MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392555130 · doi:10.5430/wjel.v14n3p253

Linguistic Personality of the Marvel Cinematic Universe Character Nebula: Narrative and LIWC Analyses

2024· article· en· W4392555130 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of English Language · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicComputational and Text Analysis Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCharacter (mathematics)NarrativeNebulaPersonalityPsychologyUniverseLinguisticsAstrophysicsSocial psychologyPhilosophyPhysicsStarsMathematicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Blockbuster films intended for an international audience often depict universally recognisable psychological motivations and limitations, presenting characters whose verbal expressions create distinct psychological impressions. This paper focused on the relationship between language use, including narratives and psychological categories of words, and the psychological traits of cinematic personalities. The study aimed to investigate how a character's language usage exposed their personality, psychological attributes, and transformations throughout their story arc and archetype. To achieve this, in the research a connection between Maslow's hierarchy of human needs, Jung's concept of archetypes, and Schmidt's typology of master characters in fiction was drawn, which expanded the understanding of the heroine Nebula from Guardians of the Galaxy verbal behavior. The research further defined the character's psychological image and arc by analysing their speech patterns. It identified the character's archetypes, namely the Backstabber and the Father's Daughter, and explored the progression between these archetypes. Additionally, the article employed the narrative analysis to construct the character's story. The narrative analysis was concluded with the implementation of the LIWC-22 psycholinguistic analysis in order to validate the findings derived from the psycholinguistics and cinematic studies. This method allowed for a comprehensive examination of the language used by cinematic characters, providing insights into their psychological traits and development. Ultimately, this research has contributed to the comprehension of how people's psychological characteristics are depicted and communicated through language in mass cinematography.

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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.282
Threshold uncertainty score0.498

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.344 · 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