Happy release period! Today I want to discuss a little the results of a survey I posted to determine the familiarity people have with Kodaka and Uchikoshi's past works, in advance of The Hundred Line -Last Defense Academy- (from here on referred to as Hundred Line)'s launch.
We'll start with this: I received a total of 280 responses! Kind of crazy. Thanks to everyone who responded and spread the word!
Of those, 94.6% of responders were interested in Hundred Line. This is a clear result of sampling bias. I posted the survey to the following places:
the unofficial Hundred Line server
Uchikoshi's Somnium's dedicated Hundred Line channel
r/LastDefenseAcademy
this blog, in the Hundred Line tags
my bluesky, using the hashtag
the Uchikoshi Big Bang server
The vast majority of these places are Hundred Line-oriented, so not a lot of people who weren't interested in the game found the survey.
Of the 280 responses, 78.6% have played at least one of TooKyo's other games, 97.1% have played at least one other Kodaka game, and 71.8% have played at least one Uchikoshi game. More detailed look at the results under the cut.
The most played TooKyo game was Rain Code, with 66.4% of the total sample having played it, and 84.5% of the responders that have played at least one TooKyo game. The least played was Death Come True, with 10.7% of total responses and 13.6% of the group that played at least one TooKyo game. Death Come True is TooKyo's most obscure property overall; Akudama Drive (anime) ended up with more people saying they've seen it (31.8% of all responders).
One thing I was curious about was whether anyone had World's End Club as their only experience with Uchikoshi. It happened to be the case for 9 responders total, of the 60 who reported playing World's End Club.
The most played non-TooKyo Kodaka game was, as expected, Danganronpa 1, with 98.2% of those who have played at least one Danganronpa game saying that they've played it. The least played game was Ultra Despair Girls; considering its status as a spinoff, that makes sense.
Among the population of eight who have never played the Danganronpa series, two have played the Tribe Nine gacha, and three have watched the anime adaptation (but only two have watched the DR3 anime). However, all those among this group who have seen the anime adaptation of Danganronpa have no Uchikoshi experience, and three of the responders only have experience playing Uchikoshi's games (though two have seen Akudama Drive -- including my own response). Only two responders to the survey have absolutely zero prior experience with the Uchikoshi and Kodaka works included in the survey.
The most played non-TooKyo Uchikoshi game was 9 Hours, 9 Persons, 9 Doors. 63.9% of total responders reported playing it, with that representing 89.1% of the people who have played at least one Uchikoshi game. The most obscure Uchikoshi game is the game version of Punch Line; more people have seen the anime than the game. This game is still, however, not as obscure as The Girl in Twilight.
(Side note from early in the survey: there was a point where I was watching the results early on that more people had watched TGIT than Punch Line, though this is once again a result of sampling bias, and it was eventually evened out.)
I'm aware of quite a few people who started playing Uchikoshi's games while waiting for Hundred Line's release, inspired by the sales the games frequently go on. I wish I had included a question about whether people were starting the games because of Hundred Line, or if they were fans before.
While because of the sampling bias the sample of people who are not interested or are unsure of their interest in playing the game is far from representative, I'd like to present the data nonetheless:
4 people said they were uninterested, 11 said they were unsure
Among those who said no, all have experience with at least one of TooKyo's prior works, as well as experiences with Uchikoshi and Kodaka's work outside the company.
Among the unsure, 4/11 have no experience with TooKyo's games, and one has no experience with Kodaka's games.
All in all, I'm pretty pleased with the survey's results, though I do think I could have conducted it better or more thoroughly. I hope everyone enjoys this game! As I mentioned before, I've never played any of Kodaka's games. I, for one, am excited for this game as among my first experiences with Kodaka's writing -- I loved Akudama Drive, and I doubt this game will disappoint me. And I hope everyone who is discovering the types of crazy things Uchikoshi likes to write in this game will have fun in the process. Wishing everyone who is playing on launch good luck!
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
ā Live Streamingā Interactive Chatā Private Showsā HD Qualityā Free Actions
Free to watch ⢠No registration required ⢠HD streaming
It's been a slow start to the year, but as term officially starts today I wanted to do an update on how things are going (I don't follow terms, I work 12mths a year, but sometimes it's nice to use them as milestones).
Currently I'm working on two main targets ahead of my next supervision in mid February, which are:
1. General reading - especially trying to get some disability studies in my brain right now.
2. Planning my survey on fanfiction & Madness habits of fans.
I'll be honest - I don't feel like I've made enough progress with either. I've been reading very slowly, and only last week did I manage to get some planning done on the survey. So I think my plan is to start doing my best to buckle down and get the survey planned out.
