Science fiction prototyping’s features and impact on college students’ perceptions of writing

Abstract

Abstract The present study develops an applied literariness study by exploring both the features, and the impact, of science fiction prototyping (SFP) on college students’ perceptions of disciplinary, or field-specific, writing. College students (N = 83), who were English (n = 35) or STEM (science, technology, engineering, mathematics) majors (n = 48), composed micro-science fiction prototyping (µSFP), a genre that blends creative and science writing. Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count (LIWC2015) analysis demonstrated that, aside from a more positive average emotional tone, µSFP written fell psycho-linguistically between personal and science writing. English and STEM majors’ µSFP stories were similar in terms of analytical levels, clout, authenticity, emotional tone, and use of words. Mann-Whitney U tests indicated that, while English majors evaluated creative writing as significantly more relevant to their future career goals pre-intervention than did STEM majors (p = .04, r = .23), this difference vanished post-intervention. Additionally, while STEM majors evaluated science writing as significantly more worth their time to study (p = .042, r = .22) and relevant to their major (p = .01, r = .28) pre-intervention than did English majors, these differences disappeared post-intervention. Wilcoxon signed-ranks tests indicated that, while English majors’ ownership and evaluation of science and creative writing did not change, STEM majors’ evaluations of creative writing as relevant to their majors and future careers were significantly higher post-intervention (p = .015, r = .35)