In the previous post, I talk about a research study done at UC San Diego that concluded that spoilers are better for stories. According to the press release for this study, the researchers will next study what makes stories work–or not work.
Why do this next study?
As the press release explains precisely why they will continue to focus on stories::
They [the researchers] are motivated by the scandals about authors using false information in their autobiographies. Christenfeld doesn’t think that this is a big deal.
“Why does it matter,” Christenfeld said, “whether something happened to one person in five billion or to no one? If the story is still a good story, why do we care?”
OH. MY. GOD. (I do not use these words lightly.)
Do these scientists get their news from the National Enquirer?
I hypothesize that one way stories work is that they have beginnings, middles and ends.