Right now what I have is a list of topics that I want to get data on. These aren't fully planned out with formalised questions etc yet - nor even clear as to what format I want the responses in (e.g. multiple choice vs open text response etc). But I think it's a pretty good overview of the things I'm aiming to gather. Here's the list as it stands:
General
- Demographic data re: Madness (i.e. how many people identify as some sort of Mad)
- Demographic data re: disability, and whether they view their Madness as disability if they have ticked both (this may need a 'kind of' response, as I know I'm on the fence with that)
- General demographic data such as race, gender, sexuality - for comparison to general population and giving more options for using the data in the future.
Fanfic Practices
- Does it matter to you if fanfic about Madness is Mad-authored?
- Do you think it makes a difference if fanfic about Madness is Mad-authored?
- Have you ever written fanfiction about Madness?
- If so, and you are Mad, did you write about your own Madness?
- Do you read fanfiction about Madness?
- If so, and you are Mad, do you read about your own Madness?
- How do you find Madfic - likely multiple choice with options like tags, naturally/scrolling, recs, following authors etc.
- How, if at all, has reading Madfic benefitted you?
- How, if at all, has reading Madfic harmed you?
- Previous two questions, but for writing!
- What do you wish authors did differently in Madfic?
- What's good about Madfic?
- Do you feel the AO3 manages tags around Madness well? E.g. how do you feel about the existence of tags such as "<Character> is SO OCD".
There are a few caveats here - firstly a reminder that whilst I use the term Mad(ness), I don't expect everyone to and you should use the terms that suit you! I will likely write the survey using the term mental illness purely to make it more accessible to a wider audience, but with the note that people should consider it to be whatever they prefer.
Secondly, this is VERY much a draft, and as I say not representative of wording. The past couple of questions especially are ones I'm not 100% sure on. I kind of want to know, but it might also just be beyond the scope of this survey - which I want to focus on fanfic practices more than anything? But hopefully that gives some insight into what I'm interested in.
Now that I've got my ideas down, I want to go through other fan surveys/studies and look at how they've done things, from question wording to the way they manage their data sets (I want mine to be open data, so that others can study it), or what they use form wise. Start to think about those sort of things. Which is a lot, but I just want to get as far as possible before my supervision.
I'm very open to comments from people with experience in fan surveys, just bearing in mind this is as I say a very early draft. I know wording of questions is super important and I'm hoping to improve my questions a lot. Or recs of good surveys to look at for examples!
Either way, hope this has been interesting & offered insight into the study I'm going to do.
Iām currently conducting research into the representation of mental illness within fanfiction, and I am seeking recommendations for fics. I would love to hear of any stories you know of that meet the following criteria:
Ā Ā - Contains at least one PoV character who is mentally ill.
Ā Ā - Author has stated (usually in fic notes, social media or similar) that they experience mental illness.
Ā Ā - Works must be in English.
These fics can be of any length or fandom. They can be standard fics, podfics, or other formats as long as they are transformative works. They can focus on ANY kind of mental illness, and that mental illness does not need to be defined explicitly as long as it is clearly a significant focus of the story.
I do not need them to be archived in any particular place, though if theyāre on the AO3 that would be ideal for me, as a lot of my other data (tag frequency etc) is drawn from there for ease of accessās sake.
Iād also love references to any rec lists or similar that focus on mental illness.
Iām doing my own research of course, but thereās no resource as good as asking. You can either reply here, use my asks/messages, or contact me at [email protected] if you have longer recommendation lists to pass along.
Thank you all so much!
ETA: Just wanted to note that Iāve consulted my research ethics representative and as far as weāre aware, this request doesnāt require any formal review - the content of your recommendations wonāt be used in my thesis, itās just information gathering for me!
RANDOM FUN QUESTIONS I can ask of the AO3 data, coming right up!
The DataĀ |Ā Basic QuestionsĀ |Ā FandomsĀ |Ā TagsĀ |Ā CorrelationsĀ |Ā KudosĀ |Ā Fun Stuff
Thanks to @eloiserummaging for beta reading these posts; any remaining errors are my own. Ā A Python notebook showing the code I used to make these plots can be found here.
All right. You should probably read the earlier posts in this series if you want to really understand what's happening. This is basically my "fun stuff" post: all the questions that aren't grand, sweeping statements about what's on the Archive, but rather my own personal quirky interests. :)
First up: Drabbles! My most pointless hill to die on is that a drabble is exactly 100 words. Do creators on the Archive agree?
KIND OF! There's definitely a spike of things at 100 words. Itās actually big enough that you can see it on the general word count histogram from the basic demographics post. There's also a sense of "drabble is a short fic" (what I would call a "ficlet") of approximately 520 words, give or take...a lot. Okay, fine. (I'm still right.)
I looooove AUs. What are the most popular AUs, and how have they changed over time?
As with the previous plots Iāve shown like this, the height of the curves are relative within each tag but not correct between tags. Soulmate AUs are way less popular than modern setting AUs, but their curve looks taller because a higher fraction of works with that tag were posted in a short span of time.
