Sharing is caring: young people’s narratives about BookTok and volitional reading

References

• Alexander JC. 2008. Iconic experience in art and life: surface/depth beginning with Giacometti’s standing woman. Theory Culture Society. 25(5):1–19. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276408095213.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andrews M. 2007. Shaping history: narratives of political change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Asplund S-B. 2021. Books as happy objects: on Swedish rural masculine reader identities. NORMA: International Journal for Masculinity Studies. 16(2):98–117. https://doi.org/10.1080/18902138.2021.1903760.
   Google Scholar
• Asplund S-B, Olin-Scheller C. 2021. Reading practices in transformation: re-designing print-based literacy mindsets in the Swedish digital classroom. L1-Educ Stud Lang Literat. 21(Running issue):1–27. https://doi.org/10.17239/L1ESLL-2021.21.02.05.
   Google Scholar
• Bamberg M. 1997. Positioning between structure and performance. JNLH. 7(1-4):335–342. https://doi.org/10.1075/jnlh.7.42pos.
   Google Scholar
• Bamberg M. 2004. ‘I know it may sound mean to say this, but we couldn’t really care less about her anyway’: form and functions of ‘slut bashing’ in male identity constructions in 15-year-olds. Human Develop. 47(6):331–353. https://doi.org/10.1159/000081036.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bamberg M. 2011. Who am I? Narration and its contribution to self and identity. Theory Psychol. 21(1):3–24. https://doi.org/10.1177/0959354309355852.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bamberg M, Georgakopoulou A. 2008. Small stories as a new perspective in narrative and identity analysis. Text Talk. 28(3):377–396. https://doi.org/10.1515/TEXT.2008.018.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baym NK. 2018. Playing to the crowd. New York: New York University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Brozo W. 2019. Engaging boys in active literacy: evidence and practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Carlbaum, S, Hanberger, A, Andersson, E, Roe, A, Tengberg, M, Kärnebro, K. 2019. Utvärdering av Läslyftet: Slutrapport från den nationella utvärderingen av Läslyftets genomförande och effekter i olika skolformer [Evaluation of the Boost for Reading. Final report from the national evaluation of implementation and effects of the Boost for Reading in different school forms]. Umeå: Umeå universitet.
   Google Scholar
• Clemens A. 2023. Trots läskris: inga besked om satsning på skolbibliotek. [Despite the reading crisis: No announcements about investing in school libraries]. Biblioteksbladet. https://www.biblioteksbladet.se/nyheter/skolbibliotek/trots-laskris-inga-besked-om-satsning-pa-skolbibliotek/.
   Google Scholar
• Cremin T, Moss G. 2018. Reading for pleasure: supporting reader engagement. Literacy. 52(2):59–61. https://doi.org/10.1111/lit.12156.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dezuanni M. 2020. Peer pedagogies on digital platforms: learning with Minecraft let’s play videos. Cambridge: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Dezuanni M, Reddan B, Rutherford L, Schoonens A. 2022. Selfies and shelfies on# bookstagram and# booktok–social media and the mediation of Australian teen reading. Learn Media Technol. 47(3):355–372. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2022.2068575.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Felski R. 2020. Hooked: art and attachment. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gee JP. 2005. Semiotic social spaces and affinity spaces. In: Barton D., Tusting K., editors, Beyond communities of practice: language, power and social context. Cambridge University Press; p. 214–32.
   Google Scholar
• Giaxoglou K, Georgakopoulou A. 2021. A narrative practice approach to identities: small stories and positioning analysis in digital contexts. In: Bamberg M., Demuth C., & Watzlawik M., ­editors. Cambridge handbook of identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, p. 241–261.
   Google Scholar
• Haglund T. 2021. Tillsammans i Engelsfors: socialt fiktionsbruk i Engelsforstrilogins digitala fangemenskap 2011–2016. [Together in Engelsfors: The Social Uses of Fiction in the Digital Fan Community of the Engelsfors Triology 2011–2016.]Uppsala universitet.
   Google Scholar
• Janks H. 2010. Literacy and power. Abingdon: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Janks H. 2013. Critical literacy in teaching and research. Educ Inquiry. 4(2):225–242. https://doi.org/10.3402/edui.v4i2.22071.
   Google Scholar
• Jenkins H. 1992. Textual poachers: television fans and participatory culture. Abingdon: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Jerasa S, Boffone T. 2021. BookTok 101: TikTok, digital literacies, and out‐of‐school reading practices. J Adolesc Adult Lit. 65(3):219–226. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaal.1199.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kohler Riessman C. 2008. Narrative methods for the human sciences. London: Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Krashen S. 2004. The power of reading: insights from the research. Hamburg: Heinemann.
