MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2164503807 · doi:10.1177/1468798404044516

Young Children Interpret the Metafictive in Anthony Browne’s Voices in the Park

2004· article· en· W2164503807 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Early Childhood Literacy · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicThemes in Literature Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetafictionPostmodernismPsychologyReading (process)Literary criticismPicture booksLiteratureLinguisticsArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Voices in the Park(Browne, 1998) was one of nine picture books I used in a study that explored the nature of Grade 1 children’s literary understanding by examining their verbal responses during storybook read-aloud sessions, and their subsequent written, visual arts, and dramatic responses. This article discusses the Grade 1 students’ responses to and understandings of the metafictive devices in Anthony Browne’s picture book. Although researchers and theorists have written about metafiction, a paucity of research has explored elementary students’ literary understandings of and responses to books with metafictive devices. As well as defining metafiction and identifying various metafictive devices described in the literature, this article contextualizes Browne’s work and the children’s responses in a discussion of metafictive textual practices in postmodern and Radical Change literature.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.930
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.225 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it