Things to note: The biggest AUs (modern setting, canon divergence, college/university, and high school) all approximately trace the growth of fics on AO3 over time. I thought A/B/O would be the most recently popular AU type, but actually it looks like soulmates is even more skewed to recent times than A/B/O, which I didnāt expect! Human AUs have gotten less popular lately (I think this was really popular in Teen Wolf, so as the rate of Teen Wolf works has slowed, the number of human AUs has also slowed). Iām not sure what fandom liked canon AUs, or even what that is, but it was really popular in 2012-2013 nevertheless.
I was also curious about crossovers. Like I mentioned briefly in the fandoms post, there are things that are in two different fandom categories that we probably wouldnāt think of as an actual crossover: an Avengers fic can be in both Avengers and Marvel, but most readers would recognize that as the same universe. I made a list fandoms that appear together on works, weeded out the ones that look like same-universe crossovers, and came up with this list:
DCU and Marvel should have been predictable, I think. A little more surprising is that SuperWhoLock actually did have an effect on the number of crossovers, by a lot--you can see all pairs of those three fandoms on this list. (If a work had three fandoms A, B, and C, that counted once as a crossover for A and B, once for A and C, and once for B and C.) Harry Potter is a common crossover too, which I expected, as Iāve read a Harry Potter AU in every fandom Iāve been in that wasnāt Harry Potter.
But this graph has my single favorite piece of information in this entire analysis: there are a ton of Guardians of Childhood & Hiccup Series crossovers. If youāre not familiar, those are two canon sources made into Dreamworks animated movies: Rise of the Guardians and How To Train Your Dragon. I had no idea there was a large fanfic fandom for those, let alone that there would be thousands of works that cross them over!! Isnāt that awesome?
I used to be in Harry Potter fandom, so here's some fun with different Harry Potter ships. The top ten ships are:
Okay. I could have predicted...some of those. Note that this doesnāt mean those are the top main pairings: I expect that James/Lily is a common side pairing for Sirius/Remus, and that Hermione/Ron appears a lot in Draco/Harry fics. Draco/Harry is much more popular than my old stomping grounds of Harry/Snape, which I think was also true at the time, although the works represented on the Archive probably donāt include most of what I was reading in 2003.
Actually, we can check my point about secondary pairings. Hereās a correlation matrix for those top ten ships (remember, green means theyāre correlated--appear as tags on the same work more often than youād expect based on chance--and pink means theyāre anti-correlated, or appear together less often than youād expect):
Yeah, absolutely, some of these are likely secondary pairings for popular ships. Actually, thereās one obvious set of pairings I missed--the canon pairings, Harry/Ginny and Hermione/Ron, which are EXTREMELY correlated. You do also see some Hermione/Ron with Draco/Harry (itās actually a big correlation despite the light color, because the scale has to account for the five HUNDRED percent relative likelihood of Harry/Ginny and Hermione/Ron). And, yep, James/Lily and Sirius/Remus are together. But apparently thereās also some Harry/Ginny with Hermione/Draco (not sure I would have picked that--or, actually, that Hermione/Draco would be this high on the list) and, more obviously, Harry/Ginny with Scorpius/Albus Severus.
There's a genre of fics that I see sometimes when browsing: the "Reader/somebody" genre, where you're explicitly supposed to insert yourself into the fic. (Some of these have Y/N scattered throughout the fic, for "your name", for example.) Who are the top characters that get paired with "Reader"?
Those aren't the same as the top character tags. So this kind of thing is serving a sub-audience of AO3 readers, different in certain ways from the typical reader, I guess. I donāt think I would have been able to predict this list in any way at all, either. I really like that fandom can encompass so many things that are different from what I read!
Finally: older fandoms on AO3. I asked my fandom friends to come up with what they thought of as "classic" fanfiction fandoms. Then I excluded anything with new (major) canon later than Nov. 15, 2009, when the Archive opened for beta, and anything with less than 1,000 works. Here's how those fandoms are faring on AO3.
I LOVE THAT THEY ARE STILL AROUND. I love fandom. That's all. Thanks for reading.
The Data | Basic Questions | Fandoms | Tags | Correlations | Kudos | Fun Stuff
Thanks to @eloiserummaging for beta reading these posts; any remaining errors are my own. Ā A Python notebook showing the code I used to make these plots can be found here.
I want to be really specific before we get into this: I don't mean "which works are better." There's a perception I see sometimes in fandom that more kudos = better material (e.g. when you're sorting on the works page). That may be true within narrow categories, but kudos also relate to things like "was this emotionally moving vs technically skilled or both or neither" and "what would I be embarrassed to be seen liking" (since the usernames of people who leave kudos appear at the bottom of the page). So exactly why some things have more kudos than others is outside the scope of this post.
