Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Harry Potter and the Millennials: The Boy‐Who‐Lived and the Politics of a Muggle Generation
Anthony Gierzynski, Ph.D.
University of Vermont
and
Julie Seger
University of Vermont
Prepared for delivery at the 2011 Annual Meeting of the
American Political Science Association, September 1‐4, 2011.
© Copyright by the American Political Science Association.
We would like to thank colleagues who took time to administer the Harry Potter Survey in their
classes: Robert Brown at University of Mississippi, Wendy Johnston at Adirondack Community
College, Matt Moore at Cal Poly, Matt Potowski at Iowa State, Rick Travis and David Breaux at
Mississippi State, Stephen Woolworth at Pacific Lutheran, as well as a number of colleagues at
the University of Vermont. We would also like to thank Kate Eddy for the editing of some of the
earlier sections of this paper.
Abstract
In this paper we report research on the political impact of the Harry Potter series on the politics
of the Millennial Generation. The Harry Potter series is rich with lessons that are relevant to
politics—acceptance of differences, support for political tolerance and equality, anti‐
authoritarianism, opposition to the use of violence and deadly force, and the corruptness and
ineptitude of politicians. We tested whether exposure to the series was related to individuals’
perspectives on such issues using a survey of college students at a number of different colleges
and universities. Our findings indicate that Millennials who became immersed in the story of
the boy‐who‐lived are different from their fellow Millennials with regard to these politically
relevant perspectives, and, furthermore, our findings suggest that the Harry Potter series had
something to do with these differences.
Page 1 of 58
Without a doubt J. K. Rowling’s Harry Potter series has had a powerful effect on the
Millennial Generation. 1 Hundreds of millions of Millennials grew up immersed in the world of
the boy wizard—reading the books, attending midnight book release parties (many dressed as
the characters), watching the movies, and becoming part of the Harry Potter fan community.
By the time the 7th and final book in the series was released, the first six books had already sold
over 325 million copies, many of which were read multiple times by their owners. The sales of
the 7th book set the record for most books sold in the U.S. in 24 hours—8.3 million. 2 Five of the
six movies based on the books are in the top 25 grossing films of all time worldwide (the 6th was
number 26). 3 The popularity of the books and movies led Universal Studios to open a
Wizarding World of Harry Potter attraction at its Florida theme park where fans can explore
Hogwarts and sample butterbeer.
Additional indications of the extent of fan immersion can be found on popular internet
sites such as Mugglenet.com and The Leaky Cauldron, http://www.the‐leaky‐cauldron.org/.
One need only spend a short time on the sites to see the level at which many fans are devoted
to the series. Fans not only post news about and discuss the latest developments about Harry
Potter, but they also create and post Harry Potter inspired fan fiction, fan art, and videos,
download video games, share recipes, buy Harry Potter merchandise (including Bertie Bott’s
Every Flavor Beans), and maintained countdown clocks for the release of the books and movies.
Fans have created Mugglespace.com, their own Harry Potter social network. They even have
1
We utilize Neil Howe and Bill Strauss’ delineation of generations for this research; the Millennial Generations is
comprised of individuals who were born between 1982 and about 1995.
2
BBC, “Harry Potter Finale Sales Hit 11 Million,” 23 July 2007,
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/6912529.stm, accessed 7 June 2010.
3
The Internet Movie Data Base (IMDB), “All‐Time Box Office: Worldwide,”
http://www.imdb.com/boxoffice/alltimegross?region=world‐wide, accessed 7 June 2010.
Page 2 of 58
their own Harry Potter music, played by Wizard Rock bands. And, finally, while their
broomsticks never really leave the ground, 227 colleges in the U.S. now actually have Quidditch
teams. 4
Beyond its evident popularity, however, little is known with regard to the specific ways
the Harry Potter books and movies may have affected its main audience, the Millennial
Generation. While Rowling did not set out to write a political tale, her story is imbued with
values, perspectives and lessons that may have affected the political views of the generation
that became so involved in the Potter world. 5 Could the series have had anything to do with
the fact that 2/3rds of the Millennials in the U.S. voted for Barack Obama in 2008? Could the
series be partly responsible for the generally liberal values and views that the Millennials voice
in public opinion polls? 6
The typical first reaction to a discussion about the impact of the Harry Potter series on
its fans is the assertion that it is just a story. It is much more than that. In fact, no story is “just
a story.” As most cultures recognize, stories are powerful and necessary vehicles for learning.
Even the “news” from which we expect to learn what is going on in the world is told in stories.
All the stories that we read, watch unfold, or are told to us, whether for fun or to obtain
information, invariably contain lessons—messages, warnings and/or maxims that bring
4
The Intercollegiate Quidditch Association,
http://collegequidditch.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=170&Itemid=54, accessed 7 June
2010.
5
Her own discussion of the values she finds important can be found in her Harvard commencement speech in
2009 (see http://www.the‐leaky‐cauldron.org/2008/6/5/entire‐text‐of‐j‐k‐rowling‐harvard‐commencement‐
speech‐now‐online). For a discussion of some of the political aspects of the books see Benjamin H. Barton, “Harry
Potter and the Half‐Crazed Bureaucracy,” Michigan Law Review, Vol. 104, pp. 1523‐1538.
