (1) 112 12.4 (2) 187 20.8 (3) 235 26.1 (4) 194 21.5 Mainly Science Fiction (5) 173 19.2 Do other people in your family read a lot (n = 905) Yes 725 80.1 No 180 19.9 Do you also like science fiction and fantasy films and TV shows (n = 901) Yes 830 92.1 No 71 7.9 How much do you like science fiction and fantasy (n = 890) About the same as other things I read (1) 30 3.4 (2) 16 1.8 (3) 82 9.2 (4) 352 39.5 It’s the best thing ever (5) 410 46.1 How special is good SF&F compared with other writing (n = 891) It’s trashy (1) 5 0.6 (2) 12 1.3 (3) 111 12.5 (4) 284 31.9 (Continued) Menadue and Jacups 7 Table 2. (Continued) How old were you when you first started reading science fiction (n = 900) n % It’s as good, if not better (5) 479 53.8 Would you say you’re a bit of a dreamer, or more of a realist (n = 901) Realist (1) 62 6.9 (2) 134 14.9 (3) 282 31.3 (4) 268 29.7 Dreamer (5) 155 17.2 Do you think reading SF&F opens you up to new ideas (n = 902) Not really (1) 12 1.3 (2) 12 1.3 (3) 42 4.7 (4) 187 20.7 Definitely (5) 649 72.0 Do you ever find yourself feeling a bit ashamed to be reading SF&F (n = 901) I should be reading something more worthwhile (1) 11 1.2 (2) 53 5.9 (3) 56 6.2 (4) 131 14.5 Not at all, I’m proud of what I read (5) 650 72.1 Note. SF = science fiction. than “realists,” 72.1% are proud to be seen reading science together with moderate interactions. There are, however, fiction, and 84.3% believe that life experience and learned only very weak correlations between scientists in science fic- skills are more important than education. Respondents per- tion and real scientists being comparatively more or less ceive themselves as having good manual skills and to be very “grounded” and other responses (Table 4). good at puzzle-solving. Many believe that they are very good to excellent at learning new manual skills and learning new Other Findings and unfamiliar ideas. Most respondents consider themselves to be open to all sides of an argument (84.8%) rather than There is a moderate correlation between both age and gender relying primarily on their own opinions. There was a very and preferences for science fiction or the specific fantasy strong positive response to the suggestion that science fiction subgenre, with older males more likely to prefer science fic- opens readers up to new ideas in general. This is believed by tion rather than fantasy (Table 5), and older respondents gen- 92.7% of respondents. erally read more than younger ones. Attitudes to science and scientists. Responses to questions on Discussion science and scientists are presented in Table 3. Significant relationships discovered between questions on attitudes to The survey generated a significant response, with 909 forms science and all other questions, and significant correlations completed between November 2015 and November 2016. related to age and gender, are presented as Spearman’s cor- The survey was far-reaching, with responses given from 21 relations in Tables 4 and 5. The number of respondents to geographical locations, and 18.3% of participants do not each question in Tables 4 and 5 is identical to that for the speak English as a first language, suggesting a diverse range corresponding entries in Tables 1 to 3. of respondents. The survey responses indicate that the sci- Respondents agree that there is a positive relationship ence fiction audience has a more balanced gender and age between science and science fiction: 68.6% believe that sci- profile today than is indicated by previous surveys. The aver- ence fiction helps them relate to science in general, 62.0% age reader is in their 40s, employed and in a relationship, believe that reading science fiction makes them more likely with female respondents tending to be younger than males. A to believe in real science, and 53.2% believe that the people significant majority of respondents report being educated to who doubt science would be more positive about it if they university level or above. This reinforces previous audience were to read science fiction. data that found “astonishing” high levels of education among Spearman’s correlations between the positive responses fans (Berger, 1977, p. 236). A similar proportion of respon- to science and familiarity with science fiction are clustered dents, however, also believe that life experience and learned 8 SAGE Open Table 3. Attitudes to Science. n % Does SF help you relate to science in general (n = 897) Not really (1) 69 7.7 (2) 72 8.0 (3) 141 15.7 (4) 302 33.7 Yes it does (5) 313 34.9 Do you think reading SF&F makes you more likely to believe in “real” science (n = 893) Not at all (1) 74 8.3 (2) 68 7.6 (3) 198 22.2 (4) 214 24.0 Yes, very much so (5) 339 38.0 Do you think that other people who have doubts about science might be more open to it if they read Science Fiction? (n = 896) Probably not (1) 84 9.4 (2) 100 11.2 (3) 236 26.3 (4) 263 29.4 It would definitely help (5) 213 23.8 Do you think scientists in science fiction seem more grounded and understandable than scientists in real life? (n = 894) I think real scientists are more understandable (1) 103 11.5 (2) 