The Social Lives of Books: Reading Victorian Literature on Goodreads
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper compares social media traces from Goodreads to data from the MLA International Bibliography and the Open Syllabus Project, in order to better understand the preferences of readers of Victorian literature from different but overlapping communities. We find that the majority of works of Victorian literature that are indicated as being read on Goodreads occur about as often as they are taught or written about in the academy, although books aimed at an adult audience are written about more frequently in peer-reviewed venues. Interestingly, those works that are statistical outliers in terms of their greater popularity with a general audience than an academic audience tend to feature women authors, children’s literature, and works with a strong female protagonist. Turning to an analysis of the written reviews on Goodreads of three outliers that were more popular with a general audience--A Tale of Two Cities, Jane Eyre, and The Secret Garden--we find that readers tend to comment on plot (especially in Dickens), feminist themes (in Jane Eyre), and the importance of characters (in all three works). In conclusion, we suggest ways in which postsecondary teachers might draw on these results to inform their syllabi and formulate strategies for teaching Victorian literature. We argue that in terms of outliers, popular taste in Victorian literature among Goodreads users reflects more general reading preferences among this user group, as readers turn to the Victorian era to read children’s literature and books featuring strong female characters.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it