6
See the PEW Research Center’s report “Millennials: A Portrait of the Next Generation. Confident. Connected.
Open to Change.” 24 February 2010, http://pewresearch.org/millennials/, accessed 7 June 2010.
Page 3 of 58
essential understanding to and encourage growth in a given narrative’s characters, and, then on
to those who follow the story.
Depending on who is telling it, there are a wide variety of politically relevant lessons
which can affect those portrayed within a story: that violence solves most problems or
conversely that it is inappropriate even in the most extreme circumstances; that everyone
deserves to be treated equally or that some people are so evil they deserve to be destroyed;
that those who follow the rules are good people or that it is okay to break the rules if the rules
are unreasonable; that a person can choose their own fate or that one cannot escape their
destiny; that the way to deal with problems is to wait for an heroic individual or that it is
essential to take action and band together to overcome adversity. Though obviously learned by
the characters, these lessons often end up informing us, as well as shaping how we view the
world, especially if we identify with the characters (Shira and Young 2011, Sester and Green
2010).
Despite the potential effect of stories on the political views of those exposed to them,
political scientists have not devoted much attention to the ways that fictional stories can affect
people’s political views. 7 Notable exceptions include studies finding effects of the 1980s made‐
for‐television movie The Day After (Feldman and Sigelman 1985), the television mini‐series
Amerika (Lenart and McGraw 1989), the impact of an environmental docudrama on attitude
construction (Delli Carpini and Williams 1996), and the impact of The Daily Show (Baumgartner
and Morris 2006). Outside of political science, media effects research has focused most heavily
7
There is a rich and growing literature on the impact of the news on the public through mechanisms such as
agenda setting, priming, framing, etc., but, to the best of our knowledge, these concepts and the efforts of the
political science community have infrequently been applied to the entertainment media (though one might argue
that in the U.S. system there is no difference between the news media and the entertainment media since they are
both designed to amuse in order to reap a profit).
Page 4 of 58
on the impact of the portrayal of violence and sex and the impact of media portrayals on
stereotypes, with infrequent attempts to connect such findings to subjects’ political
perspectives (see Perse 2001 for a summary of media effects research).
It is important to state at the outset that we are not claiming or implying that J. K.
Rowling intentionally tried to teach or influence her readers politically in any way. That point is
irrelevant to our purpose. All that is necessary to accept here is that all stories inherently
contain lessons regardless of the intent of the author. As all stories invariably reflect an author’s
perspectives so the telling of Harry Potter grew out of Rowling’s experience and knowledge and
not necessarily from any overt attempt to persuade those who would read and become
captivated by “the‐boy‐who‐lived.” Lessons may also be buried within stories simply due to the
nature of the nature of storytelling itself—the demands of the narrative or the nature of the
genre, for example—or because of cultural factors that shape the stories our authors tell. So,
whether J. K. Rowling was out to influence a generation—an intent we sincerely doubt that she
had—is of no concern to us. The point is, like that of any other storyteller her story was imbued
with values and perspectives that had the potential to shape the values and perspectives of
those who read or listened to it. Unlike any other recent storyteller, however, Rowling and her
Harry Potter saga gripped worldwide audiences, most importantly those of the Millennial
Generation who grew from grade‐schoolers to adults over the course of the ten years her
books were released.
This is an account of the impact growing up a fan of Harry Potter has had on the politics
of the Millennials. We begin by detailing the politically relevant lessons of the Harry Potter
series, showing that the series is rich with content that has the potential to shape readers’
Page 5 of 58
political views. Revealing the politically relevant content of the Harry Potter series is one thing,
showing how these aspects of the story affect readers is a whole other matter. The rest of the
paper is devoted to explaining how all the politically relevant content of the Harry Potter series
may have affected its fans, reporting on a study that involved a survey of 1,141 college students
from around the U.S. and personal interviews with fans of Harry Potter. In short, Harry Potter
fans are found to be more accepting of those who are different, more politically tolerant, more
supportive of equality, less authoritarian, more opposed to the use of violence and torture,
more likely to believe the administration of George Bush will be viewed negatively by
historians, less cynical, more likely to participate in politics, and were more likely to have
reported voting for Barack Obama for president in 2008. These differences stand even when
controlling for other known predictors (key among them whether the subjects were avid
readers). These findings suggest that the Harry Potter phenomenon had an independent and
multifaceted effect on the politics of the Millennial Generation (both direct and indirect).
The Subtle (and Not‐So‐Subtle) Political Lessons of Harry Potter
To best understand the wealth of political material present in the Harry Potter series, a
basic introduction of the series is necessary. Readers experience the wizarding world from the
perspective of Harry Potter, an orphan boy living with his non‐magical Aunt, Petunia Dursley,
and her husband Vernon and their son Dudley. Harry grows up unhappy and neglected by the
Dursley family; he is unaware of his magical powers and oblivious of his fame in the wizarding
world. For when Harry was just an infant, Lord Voldemort, the most infamous dark wizard of his
age, murdered his parents. On the night of their death, Harry miraculously survived
Voldemort’s Killing Curse, which in turn destroyed Voldemort (as he was at the time). As the
Page 6 of 58
only person to ever survive the wrath of Lord Voldemort, Harry is internationally known as “the
boy who lived.” At age eleven, Harry is informed of his magical background and invited to
attend Hogwarts, a school of witchcraft and wizardry and the major setting for much of the
series. Wizards in the world of Harry Potter live under the Statute of Secrecy, a Ministry of
Magic (wizarding government) law that shields the magical world from exposure to the real
world. Non‐magical people are referred to as Muggles and kept oblivious of the wizarding
world. Lord Voldemort and his followers, Death Eaters, desire an overthrow of the Statute of
Secrecy. They assert the superiority of pure‐blood wizards over half‐blood wizards and non‐
magical people.
