According to Their Plots, Jane Austen’s Novels Are Not Comic Romances with Happy Endings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In order to answer two specific questions (“Do the plots of Jane Austen’s novels match the plot of Cinderella?” and “Do Austen’s novels include a comic or happy ending, defined as one where the author employs more pleasant language at the end of the novel than she did at the beginning?”), Jane Austen’s six major novels and Cinderella were scored for the pleasantness of their language with the Dictionary of Affect (Whissell, 2009). The answer to both questions, based on results of regression analyses and means comparisons, is negative. Austen’s novels are not variants of the Cinderella story, nor do they have the type of endings that characterize comic romances. Cinderella is very pleasant and has a distinct happy ending. In contrast, Emma, Pride and Prejudice, and Northanger Abbey are less pleasant and have equivocal endings, while Mansfield Park and Sense and Sensibility have tragic (relatively unpleasant) endings. Persuasion employs the least pleasant language overall but has a happy ending.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".