Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Compression we live by: cognitive dynamics and strategies of compression as a viable tool of composition in micronarrative

  • Research Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Cultural Cognitive Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper argues that compression is a hallmark of creativity, demonstrating how textual compression is processed cognitively in the mind. Compression means not only simple brevity but also concentration of high ideational density into a sparse space or medium, so it reinforces information transfer from the sender to the recipient by squeezing extended ideas into an accessible human scale. This study suggests some cognitive strategies by which creative compression can be encoded and decoded in the light of some relevant theories, including conceptual blending, metaphor, framing, omission and abstraction. It draws on cognitive science in order to emphasize the cognitive and developmental necessity of the conscious practice and application of these compression strategies as viable tools for creative writing and micronarrative.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

(Source: Fredi Rizkiyanto’s Portfolio, 2015)

Fig. 4

(Source: Youm7 newspaper & Mar3, 2022)

Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.

References

  • Ahramonline. (2023, Jan 18). Out of Nile, into tile: Young Egyptians battle plastic plague. https://english.ahram.org.eg/News/484476.aspx

  • Aviles, E. (2015). Love. In J. Thomas, R. Shapard, & C. Merrill (Eds.), Flash fiction International (p. 67). Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Batchelor, K. (2012). In a flash: the digital age’s influence over literacy. In B. Batchelor (Ed.), Cult Pop Culture (pp. 77–88). Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Batchelor, K., & King, A. (2014). Freshmen and 500 Words. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 58(2), 111–121. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaal.324

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beach, L., & Bissell, B. (2016). A new theory of mind. Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1987). The Psychology of written composition. Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyd, B. (2014). Psychology and literature: Mindful close reading. In C. Danta & H. Groth (Eds.), Mindful aesthetics (pp. 17–28). Bloomsbury: New York, NY.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brand, J., Lansigan, R., Thomas, N., Emond, J., & Gilbert-Diamond, D. (2022). Completing a sustained attention task is associated with decreased distractibility and increased task performance. Frontiers Psychology, 12, 804931. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.804931

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christman, J. (2020). The Sloth. In Z. Bossiere & D. Moore (Eds.), The best of brevity (p. 55). Brookline: Rose Metal Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dufresne, J. (2018). Flash! Writing the very short story. Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eichenbaum, H. (2004). Hippocampus: cognitive processes and neural representation that underlie declarative memory. Neuron, 44(1), 109–120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2004.08.028

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Entman, R. M. (1993). Framing: Ttoward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43(4), 51–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fauconnier, G. (1997). Mapping in thought and language. Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Fauconnier, G., & Turner, M. (2002). The way we think. Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fauconnier, G., & Turner, M. (2008). Rethinking metaphor. In R. Gibbs (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought (pp. 53–66). Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Firth, J., Torous, J., Stubbs, B., Firth, J. A., Steiner, G. Z., Smith, L., Alvarez-Jimenez, M., Gleeson, J., Vancampfort, D., Armitage, C. J., & Sarris, J. (2019). The “online brain”: how the Internet may be changing our cognition. World Psychiatry (WPA), 18(2), 119–129. https://doi.org/10.1002/wps.20617

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flower, L. S., & Hayes, J. R. (1980). The cognition of discovery: defining a rhetorical problem. College Composition and Communication, 31(1), 21–32. https://doi.org/10.2307/356630

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galbraith, D., & Baaijen, V. (2018). The work of writing. Educational Psychologist, 53(4), 238–257. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2018.1505515

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graham, S., et al. (2018). A Writer(s)-within-Community Model of Writing. In C. Bazerman (Ed.), The lifespan development of writing (pp. 272–325). National Council of English: Urbana, IL.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenbaum, S., & Quirk, R. (1990). A Student’s Grammar of the English Language. Harlow: Longman Group UK Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halliday, M., & Martin, R. (1993). Writing Science. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halliday, M., & Matthiessen, C. (1999). Construing experience through meaning: a language-based approach to cognition. Cassell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halliday, M., & Mattheissen, M. (2014). Halliday’s introduction to functional grammar. London, New York: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hemingway, E., & Plimpton, G. (1958). The art of fiction no.21. The Paris Review, 18, 66–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Homes, A. (2006). Things you Should Know. In J. Thomas & R. Shapard (Eds.), Flash fiction forward (pp. 64–67). Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howe, I. (1982). Introduction. In I. Howe & I. Howe (Eds.), Short shorts: an anthology of the shortest stories (pp. ix–xv). David R. Godine.

    Google Scholar 

  • James, H. (1955). The notebooks of Henry James. (F. Matthiessen, K. Murdock, eds). New York, NY: George Braziller, Inc.

  • Karam, K. (2020). Conscious application of creativity dynamics as an approach to the formation and appreciation of literary creativity. Neohelicon, 48, 313–338. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11059-020-00546-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karam, K., & Elfiel, H. (2021). An Experimental appraisal of the acquisition of creative literary compression versus descriptive texts. Creativity Research Journal, 33(2), 106–123. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2020.1871548

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kyle, K., Crossley, S., & Berger, C. (2018). The tool for the automatic analysis of lexical sophistication (TAALES): Version 2.0. Behavior Research, 50, 1030–1046. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-017-0924-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we Live by. University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mar, R., & Oatley, K. (2008). The function of fiction is the abstraction and simulation of social experience. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 3(3), 173–192. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6924.2008.00073.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Masih, T. L. (2009). Field Guide to Writing Flash Fiction. Rose Metal Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCormack, J. (2014). Brief: make a bigger impact by saying less. Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, B. (2020). The Shape of Emptiness. In Z. Bossiere & D. Moore (Eds.), The best of brevity (pp. 1–2). Brookline.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, D. (2020). Introduction. In Z. Bossiere & D. Moore (Eds.), The best of brevity (pp. ix–xii). Brookline.

