Asking Hypothetical Questions About Stories Using QUEST

  • Rachelyn FarrellEmail author
  • Scott Robertson
  • Stephen G. Ware
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10045)


Many computational models of narrative include representations of possible worlds—events that never actually occur in the story but that are planned or perceived by the story’s characters. Psychological tools such as QUEST are often used to validate computational models of narrative, but they only represent events which are explicitly narrated in the story. In this paper, we demonstrate that audiences can and do reason about other possible worlds when experiencing a narrative, and that the QKSs for each possible world can be treated as a single data structure. Participants read a short text story and were asked hypothetical questions that prompted them to consider alternative endings. When asked about events that needed to change as a result of the hypothetical, they produced answers that were consistent with answers generated by QUEST from a different version of the story. When asked about unrelated events, their answers matched those generated by QUEST from the version of the story they read.


Hypothetical reasoning Planning Possible worlds QUEST 


  1. 1.
    Kripke, S.A.: Semantical considerations on modal logic. Math. Logic Q. 9, 67–96 (1963)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bruner, J.S.: Actual Minds, Possible Worlds. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (1986)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ryan, M.L.: Possible worlds (2016)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gerrig, R.J.: Experiencing Narrative Worlds: On the Psychological Activities of Reading. Yale University Press, New Haven (1993)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Baddeley, A.D., Hitch, G.: Working memory. Psychol. Learn. Motiv. 8, 47–89 (1974)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Zwaan, R.A., Radvansky, G.A.: Situation models in language comprehension and memory. Psychol. Bull. 123, 162 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    van den Broek, P.: Causal inferences and the comprehension of narrative texts. Psychol. Learn. Motiv. 25, 175–196 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gerrig, R.J., Bernardo, A.B.I.: Readers as problem-solvers in the experience of suspense. Poetics 22, 459–472 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Riedl, M.O., Young, R.M.: Narrative planning: balancing plot and character. J. Artif. Intell. Res. 39, 217–268 (2010)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Herman, D.: Story Logic. University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln (2002)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Young, R.M., Harrison, B., Roberts, D.L.: A computational model of narrative conflict at the fabula level. IEEE Trans. Comput. Intell. Artif. Intell. Games 6, 271–288 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Young, R.M.: Glaive: a state-space narrative planner supporting intentionality and conflict. In: Proceedings of the 10th AAAI International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Interactive Digital Entertainment, pp. 80–86 (awarded Best Student Paper) (2014)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ryan, M.L.: Possible Worlds, Artificial Intelligence, and Narrative Theory. Indiana University Press, Bloomington (1991)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Graesser, A.C., Gordon, S.E., Brainerd, L.E.: QUEST: a model of question answering. Comput. Math. Appl. 23, 733–745 (1992)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Christian, D.B., Young, R.M.: Comparing cognitive and computational models of narrative structure. In: Proceedings of the 19th National Conference of the American Association for Artificial Intelligence, pp. 385–390 (2004)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Cardona-Rivera, R.E., Price, T., Winer, D., Young, R.M.: Question answering in the context of stories generated by computers. Adv. Cogn. Syst. 4, 227–245 (2016)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Boyd, B.: On the Origin of Stories: Evolution, Cognition, and Fiction. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (2009)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bruner, J.: The narrative construction of reality. Crit. Inq. 18, 1–21 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lewis, D.: Truth in fiction. Am. Philos. Q. 15, 37–46 (1978)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Eco, U.: The Role of the Reader: Explorations in the Semiotics of Texts, vol. 318. Indiana University Press, Bloomington (1984)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Pavel, T.G.: Fictional Worlds. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (1986)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Graesser, A.C., Olde, B.A.: How does one know whether a person understands a device? the quality of the questions the person asks when the device breaks down. J. Educ. Psychol. 95, 524 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Cheong, Y.G., Young, R.M.: Suspenser: a story generation system for suspense. IEEE Trans. Comput. Intell. Artif. Intell. Games 7, 39–52 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rachelyn Farrell
    • 1
    Email author
  • Scott Robertson
    • 1
  • Stephen G. Ware
    • 1
  1. 1.Narrative Intelligence LabUniversity of New OrleansNew OrleansUSA

Personalised recommendations