“I Love Talking To You Guys About These Books”
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Across social media platforms, communities have formed around shared interests such as reading. A prominent online community is BookTube, a reader community that has formed on YouTube, promoting reader discourse with audience members from around the world. BookTube represents a broader community among readers that is facilitated by YouTube as an interactive media platform. Content creators on BookTube, also known as BookTubers, create both long- and short-form content related to books and reading, such as full book reviews, book recommendations, and bookstore vlogs (video blogs). Especially in long-form content like bookstore vlogs, BookTubers build and reinforce their individual communities, in many cases by establishing parasocial relationships with viewers. As is common practice in online communities on platforms like YouTube, BookTubers directly address audience members to give the impression of mutual participation in a book-shopping trip, reading challenge, or other reading-related practice. Considering the extent to which BookTubers can influence the reading choices or practice of fellow readers and prospective readers alike, especially since popular BookTubers’ videos regularly receive between hundreds of thousands or millions of views, there is room to further study the application and implications of this common community-building approach. This paper will present an analysis of bookstore vlogs from BookTube channels that reflect broader trends in community engagement and contemporary online reader communities. The sample of twenty-seven videos studied for this project were uploaded to YouTube over a six-month period, between September 2022 and February 2023. These videos were manually coded using qualitative content analysis, focusing on ways in which BookTubers directly address readers to promote engagement with both their content and their individual communities. This paper highlights specific BookTubers as case studies within the full sample of videos to represent themes that emerged from the analysis of the videos. Through viewer address, these BookTubers engage viewers in their discussions of books and considerations about reading-related practices, such as by promoting dialogue in comments and going book-shopping “together” with viewers in bookstore vlogs, thereby cultivating reciprocity between the content creators and their fellow readers. This paper contributes to the ongoing scholarly conversation on social media influence and emerging discussions of BookTube and its counterparts on other social media platforms (e.g., TikTok’s #BookTok and Instagram’s Bookstagram) by identifying themes related to the language used by BookTubers to address viewers and invite their ongoing participation and involvement, adding to the growing body of work on online community formation, parasocial relationships, and interactivity.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».