   Google Scholar
• Logan S, Johnston R. 2009. Gender differences in reading ability and attitudes: examining where these differences lie. J Res Read. 32(2):199–214. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9817.2008.01389.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Läsdelegationen [The Reading Delegation]. 2018. Barns och ungas läsning: ett ansvar för hela samhället [Children’s and young people’s reading: a responsibility for the whole society]. (SOU 2018:57).Stockholm: Kulturdepartementet.
   Google Scholar
• Martens M, Balling G, Higgason KA. 2022. #BookTokMadeMeReadIt: young adult reading communities across an international, sociotechnical landscape. Inform Learn Sci. (ahead-of-print).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Merga MK. 2021. How can Booktok on TikTok inform readers’ advisory services for young people? Library Inform Sci Res. 43(2):101091. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lisr.2021.101091.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mishler EG. 1999. Storylines: craftartists’ narratives of identity. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Morgan A. 2004. Vad är narrativ terapi? [What is narrative therapy?]. Stockholm: Mareld.
   Google Scholar
• Mullis IVS., Martin MO, Foy P, Drucker KT. 2012. PIRLS 2011 international results in reading. Chestnut Hill, MA: TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Centre.
   Google Scholar
• Nordberg O. 2017. Avkoppling och analys: Empiriska perspektiv på läsarattityder och litterär kompetens hos svenska 18-åringar. [Relaxation and analysis: Empirical perspectives on reading attitudes and literary competence in Swedish 18-year-olds]. [Doctoral dissertation, Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis].
   Google Scholar
• Nordberg O. 2021. Alla läser! Empiriska perspektiv på frågan om litteraturens samhälleliga relevans. [Everyone is reading! Empirical perspectives on the question of literature’s societal relevance]. Utbildning Och Lärande/Educ Learn. 15(2):63–84.
   Google Scholar
• OECD. 2013. PISA 2012 results: What students know and can do: Student performance in mathematics, reading and science (Vol. I). Paris: OECD Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• OECD. 2016. PISA 2015 results (Vol. 1): Excellence and equity in education. Paris: OECD Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• OECD. 2019a. PISA 2018 Results (Volume I) What Students Know and Can Do. Paris: OECD Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• OECD. 2019b. PISA 2018 Results (Volume II) Where All Students Can Succeed. Paris: OECD Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• OECD. 2021. 21st-Century Readers: Developing Literacy Skills in a Digital World. Paris: OECD Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Olin-Scheller C, Wikström P. 2010. Literary prosumers: young people’s reading and writing. Educ Inquiry. 1(1):41–56. https://doi.org/10.3402/edui.v1i1.21931.
   Google Scholar
• Ross CS, McKechnie L, Rothbauer PM. 2006. Reading matters: what the research reveals about reading, libraries, and community. Westport: Libraries Unltd Incorporated.
   Google Scholar
• Schleicher A. 2019. PISA 2018: insights and interpretations. Paris: OECD Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Scolari CA, Fraticelli D, Tomasena J. 2021. A semio-discursive analysis of Spanish-speaking BookTubers. In: Cunningham S., Craig D. editors. Creator culture: an introduction to global social media entertainment. New York: NYU Press, p. 75–95.
   Google Scholar
• Statens medieråd [Swedish Media Council]. 2021. Ungar & Medier: En statistisk undersökning av ungas medievanor och attityder till medieanvändning [Kids & Media: A statistic survey of young people’s media habits and attitudes towards media use]. Stockholm: Statens medieråd.
   Google Scholar
• Sullivan A, Brown M. 2015. Reading for pleasure and progress in vocabulary and mathematics. Br Educ Res J. 41(6):971–991. https://doi.org/10.1002/berj.3180.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Svenskt näringsliv [Swedish Enterprise]. 2021. Gymnasierapporten 2021 - Attityder, antal och etablering [Upper secondary report 2021 - Attitudes, numbers and establishment]. Stockholm: Svenskt näringsliv.
   Google Scholar
• Swedish Research Council. 2017. Good research practice. Stockholm: Vetenskapsrådet.
   Google Scholar
• Thumala Olave MA. 2018. Reading matters: towards a cultural sociology of reading. Am J Cult Sociol. 6(3):417–454. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41290-017-0034-x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thumala Olave MA. 2020. Book love. A cultural sociological interpretation of the attachment to books. Poetics. 81(101440):1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.poetic.2020.101440.
   Google Scholar
• Wall N. 2023. How BookTok trends are influencing what you read – whether you use TikTok or not. The Conversation. https://theconversation.com/how-booktok-trends-are-influencing-what-you-read-whether-you-use-tiktok-or-not-213311.
   Google Scholar
• Wenger E. 1998. Communities of practice: learning, meaning and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wenger E, Wenger-Trayner B. 2015. Communities of practice. A brief introduction. http://wenger-trayner.com/introduction-to-communitiesof-practice/.
   Google Scholar