The first thing to look at is how the number of kudos scales with the number of hits. Obviously, if more people look at your work, more people are available to leave kudos. But we wouldn't expect the same ratio at low hit counts and high hit counts. That is, if 10 of the first 100 people who looked at your work left kudos on it, we would expect fewer than 10 of the next 100 to do it. That's basically because the top fans--of the author, of the genre, whatever--are more likely to read it right away when it's new, while people who read it later may not fit into the target audience quite as well. Even if a lot of them like it, statistically, you might expect that fewer of them will hit the kudos button. Also, because you can only leave kudos once, repeat visits will increase the hit counts without increasing the kudos counts; that will matter for works that people like to reread, or for works that were posted one chapter at a time.
So here's kudos vs hits. The blue-colored region is showing where the most works are: low hits and low kudos, like we already knew. The heavy purple line is the average trend. If you look very closely at the low end, you can see it bends a little bit: the average kudos-to-hits ratio is higher for low-hit-count things, like we predicted.
In fact, we can just plot that (average) ratio:
We can do the same for bookmarks and comments. (Iām just going to show the ratio from now on, because itās easier to interpret.)
Those are pretty similar, with fewer overall numbers, and slightly more comments than bookmarks. Iām not sure what to make of the fact that bookmark & comment ratios increase with the number of hits. I donāt really use either bookmarks or comments, so maybe Iām missing something of the essential psychology there.
Okay. Thatās averaged over all works on AO3. Do things change if we subdivide the works into categories?
First up: have the number of kudos per fic stayed the same over time? The first few years of the Archive didn't have the kudos feature, so the oldest works we would expect to be very low, but did things change after that?
Yes. I was a little surprised by this, but it does look robust: Works seem to get peak kudos (adjusted for hit counts) in 2016 and 2017, with less both before and after. I think there are a few possible explanations for this besides "people got more likely to leave kudos and then less likely to leave kudos." One would be a difference in other kinds of reader behavior: for example, repeat visits to the same work will drive down the kudos-to-hit-count ratio, because you can only leave kudos once; or, if people click on a work to mark it for later, that can register as another hit without actually being another human reader. Another would be a difference in reader populations: maybe the same people who have always left kudos are still leaving kudos, but the AO3 is now big enough that we also get readers who arenāt in fandom social circles and are less likely to hit that button.Ā Also, if works in progress get a lower kudos/hits ratio, then more recent stories with a higher WiP rate might have a lower average--although, as Iāll show below, I donāt think itās large enough to explain this discrepancy.
How about word count?
By the way: the labels have the same color as the lines they go with. Iām using an algorithm that tries to place the labels so they donāt overlap, which sometimes means the labels arenāt that close to the line they go with--for example, here, the 3,000-10,000 word line is actually mostly covered by its label, and there will be some cases below where the labels are pretty far off. Just match the colors and you should be able to figure out which is which!
Anyway, peak kudos occur around the 3,000-30,000 word count. Lower for the very longest and very shortest things. My anecdotal experience is that very long works are most likely to be ficlet collections or otherwise works in progress, and so you might expect more repeat visitors to those works as authors add new chapters. Actually, let's check on works in progress in general. Here's complete works and works in progress:
You do see signs that having a WiP gets you fewer kudos per hit. Again, this is almost certainly because the same readers come back for successive chapters but can't leave multiple kudos. The differences arenāt very large, though--look at the y-axis. Ā The different years range anywhere from 0.03 to 0.08 at a low hit count, but the same range here is like 0.060 to 0.065!
Ratings?
Hereās an example where the labels are pretty far off the lines--āNot Ratedā is the green line that ends under the second āeā of āGeneral Audiences.ā Teen and gen are a little higher, explicit a little lower--I would guess some combination of more repeat visits to explicit fics and possible embarrassment at leaving kudos on fics with certain kinds of content. (Also, higher ratings are somewhat more likely to have warnings on them, which may change the emotional calculus that goes into whether you hit the kudos button.) But again, these differences arenāt that big--nowhere near the differences for years or word counts, for example, if you look at the range the vertical axis is spanning.
How about pairing type?
As a reminder, those pairing types are gen (no romantic or sexual relationship); male/male, male/female, and female/female; then āmultiā meaning either multiple types of pairings, or a relationship with more than two people; and āotherā meaning everything that doesnāt fit neatly into those categories. I could have seen this plot going either way--M/M is the most popular so people like it, or other things are less popular and so readers reward them more. Looks like itās the former. Not sure what to make of āotherā and āmultiā being the lowest.
Are fandoms different?
Indeed they are. (I donāt think this is entirely explained by differing kudos rates & fandom popularity over time, although that's probably some of it.) How about tags?
I feel like there's a paper somewhere in this plot alone...
One last note. As I mentioned, people tend to view kudos as a measure of quality. I have no way to measure actual quality of works. But I do have one way to think about it: Creators are likely to produce similar-quality work. (Not always, as fans of many published authors can tell you. But often.) So how much do individual authors' kudos counts vary? As I mentioned in the first post, I have a policy of not showing data for individual authors here. But I can show my own, since I can give informed consent as to this usage of my data. :) So here's the average kudos vs hit count line, with my fics shown as dots around the line.
