MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7131306992 · doi:10.7202/1122634ar

The Wraith of Childhood: How Contemporary TV Series Set the Origin of Characters’ Vulnerability—and of Creative Developments—On Childhood Trauma

2025· article· fr· W7131306992 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Marta Boni

Bibliographic record

VenueIntermédialités Histoire et théorie des arts des lettres et des techniques · 2025
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender, Feminism, and Media
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTemporalityNarrativeSet (abstract data type)Television seriesFeelingRepetition (rhetorical device)RecallAutobiographical memoryPsychic

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article explores how contemporary television series use childhood as both a narrative and affective device to revisit trauma, vulnerability, and emotional complexity. Drawing on affect theory, intermediality, and cultural analysis, it examines how “minor feelings” emerge in serial storytelling. Rather than portraying childhood as a space of innocence, the article highlights its role as a site of conflict, memory, and unresolved tension. Focusing on the use of toys as vectors of memory, it analyzes flashbacks as tools to represent fractured temporality and the lasting impact of early emotions on adult subjectivity. Using the Quebec television series In Memoriam (Crave, 2024) as its central case study, the paper shows how toys can trigger traumatic recall and illuminate ongoing psychic wounds. Television’s capacity for repetition allows these minor feelings to circulate within spaces of nostalgia and unease, often mobilizing the uncanny. The paper argues that TV functions as a mobile archive of feelings, shaping how viewers engage with both personal and collective pasts.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.066
Threshold uncertainty score0.132

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0090.020
Scholarly communication0.0090.006
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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 routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIntermédialités Histoire et théorie des arts des lettres et des techniquesSame topicGender, Feminism, and MediaFrench-language works237,207