ArticleEvolutionary human sciences2025
Quantifying and explaining the rise of fiction.
Article in Evolutionary human sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Cultural evolution - of the arts.Evolutionary human sciences · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We present a comprehensive analysis of the rise of fictions across human narratives, using large-scale datasets that collectively span over 65,000 works across various media (movies, literary works), cultures (over 30 countries, Western and non-Western), and time periods (2000 BCE to 2020 CE). We measured fictiveness - defined as the degree of departure from reality - across three narrative dimensions: protagonists, events, and settings. We used automatic annotations from large language models (LLMs) to systematically score fictiveness and ensured the robustness and validity of our measure, specifically by demonstrating predictable variations in fictiveness across different genres, in all media. Statistical analyses of the changes in fictiveness over time revealed a steady increase, culminating in the 20th and 21st centuries, across all narrative forms. Remarkably, this trend is also evident in our data spanning ancient times: fictiveness increased gradually in narratives dating back as far as 2000 BCE, with notable peaks of fictiveness during affluent periods such as the heights of the Roman Empire, the Tang Dynasty, and the European Renaissance. We explore potential psychological explanations for the rise in fictiveness, including changing audience preferences driven by ecological and social changes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.