I would definitely say my works have variable quality (particularly because I included all my own backdated works, meaning my fics span more than 15 years of my life--and I hope I'm a better writer now than I was when I was 18!). But you can see that the kudos to hit count ratios are ALL OVER the place. Twice the value of the line, 1/10th the value of the line--really varying, right?
So here's how I made the plot I'm about to show you. For every creator in the database, I look at their kudos vs hit counts for all their fics, and I measure how far away from the average line they are (and whether they're above it or below it). And then I measure what's called the āstandard deviationā of those distances--basically, asking how much those numbers vary. A really low value means of an authorās works are the same--and that could be "every work has only 10% of the average number of kudos" or "every work has 1000% the average number of kudos"; doesn't matter, it just means they're consistent. On the other hand, a high value would mean, well, somebody like me: with some works that get a lot of kudos, and some that donāt. Here's the distribution of that standard deviation, for all authors with more than one fic and at least 1000 total hits on all their fics:
So you can see it does, actually, vary a lot. My particular number, by this count, is 0.44, and you can see that that's a little high but still pretty typical--even though it's a lot of variation if you look at it! So I think this is support for my statement earlier, that you shouldn't think of kudos (or kudos/hits) as a measure of quality, for some definition of quality. It's measuring something--but it's way more complicated than quality.
One more post after this: just some fun questions.
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
ā Live Streamingā Interactive Chatā Private Showsā HD Qualityā Free Actions
Free to watch ⢠No registration required ⢠HD streaming
Okay. Now for some really fun stuff: correlations between different categories of metadata (like, correlations between ratings and tags, character tags and genre tags, etc). And as with the previous post in this series, some of the content I discuss may not be strictly work-appropriate.
The Data | Basic Questions | Fandoms | Tags | Correlations | Kudos | Fun Stuff
Thanks to @eloiserummaging for beta reading these posts; any remaining errors are my own.Ā A Python notebook showing the code I used to make these plots can be found here.
All right. We've got a list of top tags now. How do those tags relate to each other? That is, if I have a work labeled "Fluff", does that change how likely it is that that work will also be labeled "Angst"? I'm plotting, here, a matrix that answers that question directly. I can compute how often "Fluff" and "Angst" would appear together if they were just randomly assigned to all 4.3 million works that I collected metadata for. The blocks I'm showing below are colored by whether the actualĀ number of times "Fluff" and "Angst" appear together is greater or lesser than that expectation. (We do it that way, instead of just counting the raw number of connections, because otherwise it looks like everything is correlated with "Fluff", just because there are a lot of works labeled "Fluff" in the data set.) If I pick two tags--say, "Fluff" on the bottom, and "Angst" on the left--I can follow them to where they intersect, and the color of that little block tells me about whether they're correlated. Things that are pink are lessĀ likely than you'd expect to appear together, while things that are green are more likely. The diagonal line is always that pale green-grey color because, by definition, "Romance" appears with "Romance" exactly as often as you'd expect, and the graph is symmetric across that diagonal line because it doesn't matter if we take "Fluff" then "Angst" or "Angst" then "Fluff."
So one really interesting thing is that this plot is mostly green (so things are correlated). Not only do these tags appear a lot, but they appear together more than youād expect, and even when theyāre anti-correlated--that is, when being labeled one makes you less likely to be labeled another--itās not by very much. The strongest correlation is between āRomanceā and āHumorā, so I guess the rom com is alive and well! Angst and hurt/comfort also appear together a lot, which I suppose makes sense.
We can make correlation plots like this for other things. How about pairing types?
Per the AO3, āMultiā means āmore than one kind of relationship, or a relationship with multiple partnersā, and āOtherā means āeverything not covered by the other labelsā. The structure of this is kind of interesting, too. Remember, pink means things are anti-correlated (appear together less often than expected) and green means theyāre correlated (appear together MORE often than expected), so M/M is the Lone Ranger of pairing types, making all other pairing types less likely if it's included. Even more than Gen, which youād expect to exclude other categories!
Now for the REALLY fun stuff: how do all of these things correlate with other things? Here's an obvious one: ratings vs tags. No more symmetry, because we're showing different things on the two axes.
Not too surprised by this: āSmutā has a really strong relationship with rating, because most works of erotica deserve the higher ratings. The other tags are much less correlated with rating; Fluff and Humor incline to lower ratings, Established Relationship to higher ratings, and the others are kind of in the middle.
Do ratings and tags correlate with pairing type?
Hmm. Interesting. Romance is way more likely to be F/M than youād expect. (Do we not write as many M/M romances, or do we just call them something else? A couple of friends also pointed out to me that this might mean āromanceā as in āthe publication genre of romanceā not as in āromantic plotlines generallyā, which makes sense and would make them more M/F-heavy given publication trends.) Established relationship is very skewed to M/M. Gen anti-correlates with most of the tags youād expect. Apparently only single-pairing romantic relationships can be fluffy. F/F is neither as funny nor as angsty as chance would indicate.
