twooffour said:

If you wanna engage in black-and-white painting and say that there are good stories where spoilers don't matter on the one hand, and bad stories that solely rely on a twist on the other hand, then please be my guest.

Truth is, however, lots of stuff people avoid spoilers of, is in many ways mediocre, and even good works can have strong and weak aspects.

A proper scientific study has to take all of that into account, although I guess you can still proceed from this one for further research.

If you want to deny the role of the surprise element in the enjoyment of fiction as well as story, you're free to do that, too.

I don't know that anyone is denying the surprise element in the enjoyment of fiction. What I'm saying is that the point is irrelevant. You were the one who raised the specter of different kind of stories that would undermine the study's results. I speculated how you might be touching on something (which means I am the one engaging in "black-and-white painting" - huh? sorry for trying to give your point any credence I guess).

A "proper scientific study" must take into account relevant factors to the question it asks. I conceded that taking into account the cleverness of the twist might show variance in enjoyability by individuals. Just as knowing whether the students had read such fiction before. Just as knowing how many had eaten breakfast and were more or less alert. Just as knowing, etc, etc, etc. Whatever multitude of possible factors were at play, 11 of 12 stories were rated more enjoyable after knowing the twist. I think you're thinking of a question the study wasn't asking.