MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7116535469 · doi:10.3138/jeunesse-2025-0001

Metafiction as a Dialogic Space: A Bakhtinian Exploration of Metafictional Children’s Novels

2025· article· en· W7116535469 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Gan Sujia

Bibliographic record

VenueJeunesse Young People Texts Cultures · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRussian Literature and Bakhtin Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetafictionDialogicNarrativeSubversionReading (process)ScholarshipAmbiguityPostmodernism

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In an age of unprecedented ambiguity and uncertainty, children must develop critical thinking skills to navigate a complex and ever-changing world. Interactive narratives such as metafiction offer a powerful tool for cultivating these skills. This article draws on Mikhail Bakhtin’s concept of dialogue, which emphasizes the intersubjective nature of meaning-making, to analyze two metafictive children’s novels— The Bad Beginning (2001) by Daniel Handler, and The Name of This Book Is Secret (2018) by Raphael Simon—to explore how metafictive elements in these children’s novels can foster dialogues and encourage dialogic thinking. Through a close reading of these novels, this study examines how metafictive elements, such as direct address to the reader, the subversion of traditional narrative conventions, and the inclusion of playful and interactive elements, encourage readers to question assumptions. By transforming the reading experience into a collaborative process of meaning-making, these novels not only entertain but also empower young readers to become active participants in a dynamic and ever-evolving dialogue with the text and the world around them. This research contributes to a growing body of scholarship that explores the unique potential of metafiction to cultivate critical thinking, creativity, and a lifelong love of reading in children.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.780
Threshold uncertainty score0.761

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.300 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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 venueJeunesse Young People Texts CulturesSame topicRussian Literature and Bakhtin StudiesFrench-language works237,207