168 18.8 (3) 425 47.5 (4) 153 17.1 Yes, I can relate to them more easily (5) 45 5.0 Note. SF = science fiction. Table 4. Spearman’s Correlations: Attitudes to Science and Scientists. Readers doubt Quality Categories How much enjoy Helps relate Opens to Makes science science less than compared with (p < .0001) SFF science new ideas believable others other writing SFF helps relate to science 0.27 SFF opens to new ideas 0.31 0.49 SFF makes science believable 0.30 0.56 0.45 Other people may doubt science 0.22 0.43 0.37 0.56 less if they read SFF SF scientists vs. real scientists 0.28 0.26 Not ashamed to read SFF 0.21 0.20 0.25 0.32 SFF compared with other writing 0.48 0.27 0.33 0.30 0.21 Read SFF as much as ever 0.39 0.20 0.20 0.22 0.30 Note. SFF = science fiction and fantasy. skills are more important than education, suggesting a more Although there are correlations between support of real balanced perspective than one focused on academic science and the benefits of science fiction as a form of pur- attainment. suit, there are only very weak correlations with scientists in Respondents watch science fiction films and TV shows as science fiction and real scientists being comparatively more well as read science fiction literature, self-assess as more or less “grounded.” This contrasts with the findings of a pre- likely to be good at puzzles than physical skills, and are vious study, focused on children’s literature, that indicated interested in and positive about real science. More strongly representations of science fiction scientists are negative and than this, however, they think that reading science fiction unrealistic (Van Gorp, Rommes, & Emons, 2014). The find- makes them receptive to new ideas in general. ings of this survey may suggest that negative representations Menadue and Jacups 9 Table 5. Spearman’s Correlations: Consumption Habits. Categories (p < .0001) Gender Age Prefer SF or F How much enjoy SFF No. of books read last month 0.22 No. of magazines read last month 0.22 Number of SFF books read last month 0.36 Like SFF TV/film also 0.23 Prefer SF or F 0.34 0.24 Dreamer or realist 0.20 SFF helps relate to science 0.31 Note. SFF = science fiction and fantasy. of fictional scientists have a limited impact on the attitudes research that discovered a positive link between reading vol- toward scientists expressed by the adult science fiction ume and academic success. Both reading volume and the reader. The use of the term grounded rather than a more presence of self-selected or selection-guided reading options clearly prejudicial term may have influenced a less radical influence this effect. Consequently, the above-average read- response to this question than might otherwise be expected, ing volume reported in the science fiction and fantasy experi- and could explain why the correlation is weak. ence survey may be related to the high levels of educational The response to the question about whether science fic- attainment of the sample population, with 82.4% reporting a tion opens the reader to new ideas is more positive than university education. This compares to 46% of the United responses to questions regarding the relationship between States population, 50% of Australians, and 46% of the U.K. science fiction and science. This suggests that readers absorb population (Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and more from science fiction than ideas about science, and sci- Development, 2017). The survey analysis ignores non-sci- ence fiction content is expected to discuss a wider range of ence fiction and fantasy reading habits, and total reading vol- “new” subjects. This is consistent with science fiction theo- ume may be even higher than reported here. Research carried ries that are not constrained by a science focus—such as out in the United Kingdom on childhood literacy also indi- Darko Suvin’s definition of the genre. cates that reading levels are low compared with those found Respondents report strong preferences for reading com- in our survey (Clark, 2014). pared with other forms of activity, with 40.8% reporting an In the survey, reading was in addition to interest in sci- absolute preference for reading. This is combined with a high ence fiction in TV and film, and this suggests that the read- average monthly volume of books (5.06). Almost all (96.3%) ing of science fiction is complementary to other forms of respondents started reading science fiction before age 20, genre consumption, rather than competitive. These findings and 76.5% reported reading the same or more as when they indicate a population that is not following a more recent started. This pattern of consistent high-volume lifetime read- trend of declining reading that is particularly concerning to ing contrasts with general reading surveys in Australia, some educationists, as Sandra Stotsky has described in America, and the United Kingdom, the geographical loca- “What American Kids Are Reading Now” (Stotsky, 2016), tions from which the majority of responses to the survey and the significant impact of literacy upon quality of life has originated. American