An overview of the philosophical and critical literature on fiction reveals a widespread impression rarely subject to rigorous analysis: that fiction “expands our horizons”, gives us insight and opens us to new experiences and ways of thinking. This experiment will draw these different claims together and test a hypothesis about the cognitive mechanisms and the textual features that are responsible for this impression. We will focus on a recurring textual feature of good works of fiction, namely “foregrounding”. Foregrounding is defined as “the range of stylistic variations that occur in literature” at the phonetic, syntactic or semantic level (Miall, D. S., & Kuiken, D. (1994). Foregrounding, defamiliarization, and affect: Response to literary stories. Poetics, 22(5), 389-407). We hypothesise that foregrounding is one of the main causes of the impression that we are gaining knowledge from the text. This hypothesis, which is in line with both literary-critical common understanding and the psychology and neuroscience of insight and learning, will be tested with ecologically-plausible reading material: two groups of participants will be presented with two versions of a fictional text that differ in foregrounding. After reading, the participants’ perceived learning will be assessed. Additionally, two other groups of participants will be given the same two texts, yet presented as non-fictional. This will allow us to test whether the readers' perception of learning is influenced by their perception of the text's genre.