I think this pattern can be explained this way: Gen is way more likely to be a low rating, and the trend you see for most other things is just that weāre comparing to the average--if Gen is way more likely to be rated General Audiences than is typical, then the other pairing types have to be slightly less General Audiences than youād expect to make up for it. (This argument doesnāt necessarily apply to the other correlations I was showing, because in those plots there are a bunch of tags Iām not showing and because non-ratings tags can appear together.)
How about the top relationship tags--do they correlate with anything?
Huh. Well, most of these ships have preferentially high ratings--I think thatās the same effect as in the rating and pairing correlation: things without a romantic/sexual relationship have lower ratings, so on average the works containing relationships will have a higher rating. Thatās not universal--look at Magnus/Alec, for example--but itās common. The other two obvious things here are 1) Dean/Sam really skews to high ratings, 2) apparently Harry/Louis fans reject the rating system.
Okay, thatās...less interesting than I was expecting. Lots of Harry/Louis smut, lots of Keith/Lance modern AUs. The most likely established relationship is Derek/Stiles. Magnus/Alex and Yuuri/Victor are the fluffiest. Not much romance, except for Draco/Harry, and that pairing also has an unusual amount of humor.
What about character tags?
Hmm. Looks like there are a lot of teen-rated Marvel works, and Supernatural leans towards the higher ratings (which we already knew).
This basically just repeats stuff we already noticed in the relationships plot, I think. One thing I didnāt notice up there is that John and Sherlock are not that likely to be tagged in Established Relationship works, which is kind of interesting as theyāre long-term partners (not necessarily romantic partners) in most versions of the canon.
How about characters and pairing type...are there characters that appear more often in one kind of pairing than you'd expect based on randomness? (Note that all these characters appear most in M/M stories, because those are by far the most common--this is just asking a relative question about how much they appear in other kinds of stories.)
Mostly not super interesting, I have to say. Steve, Tony, Natasha, and Harry Potter are all more likely than usual to appear in poly relationships or in F/M stories, apparently, and Stiles and Castiel are less likely than usual to appear in gen works.
Finally, a really fun thing (that I have to link to an external site to do, because tumblr doesnāt like javascript in posts). Instead of just looking at the top 10 tags, here are the top 100 tags portrayed as dots, arranged in a connected graph: the dots represent tags (with the popularity of the tag represented by its size), and theyāre connected by lines whose thickness indicates how often the two things appear together, relative to chance. You can also use this kind of setup to work out sets of interconnected tags that are more closely tied to each other than to the other tags. I colored those sets with different colors, so you can identify them. Hovering your mouse pointer over a dot should tell you which tag it is.
Here are the blocks of tags that the algorithm found:
Alcohol, Alpha/Beta/Omega Dynamics, Established Relationship, Explicit Language, Explicit Sexual Content, First Time, Fluff And Smut, Jealousy, Kissing, Mpreg, Polyamory, Sex, Sexual Content, Slash, Smut
Anal Fingering, Anal Sex, Bdsm, Blow Jobs, Bondage, Dirty Talk, Dom/Sub, Dubious Consent, Hand Jobs, Masturbation, Oral Sex, Plot What Plot/Porn Without Plot, Rimming, Rough Sex, Spanking
Angst With A Happy Ending, Developing Relationship, Eventual Smut, Falling In Love, First Kiss, Fluff And Angst, Friends To Lovers, Friendship/Love, Happy Ending, Implied Sexual Content, Love, Love Confessions, Mutual Pining, Other Additional Tags To Be Added, Pining, Slow Build, Slow Burn, Swearing, Unrequited Love
I love this! To me, those sets look like: fluffy plot-based tags, violence and disturbing content tags, more action-oriented plot-based tags, less explicit vanilla-ish erotica tags, more explicit or kinky erotica tags, and romance. Thatās so cool. (Not everything makes sense--why is Drabble where it is?--but still, cool.)
Or in other words: some numerical routines correctly identified the porn. :)
In this post, we'll discuss tags on the Archive of Our Own! Please note: because the works on the Archive include explicit material, some of the tags discussed in this post may not be appropriate for your workplace.
The Data | Basic Questions | Fandoms | Tags | Correlations | Kudos | Fun Stuff Thanks to @eloiserummaging for beta reading these posts; any remaining errors are my own. Ā A Python notebook showing the code I used to make these plots can be found here.
The Archive of Our Own has one of the best tagging systems around. You can read more about it here, here, here, or here. For our purposes, the important part is that users can tag their works however they want, and then a group of people called "tag wranglers" sort those tags, either adding them as synonyms of existing tags or creating new canonical versions for them. What I'll be showing here is the "canonical" version of the tags. For example, a work tagged "flufffffff" or "so fluffy!" would have those two tags assigned to the canonical tag "Fluff", so I will consider both of those tags as being "Fluff" to get the most accurate count.