readers report reading nine books per been discussed elsewhere (Dugdale & Clark, 2008). We year in the 18- to 29-year-old age category and 13 for older were surprised to find no strong Spearman’s correlations readers (Scardilli, 2014). Jacqueline Manuel and Don Carter, between family reading and the reading habits of respon- in their comprehensive review of current and historical read- dents. There were extremely weak correlations between ing practices of a population of native English speaking teen- family reading, geographical location (0.13), native lan- agers in Australia (Manuel & Carter, 2015), found that since guage (0.12), and gender (0.1) but no other categories. A 1952, year 7 to year 12 teenager reading averaged between previous review of the literature on home and family influ- 1.6 and 2.0 books per month, and in their own 2006-2010 ence on reading has indicated that socioeconomic status survey that reading volume is remarkably consistent between (SES) has a significant influence on reading habits, but also the 1950s and the present. Monthly book reading by respon- that home literacy levels have a limited impact on childhood dents to the science fiction experience survey is more than reading motivation regardless of SES, a result that intrigued twice these values. Manuel and Carter (2015) also found that Linda Baker, Deborah Scher, and Kirsten Mackler who have science fiction was not especially popular with teens, rank- called for further research into these effects (Baker, Scher, ing 6 out of 12 for boys (42%) and 8 out of 12 for girls (12%). & Mackler, 1997, p. 73). In their exhaustive examination of Fantasy was the first preference for girls and second prefer- the relevant literature, Baker et al. (1997) state “we cannot ence for boys (p. 123). They further describe a body of determine whether certain factors were more important than 10 SAGE Open others in contributing to leisure reading” (p. 74). It is sug- and response characteristics of online surveying gested that influences on reading practices are not easily (Callegaro, Lozar, & Vehovar, 2015) can only be reduced disentangled. In this instance, however, we seem to have by multimethod sampling beyond the resources available found strong statistical evidence that respondent’s percep- to this study. tion of the volume of reading exhibited by other family A potential additional limitation is that responses col- members has little influence on their own reading habits and lected as free-text, or open questions regarding the science experiences. fiction genre, are not reported here. The richness of these A method for increasing literacy among young people data is yet to be explored and will be the topic of a future might be simply to encourage them to read science fiction article. and fantasy, perhaps as an alternative to employing more complex and time-consuming behavioral interventions to the Conclusion same ends (Cockroft & Atkinson, 2017). One approach to addressing declines in reading has been to recommend a The audience identified in this survey is characterized by more popular, public investigation of reading characteristics openness to and belief in science, consistently high-volume to identify the issues that exist (Albalawi, 2015). As a contri- reading, and a very high level of education. Respondents are bution to this effort, this survey seems to identify one reading sympathetic toward science and scientists, and believe that group that is not in decline. reading science fiction inspires scientific comprehension and positive attitudes to science and that reading science fiction also has the potential to positively change new readers’ atti- Survey Limitations tudes toward science. Respondents watch TV and film sci- There are several study limitations of note for this study. ence fiction and fantasy as well as reading, and the volume of Research on the comparison of characteristics of online sur- books read by respondents is high in comparison to the find- veys compared with survey by mail have found that online ings of general reading surveys and appears to be indepen- surveys exhibit a comparatively low dropout rate and more dent of their family reading habits. Reading is also complete data responses but are similarly subject to self- complementary to other forms of participation with genre selection variation (Dolnicar, Laesser, & Matus, 2009). rather than competitive. It has been found elsewhere that sci- Martine Van Selm and Nicholas Jankowski have identified ence fiction and fantasy are popular among younger readers the value of specific online communities in generating sur- and that self- or guided-selection of reading creates the most vey data, and specifically for what Walter Swoboda, Nikola educational benefits from reading. Open acceptance, and Mühlberger, Rolf Weitkunat, and Sebastian Schneeweiß encouragement, of science fiction and fantasy reading at a termed “expert interrogations” (Swoboda, Mühlberger, young age might therefore improve the adoption of persis- Weitkunat, & Schneeweiß, 1997, p. 243; Van Selm & tent and high-volume reading habits