    Google Scholar 

  • Myhill, D. A. (2008). Towards a linguistic model of sentence development in writing. Language and Education, 22(5), 271–288. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500780802152655

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ophir, E., Nass, C., & Wagner, A. D. (2009). Cognitive control in media multitaskers. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 37, 15583–15587. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0903620106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Osman, J. (2020). Fluency. In Z. Bossiere & D. Moore (Eds.), The best of brevity (p. 47). Brookline: Rose Metal Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peng, M., Chen, X., Zhao, Q., & Zhou, Z. (2018). Attentional scope is reduced by Internet use. PLoS ONE, 13(6), e0198543. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0198543

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Poe, E. (1984). The Philosophy of Composition. In G. Thompson (Ed.), Essays and Reviews (pp. 13–25). New York: Literary Classics, 1984b

  • Read, J. (2000). Assessing vocabulary. Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Rizkiyanto, Ferdi. (2015). Rizkiyanto’s Portfolio. Retrieved from http://ferdirizkiyanto.blogspot.com/2009/06/global-warming-ad-time.html

  • Shakespeare, W. (1985). In P. Edwards (Ed.), Hamlet. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shen, D. (2014). Style and Rhetoric of short narrative fiction. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, S. M., Ward, T. B., & Finke, R. A. (1995). Introduction: cognitive processes in creative contexts. In S. M. Smith, T. B. Ward, & R. A. Finke (Eds.), The Creative Cognition Approach (pp. 1–6). Bradford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stone, M. (2013). Economy in Embodied Utterances. In L. Goldstein (Ed.), Brevity (pp. 143–159). UK: Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Szczurek, K. (2015). Not Far from the Tree. In J. Thomas, R. Shapard, & C. Merrill (Eds.), Flash fiction International (pp. 209–210). Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, J., & Shapard, R. (2006). Flash fiction forward. Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, F., & Turner, M. (2011). Clear and simple as truth. Princeton University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, J., Shapard, R., & Merrill, C. (2015). Introduction. In J. Thomas, R. Shapard, & C. Merrill (Eds.), Flash Fiction International (pp. 21–25). USA: Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner, M. (2006). The Art of Compression. In M. Turner (Ed.), The Artful Mind (pp. 93–115). Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Turner, M. (2014). The origin of ideas. Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner, M. (2020). Suggestive landscape. Zeitschrift Für Anglistik Und Amerikanistik, 68(4), 451–466. https://doi.org/10.1515/zaa-2020-2012

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ungerer, F., & Schmid, H. (2006). An introduction to cognitive linguistics (2nd ed.). Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Genugten, R., Beaty, R., Madore, K., & Schacter, D. (2022). Does episodic retrieval contributes to creative writing? Creativity Research Journal, 34(2), 145–158. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2021.1976451

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, T. (2014). Flash Fiction. In S. Earnshaw (Ed.), The handbook of creative writing (pp. 315–323). Edinburgh University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Youm7 newspaper. (2022, Mar 3). The world is closely monitoring the Russian-Ukrainian Status quo [Cartoon]. Retrieved from https://img.youm7.com/ArticleImgs/2022/3/11/74803-%D9%83%D8%A7%D8%B1%D9%8A%D9%83%D8%A7%D8%AA%D9%8A%D8%B1.jpeg

  • Young-Ha, K. (2015). Honor Killing. In J. Thomas, R. Shapard, & C. Merrill (Eds.), Flash fiction International (pp. 79–80). Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zeki, S. (2002). Neural concept formation and art. Journal of Conscious Studies, 9, 53–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zipf, G. (1949). Human behavior and the Principle of least effort. Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahy, F., & Karam, K. (2021). Potentials of Empathetic Stimuli in Creative Nonfiction: Zimbardo’s The Lucifer Effect and Danner’s Torture and Truth. English Studies, 102(4), 468–493. https://doi.org/10.1080/0013838X.2021.1928361

Download references

Acknowledgement

I would like to express my deepest gratitude to Professor Mark Turner, the Professor of cognitive science at Case Western Reserve University for his insightful guidance and supervision of this research project during my postdoctoral scholarship in the USA. This achievement would have been impossible without his wise recommendations. I would also like to express my thankfulness to Fulbright team in Egypt headed by Dr Maggie Nassif, the Executive Director of the Binational Fulbright Commission in Egypt, for providing me with all required support and aids to make this scholarship fruitful and successful.

Funding

This research is part of a postdoctoral project in literature, language and cognitive science funded by Fulbright Scholar Program.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Chair of the Department of English Language and Literature, Suez University, Suez, Egypt

    Khaled Mostafa Karam

  2. Adjunct Associate Professor, Pharos University, Alexandria, Egypt

    Khaled Mostafa Karam

  3. Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Cognitive Science, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, USA

    Khaled Mostafa Karam

  4. Associate Professor of Linguistics, Department of English Language and Literature, Suez University, Suez, Egypt

    Mohamed Eissa

Authors
  1. Khaled Mostafa Karam
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mohamed Eissa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Khaled Karam wrote the main manuscript text. Mohamed Eissa wrote the section of metaphorization, and the abstraction in cartoon and made the linguistics analysis in all other parts. He also revised and edited the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Khaled Mostafa Karam.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Conflict of interest

We (the author) acknowledge that we have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Karam, K.M., Eissa, M. Compression we live by: cognitive dynamics and strategies of compression as a viable tool of composition in micronarrative. J Cult Cogn Sci 7, 233–253 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41809-023-00123-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41809-023-00123-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation