MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415763031 · doi:10.1080/13614541.2025.2575723

Riddle of Social Isolation in JK Rowling’s Harry Potter

2025· article· en· W4415763031 on OpenAlexaff
Sigrid Roman

Bibliographic record

VenueNew Review of Children s Literature and Librarianship · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicThemes in Literature Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHarry potterIsolation (microbiology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To examine what conceptualizations of isolation and loneliness are potentially internalized by readers, this article draws on the social isolation aspect found in the multidisciplinary work of Roelof Hortulanus, Anja Machielse, and Ludwien Meeuwesen. This article then deconstructs how social networks are portrayed in the Harry Potter novel series to shape the extent, nature, and divergent manifestations of loneliness (and vice versa). Special attention will be paid to the Harry Potter’s and Tom Riddle’s social networks before and during their formative years at Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry and how these impacted their experiences of social isolation, loneliness, and eventual social development. The novels’ engagement with the theme of loneliness provides thought-provoking insights into the series’ commentary on the relationships between students and peers, students and teachers, and students’ internalization or rejection of the school climate. Through a careful examination of Rowling’s parallels between Harry Potter and Tom Riddle, the article argues that the author gives a complex, albeit sometimes dark portrayal of the potential of social networks that provides the reader with useful images and references to explore the theme of loneliness, and offers some important lessons on the importance of the school as a powerful locus for mediating alienation.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.925
Threshold uncertainty score0.659

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNew Review of Children s Literature and LibrarianshipSame topicThemes in Literature AnalysisFrench-language works237,207