The other important thing about AO3 tags is that they come in four flavors. The first one is "warnings", the content warnings required by the Archive (plus the default tag indicating you're abstaining from the warnings system). The second flavor is "Characters", tags describing the characters in the work. The third is "Relationships", tags describing the platonic or romantic relationships depicted in the work--typically, "X/Y" indicates a romantic and/or sexual relationship between characters X and Y, while "X&Y" means a platonic relationship, although this usage isn't universal and isn't enforced. The final category is "freeform", aka everything else.
Again, the tagging system is freeform and optional. In particular, I'll note that "character" tags and "relationship" tags don't necessarily imply each other: you can have a work tagged "Sherlock Holmes/John Watson" that only features Mycroft Holmes, or that features John and Sherlock but doesn't tag them as characters, only as the relationship. So remember that--while it's pretty good on average, because people tag their works so readers/viewers can find them--the number of uses of a character tag isn't the same as the number of works that feature that character, for example.
Okay! So what are the most popular freeform tags on the Archive? If you read a lot of fanfiction, I doubt you will be surprised by anything on this list. Left column is the top 15 tags by number of uses, while right column is the top 15 tags by the cumulative hit count on every work tagged with that tag.
Are these tags consistently popular over time? For reasons of space, Iāll just plot the top 10 by number of works:
If you look back at the works vs time plot in the second post, you'll see that yes, the shape of these trends is similar to the total number of works, so trends in fannish tastes havenāt changed much over the time the AO3 has been in existence. (These show a little more bumpiness because there are fewer works in each plot.) Some of these have gained a little more recent popularity vs earlier works--smut, fluff, and the two specific alternate universes are a little more weighted towards later times, while humor and general AUs are falling a little behind--but the differences arenāt as large as we saw for fandom trends in the previous post.
I'm sure you're curious about characters and relationships. Here are the top character tags, omitting the catchall character tags of āOriginal Character(s)ā, āOriginal Male Character(s)ā, āOriginal Female Character(s)ā, and āReaderā (all of which would otherwise appear in the top 15). Also, remember this is missing some of the data from 2018 and 2019, as described in the first post, so BTS characters should probably be higher:
And here are the top relationship tags (again, excluding the catchall āMinor or Background Relationship(s)ā):
And in particular, here are the top characters of color (excluding works with fictionalized race/ethnicity power systems--um, more than modern-day Western societyās power systems are made up--and characters from Voltron Legendary Defender, since I wasnāt able to find enough information on them):
Park Jimin (BTS)
Min Yoongi | Suga
Jeon Jungkook
Kim Taehyung | V
Kim Namjoon | Rm
Jung Hoseok | J-Hope
Kim Seokjin | Jin
Zayn Malik
Katsuki Yuuri
Sam Wilson (Marvel)
Magnus Bane
Nick Fury
Midoriya Izuku
Bakugou Katsuki
Erica Reyes
And here are the top relationships that are not M/M:
Evil Queen | Regina Mills/Emma Swan
Oliver Queen/Felicity Smoak
Bellamy Blake/Clarke Griffin
Clarke Griffin/Lexa
Clint Barton/Natasha Romanov
Pepper Potts/Tony Stark
Captain Hook | Killian Jones/Emma Swan
Kylo Ren/Rey
Hermione Granger/Ron Weasley
Kara Danvers/Lena Luthor
Sherlock Holmes/Molly Hooper
Belle/Rumplestiltskin | Mr. Gold
Allison Argent/Scott McCall
James Potter/Lily Evans Potter
Hermione Granger/Draco Malfoy
Here are the top ten freeform tags for the top ten fandoms. Different fandoms seem to produce different kinds of fanworks--which you'd expect, based on the variety in the source material.
AU = alternate universe, AU - CD = Alternate universe - canon divergence, AU - C/U = alternate universe - college/university, AU - HS = alternate universe - high school, BJs = blow jobs, ER = established relationship, H/C = hurt/comfort, PWP = plot what plot/porn without plot, RPF = real person fiction, SPN = supernatural.
Finally, for fun, here's the top 200 tags of all kinds, sorted against each other. You can find a lot of fun things on this list. Some of my favorites:
Supernatural is so big, and so focused on so few characters, that Dean Winchester is the sixth most popular tag on the entire AO3.
Clint Barton is way higher than I would have expected.
Sherlock Holmes is slightly less popular than anal sex.
Original female characters are more popular than anal sex.
Similarly, cuddling is more popular than A/B/O.
Harry Styles is less popular than 3/7ths of BTS (at least as of sometime in 2018); Louis Tomlinson barely tops Draco Malfoy.
Alcohol comes between Katsuki Yuuri and Viktor Nikiforov.