As such, the Harry Potter series is full of characters, plot lines, and relationships that
provide “lessons” that are relevant to politics. Included among these are lessons of: acceptance
and tolerance of people who appear different from oneself; equality; anti‐authoritarianism;
anti‐violence; the corruptness government officials (in the form of the Ministry of Magic); and,
skepticism not cynicism. All of these “lessons” have the potential to have a powerful impact on
the politics of the reader. Given how immersed members of the Millennial Generation became
in the wizarding world and given that the exposure to the series occurred during their most
formative years, it is reasonable to expect that the lessons of Harry Potter may have had a
significant impact of the politics of the Millennial Generation.
Lesson #1: Diversity and Acceptance: Don’t Judge a Person (or Creature) By Their Appearance
or Blood
One consistent lesson running throughout the books and movies is acceptance of those
who are different, whether it is those who are not of pure wizarding blood (labeled
Page 7 of 58
“Mudbloods” in the books) or those who outwardly appear different and even frightening at
first. Identifying with the heroes of the book means identifying with characters who reject
segregating pure wizards from Mudbloods and accept and even befriend half‐giants (Hagrid),
werewolves (Professor Lupin), and house‐elves (Dobby)—all of whom, even in the wizarding
world, are either considered inferior or dangerous, or both; and are largely ignored or actively
shunned and discriminated against.
The fundamental conflict in the Harry Potter series is, in many ways, racially driven. The
chief antagonist, Voldemort, and his supporters are prejudiced, believing in the superiority of
“pure‐blood” wizarding lineage. Characters that reject the so‐called superiority of “pure‐
bloods” are depicted as more worthwhile people. Bigoted characters like Death Eaters, the
Malfoy family and Dolores Umbridge are punished for their prejudices. Draco Malfoy exposes
his intolerant beliefs when he and Harry meet in the first book. Malfoy immediately espouses
elitism, hatred for “half‐bloods,” and proceeds to threaten Harry when he introduces himself:
“You’ll soon find out some wizarding families are much better than others,
Potter. You don’t want to go making friends with the wrong sort. I can help you there.”
He held out his hand to shake Harry’s, but Harry didn’t take it.
“I think I can tell who the wrong sort are for myself, thanks,” he said coolly.
“I’d be careful if I were you Potter,” Malfoy said slowly. “Unless you’re a bit
politer you’ll go the same way as your parents. They didn’t know what was good for
them, either. You hang around with riffraff like the Weasleys and that Hagrid, and it’ll
rub off on you.” (Rowling, Sorcerer’s Stone 1999, pp. 108‐109).
Sentient magical creatures, such as house‐elves, centaurs, and other magical creatures
interact with Harry and his friends throughout the books, offering readers a variety of eccentric,
charming characters that are generally framed as “good.” Harry’s best friend outside of Ron
and Hermione is a half‐giant named Hagrid. Harry is revered by the house elf Dobby because
he treats him respectfully and frees him from his indenture to the Malfoy’s. In the final book, in
Page 8 of 58
a discussion with a Goblin (a type of creature usually portrayed in purely negative terms in
other fantasy stories) named Griphook, Harry, Ron and Hermione, the protagonists, evince an
attitude of acceptance for all kinds of beings:
“If there was a wizard of whom I would believe that they did not seek personal
gain,’ said Griphook finally, ‘it would be you, Harry Potter. Goblins and elves are not
used to the protection or the respect that you have shown this night. Not from wand‐
carriers. The right to carry a wand,” said the Goblin quietly, “has long been contested
between wizards and goblins.”
“It doesn’t matter,” said Harry, “This isn’t about wizards versus goblins or any
other sort of magical creature—“
Griphook gave a nasty laugh. “But it is, it is precisely about that! As the Dark Lord
becomes ever more powerful, your race is set still more firmly above mine! Gringotts
falls under Wizarding rule, house‐elves are slaughtered, and who amongst the wand‐
carriers protests?”
“We do!’ said Hermione. “We protest! And I’m hunted quite as much as any
goblin or elf, Griphook! I’m a Mudblood!”
“Don’t call yourself—” Ron muttered.
“Why shouldn’t I?” said Hermione. “Mudblood, and proud of it! I’ve got no higher
position under this new order than you have, Griphook! It was me they chose to torture,
back at the Malfoys’!” (Rowling, Deathly Hallows 2007, pp. 488‐89).
This lesson of acceptance of those who are different is so ubiquitous throughout the books and
films, one can’t help but expect that fans of the series would internalize such lessons, and along
with it lessons of tolerance and equality.
Lesson #2: Political Tolerance and Equality: Everyone has the Same Rights to Dignity and
Freedom
It is clear from the start that the main antagonist, Voldemort, and his followers not only
distain all who are not pure‐bloods, but also think that only pure‐blood wizards deserve all the
rights and privileges of society. Mudbloods, Muggles (the non‐magical population), and all the
rest of the magical creatures are deemed second class citizens at best. Many of the antagonists
voice a desire to see Mudbloods denied schooling a Hogwarts (the wizard community’s school).
Page 9 of 58
Magical creatures are denied their freedom, dignity, and use of magic by the antagonists.
House elves, for example, are treated as slaves and abused by the antagonists.
Harry, on the other hand, frees the house elf Dobby and treats even the seemingly
mean‐spirited elf Creature with respect. Hermione actually forms an advocacy group on behalf
of house elves, the Society for the Promotion of Elfish Welfare (with the unfortunate acronym
S.P.E.W.), whose
“…short‐term aims” said Hermione…“are to secure house‐elves fair wages and working
conditions. Our long‐term aims include changing the law about non‐wand use, and
trying to get an elf into the Department for the Regulation and Control of Magical
Creatures, because they’re shockingly underrepresented” (Rowling, Goblet of Fire 2000,
pp. 224‐25).
Lessons of equality also extend to differences in wealth and status. One of Harry’s best
friends comes from a large wizard family, the Weasleys. The Weasleys, despite their pure‐
blood status, are poor and because of that looked down upon by the antagonists in the story.
The Weasleys, however, are portrayed as good and noble characters that treat Harry and
Hermione as part of the family.
As Voldemort and his followers gain power over the Ministry of Magic in the final books
they begin to implement policies to interrogate and register all Mudbloods and strip them of
their wizarding privileges, imprison those who resist, and further subjugate magical creatures.
Ultimately, Voldemort wishes to exercise domination over Muggles as well, who, for most of
the books, are kept in the dark about the parallel magical world. This is perhaps best depicted
Page 10 of 58
by the change in the statue in the atrium of the Ministry of Magic once Voldemort’s influence
waxes, from golden fountain representing all magical together in harmony, to
a gigantic statue of black stone…. It was rather frightening, this vast sculpture of a witch
and wizard sitting on ornately carved thrones….Engraved in foot‐high letters at the base
of the statue were the words MAGIC IS MIGHT….
Harry looked more closely and realized that what he had thought were
decoratively carved thrones were actually mounds of carved humans: hundreds and
hundreds of naked bodies, men, women, and children, all with rather stupid, ugly faces,
twisted and pressed together to support the weight of the handsomely robed wizards
(Rowling 2007, pp. 241‐242).
In the Harry Potter world, the protagonists are constantly objecting to, and fighting
against these injustices that deprive classes of individuals their rights, equal treatment and
freedoms, while the antagonists that promote them evince the companion disposition of
authoritarianism. Again, we suspect that fans of the series would internalize these lessons in
tolerance and equality.
Lesson #3: Don’t be an Authoritarian Git
In her book The Authoritarian Dynamic, Karen Stenner conceives of authoritarianism as
a dynamic. The authoritarian dynamic is the result of a stable individual predisposition that is
activated by fears engendered by political dissent and diversity, “moral decay,” social disorder,
and national decline.
Authoritarian fears are alleviated by defense of the collective normative order: positive
differentiation of the in‐group, devaluation and discrimination against out‐groups,
Page 11 of 58
obedience to authorities, conformity to rules and norms, and intolerance and
punishment of those who fail to obey and conform (Stenner 2005, p. 33).
Many of the antagonists in the Harry Potter series provide perfect illustrations of the
authoritarian dynamic as described by Stenner. The predisposition described by Stenner is
evident in the Harry’s uncle, Vernon Dursley, in whose house Harry grew up in and lived at
when Hogwarts was not in session. Uncle Vernon was extremely concerned about appearing
“normal” (conformity seeking), narrow‐minded, intolerant of the magical, and in favor of harsh
punishment, especially when his “normal” world was threatened. Harry’s bedroom was a
closet under the stairs and his uncle always tried to keep him hidden so he wouldn’t ruin the
appearance of his “normal” family. The Malfoy family offers another example; Draco Malfoy, a
boy Harry’s age, was Harry’s nemesis in the earlier books. Draco’s parents were Death‐Eaters
(servants of Voldemort) who were subservient to Voldemort and extremely prejudiced of any
one deemed beneath them—Mudbloods, Muggles, the Weasley family, and magical creatures
(they were very abusive of their house elf, Dobby, until Harry tricked Lucius Malfoy, Draco’s
father, into freeing him). In the final battle of the series the Malfoys skulk away when it is clear
that Voldemort has lost.
Perhaps the best manifestation of authoritarianism in the series is Dolores Umbridge.
Umbridge is a pivotal Ministry character throughout the fifth installation of the series. She is a
stickler for the rules, thirsty for power, and an unflinching follower of whoever is in power
above her, including Voldemort. Umbridge’s character is easily despicable; her demeanor and
actions are thoroughly obnoxious to readers. In the fifth book, Umbridge takes over as
instructor for Defense of the Dark Arts at Hogwarts. In the classroom she institutes strict
Page 12 of 58
discipline and focuses on rote memorization, diminishing her students’ potential to learn
anything of value. In her reign as Hogwarts High Inquisitor and, ultimately, as Hogwarts Head
Master, Umbridge institutes a strict authoritarian regime, devising rules for every behavior,
employing a truth serum to get information unwillingly out of students, torturing students who
do not obey, and organizing a squad of students to inform upon their fellow students in an
attempt to crush any resistance. The sympathetic characters in the story are decidedly against
Umbridge. Harry defies Umbridge from the start and is tortured by Umbridge with a magical
pen that cuts Harry’s skin with the punishment lines “I must not tell lies” that he is forced to
write repeatedly. Harry and his friend defy Umbridge repeatedly throughout the books, best
celebrated in a scene (nicely depicted in the film The Order of the Pheonix) in which the
Weasley twins, Fred and George (Ron’s twin older brothers) stage a disruption during the
O.W.L.S., the wizarding equivalent of the S.A.T., another point of connection between Harry
Potter and the Millennial experience. Fred and George fly into the testing room, scattering test
papers and ignite a fireworks display that not only includes a dragon that chases Umbridge out
of the room, but that destroys her entire wall of framed rules.
In addition to fighting against Umbridge and the other authoritarian types in the books,
Harry, Ron, and Hermioni, indeed all of the rest of the good characters in the books display
characteristics that are the opposite of the authoritarian predisposition. The good characters
are open to new experiences, try different things, they do not fear the unusual or the different,
and, as discussed above, are extremely tolerant and accepting of everyone, regardless of their
blood lines or outward appearances. In this case the lesson is quite clear for any immersed in
Page 13 of 58
the story: don’t act like an authoritarian git; we suspect fans will have internalized this lesson as
well.
Lesson #4: Violence and Torture are Bad
Another ubiquitous theme in the Harry Potter stories is that violence is to be avoided
and that using violence freely and indiscriminately is a characteristic of bad people. The
protagonists avoid violence, using it only when it is necessary (and sometimes, as with Harry,
not even then) and abhor torture; the antagonists use them freely. Indeed, in the “civilized”
wizarding world there are three unforgivable curses, the killing curse (Avada Kedavra), a curse
that inflicts excruciating pain (the crucio curse), and the imperio curse which puts the
person/creature under the complete control. The antagonists use these curses freely, as when
Voldemort kills Hogwarts student Cedric Diggory in Goblet of Fire; the protagonists avoid them.
The best example of the aversion to violence and killing is found in Harry. Harry refuses
to use a killing curse even in the final show down with the epitome of evil, Voldemort. In an
earlier scene when Harry tries the torture curse, Crucio, against Bellatrix Lestrange who
moments before had killed Sirius Black (a father figure to Harry and his only living connection to
Harry’s dead parents), the curse is ineffective because even then, in his pain and rage, he is
incapable of torturing someone.
“Never used an Unforgivable Curse before, have you, boy?” [Lestrange] yelled…. “You
need to mean them, Potter! You need to really want to cause pain—to enjoy it—
righteous anger won’t hurt me for long (Rowling, Harry Potter and the Order of the
Phoenix, 2003, p. 810).
Page 14 of 58
Lestrange, one of Voldemort’s Death‐Eaters, is the epitome of the violent tendencies
among the antagonists. Lestrange is a sadistic character who clearly gets pleasure out of
inflicting pain. At one point she taunts one of Harry’s other friends, Neville, with the fact that
she drove the Neville’s parents insane with the crucio curse. We suspect that the repetition of
these themes about violence and torture—good people don’t use these tactics, bad people
do—will also have been internalized by fans of the series.
Lesson #5: Government Leaders as Corrupt, Incompetent, and Fixated on Maintaining Power
The portrayal of government in the Harry Potter series comes in the form of the Ministry
of Magic, which is a secret cabinet within the British government that regulates the wizarding
world. While the leaders of the Ministry of Magic are either bumbling, paranoid about losing
power, incompetent, or corrupt, or some combination of the above, the problems with
government are not portrayed as institutional. The Ministry of Magic’s executive office is held
through the first several books by Cornelius Fudge (note the name) who is in denial of real
problems such as the return of Voldemort, infatuated with tedious Ministry regulations, and
outright paranoid in keeping his critics silenced (for more on the portrayal of government in the
series, see Barton 2006). The Ministers that follow Fudge are no better and are corrupted by
Voldemort and his Death‐Eaters.
The series’ implicit critique of government, however, is limited to the individuals who
are in charge. There is an accepted need for the regulations of the Ministry of Magic to keep
the magical world hidden from the muggle world and to maintain a responsible use of
wizarding powers. Indeed, Ron Weasley’s father, Arthur, works for the Ministry for a good part
Page 15 of 58
of the story, doing good, keeping magical artifacts out of the hands of Muggles. Harry’s career
goal is to work for the Ministry as an Auror, in what is, in effect, the Ministry’s security division.
We expect that the perspective on government offered by the series—that individual
politicians are the problem, not the institutions—should lead to a set of attitudes about the real
political world, particularly, a dim view of the Bush administration, a willingness to participate,
and a desire to remove the distrusted politicians and replace them with the opposition. At the
same time Millennials in the U.S. were reading the Harry Potter series the Bush administration
came under fire for, among other things: presenting a false case for war in Iraq, mishandling the
war in Iraq, ineptitude when it came to handling the damage caused by the hurricane Katrina,
and the economic collapse of 2008. The Bush administration appeared to be bumbling,
paranoid about losing power, incompetent, and/or corrupt. To readers of Harry Potter we
suspect that the Bush Administration looked exactly like the Ministry of Magic under the likes
of Cornelius Fudge…with Dick Cheney as Voldemort. Indeed, there was the bumper sticker
prevalent at least in the Northeast near the end of Bush’s term that read, “Republicans for
Voldemort.” Seeing what working together can do to bring about the end of such a regime in
the Harry Potter series, we suspect also invigorated fans of the series and helped propel them
to join the masses working for Barack Obama.
Lesson #6: Be Skeptical, Not Cynical
Throughout the books Harry and his friends consistently maintain a healthy level of
skepticism, and, they must, for repeatedly throughout the books they confront things are not
what they first seem, governmental officials are not to be trusted, and a media, particularly the
wizarding world’s sensationalist newspaper, The Daily Prophet, that has to be read with
Page 16 of 58
skepticism. With each new experience—from first learning about Hogwarts to finding out the
true motives of Severus Snape—to each new character—good werewolves, let alone witches,
giants, and goblins—the lesson is, again and again, things are not always as they first appear.
Given the corrupt and or bungling nature of government officials, the lesson is to not put much
faith in such authorities. And The Daily Prophet’s vicious attacks on Harry and Professor
Dumbledore for claiming that Voldemort had returned make it clear that the media also must
be viewed with a vigorous level of skepticism. While the protagonists maintain a healthy level
of skepticism, they never become cynical. They hold on to hope, see the good in most
everyone, and trust those who have shown themselves trustworthy. The cynical are the
antagonists who join Voldemort because they think he will win and accepting his cynical view of
the world. The repetition of such lessons about skepticism versus cynicism throughout the
series, we believe, should lead fans to evince the former over the latter.
While there are certainly more political relevant lessons found in the Harry Potter series,
such as a lesson on the need for collective action (this is not a story in the mould of typical U.S.
stories wherein individual heroes always wins the day), we focus on the ones above because
their repetition throughout the series increase the probability that fans will adopt these lessons
as a result of their exposure to this material. Next, we examine why we suspected that these
lessons might be internalized by Harry Potter fans.
Reasons to Expect Fans Would Be Affected Politically
A number of theories informed our inquiry and led us to expect that the political lessons
of Harry Potter discussed above would be learned by fans: political socialization, learning
theory, and the effect of reading.
Page 17 of 58
Political Socialization
The theory of political socialization, particularly the notion of formative years in the
development of politics, is what first led us to expect that the Harry Potter series could have a
powerful effect on the political perspectives of fans. Political socialization is the process
through which we acquire the political values and views from our culture. Political socialization
theory posits that there are a number of agents of socialization responsible for the transmission
of cultural values to new generations. That is, it is believed that we learn how to act and what
to value in our society from people—such as our families and our friends or members of our
community—and institutions, such as school, religious institutions, and the media (television,
video games, movies, and books).
In the process of socialization, what is learned depends on the developmental stage of
the individual. Early learning involves largely emotional attachments and the development of
diffuse support, a time when parents play an important role (Jennings and Niemi 1968, Dawson,
Prewitt and Dawson 1969, Tedin 1974). Later in the process, during adolescence, individuals
develop abilities to think in more abstract terms and are thus more capable of dealing with the
concepts involved in politics and government. It is during this period that the political and social
environment can have a big impact on the values and outlooks that form the basis of a person’s
politics. Indeed, this intersection between the formative years of political socialization and
history is the basis for the formation of generations—age cohorts with distinct sets of political
values. For the Millennial Generation the Harry Potter series came along at just this time, the
formative years of their political socialization, heightening the potential impact of this
widespread phenomenon so that the tales from the wizarding world may have had a significant
Page 18 of 58
impact on shaping the nature of their generation. Millennials actually grew up along with the
characters of the series, they aged along with Harry, Hermione and Ron aged, they confronted
many of the same age related issues. Furthermore, Millennials not only read the stories, but
read them multiple times, dressed up as the characters, joined fan groups, created their own
Harry Potter stories, art, and music, and, even expected to receive a letter from Hogwarts when
the turned 10 (I have heard from more than a few students that they were disappointed that
they did not receive that anticipated letter inviting them to study at Hogwarts). Such
immersion means that many of the generation may have identified with the characters.
Immersion leads to what has been called “transportation” which
…is presumed to affect not only the perceived entertainment value of the media, but
also the cognitive and emotional responses of the viewer. Individuals who are
transported are more likely to process the messages of the narrative via peripheral
route processing, with fewer negative cognitive responses and greater affective
response….
As a reader or viewer of a narrative becomes more immersed in its events, the
narrative world, its inhabitants, and its situations begin to feel more real, and the
consumer responds both emotionally and cognitively as if they were. Thus we treat the
things that happen within it much as we do stimuli within the real world itself. Over time
we may eventually begin to see the real world through the filter of the media‐created
worlds into which we feel most transported, rather than the other way around. (Sester
and Green 2010, p. 276).
Page 19 of 58
If, as we expect, adolescents identified with the characters and became immersed in the series
during their formative years when they were exposed to the series, there is a good probability
that they adopted many of their values. 8
In addition to the adopting the view of characters one identifies with in fiction, it is also
important to note that during the formative years audiences’ ability to avoid political messages
through selective exposure or to counter‐argue political notions is limited. Certainly there were
many parents who urged their children take up the Harry Potter series thinking that it would
get them to read; conversely, there were many parents who discouraged their children from
reading a series about wizards and witches for fear it would violate their Christian beliefs. But,
the phenomenon was so wide spread, was such a contagion, that it is likely that many children
were exposed to the material regardless of the politics of their parents and with no
consideration of the political content on the part of the child themselves. With so many
children hooked on the series and discussing it with their friends, the need to read them to be
in those discussions, to know what everyone was talking about was probably too much for most
children to refuse. Once they started reading the books, adolescents were not likely to be able
to counter‐argue the political content of the books and, unless they were read aloud by
parents, which certainly many of the earlier books in the series were, the parents were not
there to counter‐argue the politics either.
With the Harry Potter series hitting the older cohort of the Millennial Generation in their
formative years, engendering such deep and widespread interest at a time when selective
8
For some recent work in this area, see Shira and Young (2011) and Sester and Green (2010).
Page 20 of 58
exposure and the ability to counter‐argue are minimal, it is highly likely that the series has
shaped the politics of the Generation in the areas discussed above.
Learning Theory: Passive Learning
Being able to counter‐argue political messages is not only dependent upon age, but it is
also, according to learning theory, dependent upon whether the learning process is active or
passive. Active learning is a conscious effort to learn material and concepts about something.
In the process the individual engages their existing knowledge and beliefs to process the
messages. Passive learning, or incidental learning, occurs when learning is a byproduct of some
other activity, such as reading for pleasure or watching movies. In the case of passive learning
the individual’s defenses are down when it comes to political messages—we are not engaged in
the activity for the purpose of acquiring political material—so we are more susceptible to being
influenced by the messages. We expect that the political impact of the Harry Potter series was
enhanced because the acquisition of political perspectives that exist in the series were a
byproduct of reading the series for fun. In other words, the effect of the Harry Potter series is a
case of passive learning so that even if the audience had the political values and information to
counter‐argue the politics of the books, it is highly unlikely that they did so.
While passive learning is often characterized as temporary, the repeating of the lessons
as fans read through all seven of the books (often more than once) and watch the eight movies
(often more than once), would likely go a long way to making these lessons more permanent.
Such repetition of themes suggests that Cultivation Theory might apply here, as well.
Cultivation Theory which argues that repeated exposure to a media source (television) leads
Page 21 of 58
audiences to internalize the perspectives of that source and see the world as similar to the
world portrayed in the media (see Gerbner, Gross, Morgan and Signiorelli 2002).
Reading
The other route through which the Harry Potter series may have affected the Millennial
Generation is an indirect one. Research that has tracked reading patterns has observed an
increase in the frequency of reading among the Millennial Generation and some have
speculated that the Harry Potter series had some role in this trend. In our survey (methods and
full results discussed below), we found what we thought was an astounding 17% of our sample
picking the statement “I was not much of a reader until I read the Harry Potter series, but after
reading Harry Potter, I began to read more books,” confirming the speculation that many more
Millennials read because of the Harry Potter books. 9
Being a reader has not garnered much attention in the research on political behavior,
with the exception of the impact of reading the news (as opposed to watching it). With reading
comes an enhanced cognitive capacity that allows for a greater ability to deal with complexity
(Cunningham and Stanovich 2001). In Stenner’s attempt to explain why some people were
more likely to possess the authoritarian predisposition she posits that cognitive skills enhanced
“one’s ability to deal easily and comfortably with complexity and difference” (Stenner 2003, p.
161). Indeed, she finds that verbal ability, a measure of cognitive capacity, is one of the only
significant factors predictive of the authoritarian predisposition, with respondents scoring
highest on the verbal ability scoring 15 percentage points lower on the authoritarian measure.
We hypothesize that the Harry Potter series will have reduced the proportion of Millennials
9
The lead author of this paper became a reader only after being introduced to J. R. R. Tolkien’s The Hobbit, and
The Lord of the Rings trilogy.
Page 22 of 58
with the authoritarian predisposition not only because of the portrayal of authoritarian types in
the series (see above), but also indirectly by getting Millennials to read, which in turn enhanced
their cognitive skills and subsequently their ability to deal with complexity and difference (in
addition to the stories lessons in differences as discussed above).
Hypotheses
Bringing together the political content of the Harry Potter stories with the expectations
engendered by political socialization theory, learning theory, and the effects of reading, we
arrived at the following set of hypotheses regarding the political impact of the series on the
Millennial Generation.