that are of benefit to Jankowski, 2006, p. 437). Selm and Jankowski (2006) also cognitive development and academic success. identify the cost-effectiveness of this approach and the ben- This is the first article to describe the findings of a gen- efits of anonymity in encouraging frank responses, but also eral online science fiction and fantasy audience survey that acknowledge the limitations associated with technological was not distributed by a science fiction publisher, and adds access, and the risk of “losing sight” of the respondents (p. to the literature by providing a more neutral and broad 438) due to lack of control over the dissemination of the reaching account of the interests and attitudes of this audi- survey—we might consider the cluster of 1.1% of ence than might be found in surveys with a more commer- respondents to our survey who reported from Finland to be cial intent. Previous work has discovered the increasingly an example of this effect, rather than reflecting a true important role science fiction has gained in the fields of geographical proportionality of science fiction readers. The education and advocacy and how it responds to the evolu- survey was written and promoted in English only, which tion of cultural change. The gathering of popular opinions restricts the opportunities for responses by nonnative and attitudes based on empirical data adds to the resources speakers of English and will impact survey dissemination available to researchers who intend to integrate science fic- patterns. tion into their research. Researchers may be able to use a An online survey cannot reflect the attitudes of a more accurate knowledge of what science fiction and fan- broader segment of a science fiction audience who are not tasy audiences think about science to increase the effective- regular users of the Internet or are not followers of social ness of the applications of science fiction in research media. The complexity of interactive media engagement contexts. exhibited by online audiences has been theorized to make Acknowledgments analysis by online survey both particularly challenging, and despite superficial similarities, unlike previous audi- We would like to thank Todd Vandermark, Web Editor, Science ence research paradigms (Livingstone, 2013; Yun & Fiction and Fantasy Writers of America, for his kind assistance in Trumbo, 2000). These limitations of the technical resource promoting our survey. Menadue and Jacups 11 Declaration of Conflicting Interests Hamilton, P. (1954, December). Research survey results. Nebula Magazine, pp. 123-128. The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect Kirby, D. (2010). The future is now: Diegetic prototypes and the to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. role of popular films in generating real-world technological development. Social Studies of Science, 40, 41-70. Funding Kotasek, M. (2015). Artificial intelligence in science fiction as a The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for model of the posthuman situation of mankind. World Literature the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: Menadue Studies, 7(4), 64-77. is the recipient of an Australian Postgraduate Award for his research. Livingstone, S. (2013). The participation paradigm in audience This research did not receive any specific grant from funding research. The Communication Review, 16, 21-30. doi:10.1080/ agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors. 10714421.2013.757174 Manuel, J., & Carter, D. (2015). Current and historical perspec- tives on Australian teenagers’ reading practices and prefer- ORCID iD ences. Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, 38, Christopher Benjamin Menadue https://orcid. 115-128. org/0000-0003-4794-8280 Menadue, C. B. (2016). Science fiction and fantasy experience sur- vey. Retrieved from https://researchdata.ands.org.au/science- References fiction-fantasy-experience-survey Menadue, C. B. (2017a). Science fiction and fantasy opinion sur- Adams, J. J., & Wallace, S. (2011, December). Lightspeed magazine vey. Retrieved from https://research.jcu.edu.au/researchdata/ / Fantasy magazine reader survey. Lightspeed Magazine, p. 19. default/detail/a302631ffee48370c97e561e04706e5f/ Albalawi, M. (2015). The decline of literature: A public perspec- Menadue, C. B. (2017b). Trysts tropiques: The torrid jungles tive. Advances in Language and Literary Studies, 6(3), 88-92. of science fiction. Etropic, 16, 125-140. doi:10.25120/ Aldiss, B. W., & Wingrove, D. (1986). Trillion year spree: The history etropic.16.1.2017.3570 of science fiction. London, England: Victor Gollancz. Menadue, C. B. (2018a). Cities in flight: A descriptive examination Bainbridge, W. S. (1980). The analytical laboratory, 1938-1976. of the tropical city imagined in twentieth century science fic- Analog, 100, 121-134. tion cover art. Manuscript submitted for publication. Baker, L., Scher, D., & Mackler, K. (1997). Home and family influ- Menadue, C. B. (2018b). Hubbard bubble, dianetics trouble: An ences on motivations for reading. Educational Psychologist, evaluation