Leonard McCoy is below songfic. Please join me in picturing how pissed off heād be.
The one-two punch of āSpankingā and āIām Sorryā is pretty amusing.
If I had put up the top 201 tags, 200 and 201 would have been āFlirtingā and āMurderā, so Hannibal is almost on this list.
Next up: a more detailed analysis of fandoms, the engine of fan works everywhere.
The Data | Basic Questions | Fandoms | Tags | Correlations | Kudos | Fun Stuff
Thanks to @eloiserummaging for beta reading these posts; any remaining errors are my own. Ā A Python notebook showing the code I used to make these plots can be found here.
What are the top fandoms on the AO3?
I pulled this data directly from the Archive fandoms pages in mid-March, just to make sure I was comparing work counts on the same day. And, as it happens, I checked about 3 days after BTS pipped Star Wars to become the 10th-biggest fandom on AO3! You may note that thereās significant overlap between some of these fandomsāK-pop and BTS, Marvel and Avengersābut they are classified as different fandoms so Iām preserving that here. (In a technical sense, while thereās significant overlap between Marvel and the Avengers, Marvel has some works Avengers doesnāt and vice versa.) Edit 4/25: in fact, I had a data processing failure and BTS should have been a subfandom of K-pop all along! I'm leaving the plots for now, but worth keeping in mind.
These fandoms arenāt of equal popularity over time:
(The height of the curves are relative within each fandom but not correct between fandoms, by the way. The BTS work count is like ā of the Marvel work count, fore example, but it looks taller because a higher fraction of those works were posted in recent years. Basically, all the colored blocks have the same area, so the ones popular over a short time are also taller.)
RPF and Supernatural are nearly-constant juggernauts, while Marvel rises and falls with movie releases, and K-pop has exploded in the last few years. You can also see release dates of Sherlock series reflected in the Sherlock Holmes tag, and Fantastic Beasts in the Harry Potter tag. (And in the old version of this where Star Wars was the 10th biggest fandom, you could REALLY see The Force Awakens.) Marvel has the biggest single day for any fandomāon Dec 24, 2015, there were (at least) 452 Marvel works posted! In fact, we can look at Marvel in more detail. Hereās Marvel posting rates over time, with the MCU movie release dates overplotted:
Wowāguess we all hated Civil War, lol. In fact, that dip is so big that you can see it on the Archive-wide stats from the previous postāother fandoms had a small dip there, but nothing like Marvel, so it drives most of the decrease you see in mid-2016.
Hereās a fun comparison: the top 10 fandoms by number of works; by total number of hits on all works; and by median hit count per work, for fandoms with at least 1,000 works. Another way to think of this table is: most popular with creators; most popular with readers; and highest reader-to-creator ratio. For an apples-to-apples comparison, Iām using the number of works in my dataset and not the Archive counts, so this top-fandoms-by-works list is a little different from the plot above.
The total works/total hits lists are not that different, though thereās some obvious order reshuffling. The top fandoms by median hit count list is really different, though, with only Teen Wolf on there from among the top fandoms by hits or number of works. I can think of two explanations for why those fandoms in particular: either theyāve got massively better fic than other fandoms (hard to know why that would be), or thereās a big unmet desire for fic in those fandoms. Maybe a place to write, if youāre looking for lots of approbation. :)
Do fandoms produce works of the same length?
Kind of surprisingly: no. Those are big differences: the median BTS fic is 70% longer than the median Sherlock or Supernatural fic! Also note how very small these values are. 50% of all the works in Sherlock fandom are under 1705 words. You can also see that in the wordcount histograms in the last post, of course.
A couple of other questions: how many works are there in a typical fandom?
The most common number is 1! Thatās very surprising to me.
I was also curious about how per-work hit counts relate to the number of works in a fandom. Naively, I would think that having more works in a fandom would increase hit counts: a person who reads a fic about fandom X is likely to want to read more fics about fandom X, so you build a self-sustaining readership if there are lots of fics to choose from. Also, since work creators are a subset of work readers, in general, what writers choose to write in is probably a good proxy for what readers are interested in reading; more fics means more people interested means more readers.
Hereās the actual relationship between number of works and median hit count:
Itās kind of noisy (meaning the points move around a lot), but for fandoms with more than ~5 works, we do see that more works means more hits. The increase actually stops around 1000 works, which I should have predicted above. (Iāve cut off the graph because itās veryĀ noisy above 10,000 works, but the flattening continues.)Ā Apparently, thatās about the point where you have more works in a fandom than even a devoted reader could read. If you have 10 works, or 20 works, then every possible reader can read everything, so more interest means more hits. But once you have more works than people can read, then, basically, adding readers and adding creators cancel each other out in the average hits per work.
Also kind of interesting is that things with <5 works seem to have more hits on average. I suspect this is because of Yuletide, which steers people to rare fandoms they might not read on their own.