Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study of children’s play activities has not only been historically trivialized, but numerous widely held misconceptions about kids, their play, folklore and popular culture continue to persist today despite evidence to the contrary. For example, some adults believe that mass media and popular culture has contributed to the decline of kids’ traditional play activities, while others argue that traditional play objects are being replaced by “media culture artifacts”; however, the child-centred fan-play research I present in this paper reveals that popular culture encourages and activates children’s traditional and creative competences, rather than destroy them. The Harry Potter “phenomenon”, as a contested site where youth struggle for visibility and power, serves as the case study for this paper. Based on ethnographic observation of several local events, surveys, and interviews with child and teenage fans of Harry Potter, I examine several emergent, participatory, fan-play activities (including costuming, role-playing, make-believe and spells) and discuss the many ways children manipulate, appropriate, adapt and combine popular culture and folklore, using both creativity and tradition as expression of their lives, identities and power struggles. I conclude by discussing the heart of contemporary children’s culture and play – the conservative/creative nature of children, hybrid play forms and the activation of traditional and creative competencies in the face of popular culture influences.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".