of the representations of dianetics and scientology 32, 69-82. doi:10.1207/s15326985ep3202_2 in science fiction magazines from 1949 to 1999. Manuscript Barker, M., & Mathijs, E. (2006). Lord of the rings international submitted for publication. audience research project: World questionnaire dataset, 2003- Menadue, C. B., & Cheer, K. D. (2017). Human culture and science 2004 [Data collection]. Colchester, England: UK Data Service. fiction: A review of the literature, 1980-2016. SAGE Open, Berger, A. I. (1977). Science-fiction fans in socio-economic per- 7(3), 1-15. doi:10.1177/2158244017723690 spective: Factors in the social consciousness of a genre. Science Menadue, C. B., & Giselsson, K. (2017). An empirical revi- Fiction Studies, 4, 232-246. sion of the definition of science fiction: It’s all in the techne. Callegaro, M., Lozar, M. K., & Vehovar, V. (2015). Web survey Manuscript submitted for publication. methodology. London, England: Sage. Menadue, C. B., & Guez, D. (2017). An empirical revision of Campbell, J. W. (1949). The analytical laboratory: Meet yourself. the definition of science fiction: Results of a reader survey. Astounding Science Fiction, 43, 161-162. Manuscript submitted for publication. Campbell, J. W. (1958). Portrait of you. Astounding Science Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development. (2017). Fiction, 61, 135-136. Education at a glance. Author. doi:10.1787/eag-2017-en Carnell, J. (1955). “Survey”—Preliminary report. New Worlds Rieder, J. (2010). On defining SF, or not: Genre theory, SF, and Science Fiction, 32, 2-3. history. Science Fiction Studies, 37, 191-209. Carnell, J. (1964). Survey report 1963. New Worlds Science Fiction, Scardilli, B. (2014, December). Americans’ reading habits. 47, 2-3, 121. Information Today, 31(3), p. 8. Clark, C. (2014). Accelerated reader and young people’s reading in Stableford, B. (1979). Notes toward a sociology of science fiction. 2013: Findings from the national literacy trust’s 2013 annual Foundation: The Review of Science Fiction, 15, 28-40. literacy survey on reading enjoyment, reading behaviour out- Stotsky, S. (2016). What American kids are reading now. Academic side class and reading attitudes. London, England: National Questions, 29, 188-197. doi:10.1007/s12129-016-9568-6 Literacy Trust. Suvin, D. (1979). Metamorphoses of science fiction: On the poet- Cockroft, C., & Atkinson, C. (2017). “I just find it boring”: Findings from an affective adolescent reading intervention. Support for ics and history of a literary genre. New Haven, CT: Yale Learning, 32, 41-59. doi:10.1111/1467-9604.12147 University Press. Dolnicar, S., Laesser, C., & Matus, K. (2009). Online versus paper: Swoboda, W. J., Mühlberger, N., Weitkunat, R., & Schneeweiß, S. Format effects in tourism surveys. Journal of Travel Research, (1997). Internet surveys by direct mailing: An innovative way 47, 295-316. doi:10.1177/0047287508326506 of collecting data. Social Science Computer Review, 15(3), Dugdale, G., & Clark, C. (2008). Literacy changes lives: An 242-255. doi:10.1177/089443939701500302 advocacy resource: Executive Summary. London, England: Todorov, T., & Berrong, R. M. (1976). The origin of genres. New National Literacy Trust. Literary History, 8, 159-170. doi:10.2307/468619 12 SAGE Open Van Gelder, G. (2003). Editorial [discussion of survey distrib- Author Biographies uted in spring 2002]. Fantasy & Science Fiction, 104(2), n.p. Christopher Benjamin Menadue research is based in the digital Retrieved from https://www.sfsite.com/fsf/2003/gvg0302.htm humanities and the applied analysis of ephemeral literature. He Van Gorp, B., Rommes, E., & Emons, P. (2014). From the currently works on how science fiction reflects human cultural wizard to the doubter: Prototypes of scientists and engineers values and experience, and how this can be inferred from people’s in fiction and non-fiction media aimed at Dutch children and responses to and interests in science fiction narratives. He teenagers. Public Understanding of Science, 23, 646-659. employs a combination of literary and digital methods in his doi:10.1177/0963662512468566 research analysis. Van Selm, M., & Jankowski, N. W. (2006). Conducting online surveys. Susan Jacups is an established statistician and epidemiologist Quality & Quantity, 40, 435-456. doi:10.1007/s11135-005-8081-8 with extensive experience in population analysis, and a provider Yun, G. W., & Trumbo, C. W. (2000). Comparative response of statistical advice and training services at postgraduate level. to a survey executed by post, E-mail, & web form. Journal She has also worked as a consultant for academic studies requir - of Computer-Mediated Communication, 6(1), n.p. Retrieved ing statistical analysis and has taught courses in applied from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/ biostatistics. j.1083-6101.2000.tb00112.x

Journal

SAGE Open – SAGE

Published: Jun 5, 2018

Keywords: science communication; literature; demography; literacy; reading; culture; science fiction; fantasy; descriptive statistics; education

There are no references for this article.