The sample included a total of 222 children attending the fourth or fifth grade of primary school, recruited from public educational institutions in Northern and Central Italy, of which 97 were females (43.7%) and 125 were males (56.3%). Participants ranged in age from 9 to 10 years, with a mean age of 9.31 years (SD = 0.46); specifically, 154 children (69.4%) were 9 years old and 68 children (30.6%) were 10 years old. With respect to geographical distribution, 110 participants (49.5%) were recruited from schools located in central Italy, whereas 112 participants (50.5%) attended schools in northern Italy.

Since reading comprehension represented an essential skill to read narrative material, inclusion criteria included the absence of known cognitive or linguistic impairments.

Participation was voluntary, and written informed consent was obtained from parents or legal guardians.

The present study was approved by the Ethical Committee for Research in Psychology of Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore of Milan (approval number: pr87_24). Written informed consent was obtained from parents or legal guardians prior to children’s participation.

Data collection was conducted in collaboration with the recruited schools and followed a standardized administration protocol and was structured in two data collection phases conducted 5 to 7 days apart.

During the first phase, each child individually completed the Personal Interests Questionnaire for Children (PIQ-C), a brief open-ended self-report designed to collect information relevant for narrative personalization, administered individually in a quiet room within the school setting. The PIQ-C was adapted from the Personal Interests Questionnaire for adults (PIQ ¹² ), originally developed to support individualized narrative feedback. To ensure developmental appropriateness for children aged 9 to 10 years, the questionnaire was translated into Italian and substantially revised. Revisions included reducing item length and linguistic complexity, removing content related to adult experiences (e.g., employment), and excluding prompts requiring abstract or highly reflective thinking that proved too demanding during pilot testing. Pilot testing also indicated that children had difficulty selecting single preferences; therefore, several items were reformulated to allow multiple responses. The final PIQ-C consists of eight open-ended items assessing identifying information, school preferences, admired figures, fears, perceived strengths, and physical self-description.

In the second phase, children were again individually invited to a quiet room were presented the fable corresponding to their assigned experimental condition, differing in the degree of personalization of the fable used as feedback material: (a) a non-personalized version, (b) a minimally personalized version including the child’s name and gender, (c) a moderately personalized version incorporating additional biographical elements (e.g., physical characteristics, a salient fear, and a personal strength), and (d) a fully personalized version that additionally reflected the child’s peer context and an admired helper figure.

All fables were developed according to theoretical principles of individualized feedback within the Therapeutic Assessment framework for children and shared the same narrative structure, plot, and moral message, differing only in the degree of personalization embedded in the text.

Immediately after reading the fable, participants completed post-test questionnaires assessing emotional engagement with the story and perceived narrative quality. Sessions lasted approximately 15 to 20 minutes and were conducted by trained researchers using a standardized script. No debriefing or interpretative discussion was provided to avoid influencing children’s spontaneous evaluations of the narrative material.

Experimental condition: The Fable

A fable was developed for each participant, with varying levels of personalization based on information provided in the PIQ-C. Each story featured a child protagonist characterized by specific personal strengths who was required to face a significant fear in a peer context to avoid shame or humiliation. During the narrative, the protagonist encountered an admired figure who encouraged the use of these personal qualities to cope with the challenging situation. The moral, conveyed in the final lines, emphasized that the solution adopted by the protagonist was shared with peers and met with curiosity and acceptance, highlighting that situations perceived as challenging are often common among children. The story concluded by conveying the message that facing difficult situations through self-expression, rather than excessive concern about others’ judgments, is generally the most adaptive response.

Four experimental versions of the fable were created, corresponding to four levels of personalization. All versions shared the same narrative structure, plot progression, and moral message, differing only in the degree and type of personalized elements embedded in the text. In the non-personalized condition, the story contained no individualized references, including gender. The minimally personalized version included the child’s name, gender, and age. The moderately personalized version additionally incorporated references to physical characteristics, a salient fear, and a personal strength identified in the PIQ-C. The fully personalized version further included explicit references to the child’s peer group and an admired helper figure identified by the child.

Children assigned to the non-personalized condition received a moderately personalized version of the fable after completion of data collection.

Fable Appreciation Questionnaire (FAQ)

Children’s appreciation of the fable was assessed using the Fable Appreciation Questionnaire (FAQ), a post-test self-report measure specifically developed for this study to evaluate emotional engagement with the narrative and perceived formal qualities of the story.

The FAQ was derived from selected items adapted from two established therapeutic alliance measures. Two items were adapted from the Children’s Alliance Questionnaire (CAQ ¹³ ), and three items from the Vanderbilt Therapeutic Alliance Scale-Revised, Short Form (VTAS-R ¹⁴ ). Original items referring to the therapeutic relationship were conceptually reframed to assess the child’s relationship with the fable, replacing references to the therapist or mentor with references to the narrative. Item wording and syntax were simplified to ensure develpmental appropriateness for children aged 9 to 10.

Two additional items assessing formal aspects of the narrative (perceived readability and length) were included to capture potential structural differences across conditions. The final questionnaire consisted of seven items assessing overall liking of the story, desire to keep it, perceived emotional understanding and support, perceived usefulness of the solution presented, reading difficulty, and perceived length. Responses were provided on a 5-point Likert scale illustrated with emoticons.

Exploratory factor analysis supported a two-factor structure: Affective Engagement with the Fable (four items: e.g., “ I like the fable I received”; “ I would like to keep the fable”; 30% of variance; Cronbach’s α = .74) and Formal Qualities of the Fable (two items: “ The fable was easy to read”, “ The fable was too long”; 7% of variance; Cronbach’s α = .35).

Several limitations of the present study should be acknowledged. First, the sample was limited to children aged 9 to 10 years, which restricts the generalizability of the findings to other developmental stages. Future studies should examine whether similar effects of personalization emerge in younger children or early adolescents, for whom narrative comprehension, emotional engagement, and sensitivity to personalization may differ.

Second, the study was conducted in a non-clinical context. While this design allowed for a controlled investigation of the effects of personalization on narrative engagement, responses to different levels of personalization may be more pronounced in clinical settings, particularly when therapeutic stories are used to communicate assessment feedback or emotionally salient information. Research conducted in applied and clinical contexts is therefore needed to evaluate the ecological validity and clinical relevance of the present findings.