Hypothesis 1: Fans of HP will exhibit a greater acceptance of diversity/differences than
nonfans. (Derived from Lesson #1)
Hypothesis 2: Fans of Harry Potter will exhibit greater levels of political tolerance than
nonfans. (Derived from Lesson #2)
Hypothesis 3: Fans of Harry Potter will value equality more than nonfans. (Derived from
Lesson #2)
Hypothesis 4: Fans of Harry Potter will be less likely to exhibit the authoritarian
predisposition than nonfans. (Derived from Lesson #3)
Hypothesis 5: Fans of Harry Potter will be less supportive of the use of deadly force than
nonfans. (Derived from Lesson #4)
Hypothesis 6: Fans of Harry Potter will be less likely to support the use of torture than
nonfans. (Derived from Lesson #4)
Page 23 of 58
Hypothesis 7: Fans of Harry Potter will have a more negative view of the Bush
administration than nonfans. (Derived from Lesson #5)
Hypothesis 8: Fans of Harry Potter participated in politics at a higher rate than non‐fans.
(Derived from Lesson #5)
Hypothesis 9: Fans of Harry Potter will have supported Barack Obama for president at a
higher rate than nonfans. (Derived from Lesson #5)
Hypothesis 10: Fans of Harry Potter will evince a greater level of skepticism and a lower
level of cynicism than nonfans. (Derived from Lesson #6)
Methodology
This study began as a class research project for Gierzynski’s “Film, TV, and Public
Opinion” research seminar in the spring semester of 2009. 10 We designed the survey (see
Appendix) and administered it to classes at the University of Vermont and asked colleagues to
implement the survey in their classes at the Mississippi State and Ole Miss (a captive sample).
Those administering the survey were given a script to read before the surveys were filled out:
Students at University of Vermont under the supervision of a professor there are
conducting a research project and have asked for our help.
What they are asking is for us to fill out a survey that asks about your feelings on
certain political issues, and also, some questions regarding the Harry Potter series.
They would really appreciate it if you took the time to answer the survey
honestly; it shouldn't take more than 15 minutes to complete it.
10
Contributing students included the co‐author, Julie Seger, Ian Collins, Catherine Dixon, Laura Eddy, Shauneen
Grout, Clayton Oberst, Christopher Overton, Guarav Pruthi, Gabriela Riley, Stephen Rowe, Ellen Simpson, Ashley
Thygesen, Gordon Whelply, and Norman Woolworth.
Page 24 of 58
Your responses will remain completely anonymous. To remain anonymous, you
should NOT put your name on the answer sheet or survey.
They thank you for doing this.
A similar script was read by students who administered the survey in classes at the University of
Vermont. In the fall, four of the students from that class, Guarav Pruthi, Julie Seger, Ellen
Simpson, and Norman Woolworth, assisted in expanding the sample to include other schools.
Our final sample size was 1,141 (breakdown of the sample along can be found in Table 1). The
“Film, TV and Public Opinion” class of 2010 added to the research by collecting qualitative data
via in‐depth interviews with University of Vermont students (to be reported on in a future
publication). 11 Julie Seger conducted additional in‐depth interviews for her honors thesis.
[Table 1 About Here]
Measures
Harry Potter Fan Measures: We devised a number of ways to measure Harry Potter fan levels.
We asked how many of the Harry Potter books respondents had read (Question 33); how many
of the movies they had seen (Question 36); asked them to place themselves on a fan scale
(Question 38); and finally, asked them a series of increasingly difficult trivia Questions from the
series, some of which at the time of the survey could only have been answered by reading the
books (Questions 41 through 45).
Dependent Variables: To measure acceptance of differences or attitudes toward diversity we
utilized an abbreviated feeling thermometer questions for four target groups—Muslims,
Blacks/African‐Americans, undocumented immigrants, and homosexuals (Questions 16 through
11
Contributing students included Joanna Benjamin, Brad Borneill, Lindsay Cahill, Dana Christiansen, Zach Clark,
Matt Jalbert, Dean LoRusso, Luke Martin, Kofi Mensah, Isaac Moche, Patrick O’Donnell, and Caitlin Perry.
Page 25 of 58
19). We created an additive scale out of the responses to these questions. To measure political
tolerance we utilized a modified version of the tactic used by Sullivan, Piereson and Marcus
(1993). We gave the respondents a list of groups (trying to balance for ideology) and asked
them which one they liked the least (Question 6). Then we asked the battery of tolerance
questions for the group they selected (Questions 7 through 11). After recoding the responses
we added the scores up for an additive index. The measure of the value of equality was
assessed by the ANES “government guarantee a good standard of living” question (Question 5).
To measure the authoritarian predisposition we followed Stenner’s tactic of modifying
the four questions about child rearing practices to simply have the respondents “choose the
word that appeals to you more or sounds better to you” (Questions 1 through 4).
For the measure of attitudes about the use of deadly force we asked whether the
respondents favored or opposed the death penalty (Question 15) and a question we devised
that asked “Do you agree or disagree with the following statement: The best way to deal with
the threat of terrorism is to hunt down and kill all the terrorists” (Question 31). On torture, we
utilized a question that asked, “Would you regard the use of torture against people suspected
of involvement in terrorism as acceptable or unacceptable?” (Question 32).
To measure the respondents’ attitudes about the Bush Administration we devised a
question that asked “Ultimately, how do you think historians will view the George W. Bush
administration?” (Question 29). For political participation we listed a number of activities and
asked whether they had done any of them and added up the number of activities they had
done (Questions 21 through 28) plus whether they voted in 2008 from Question 30). And, we
asked for whom the voted in the 2008 presidential election (Question 30).
Page 26 of 58
And, finally, to measure skepticism we devised a question (Question 13) that read as
follows:
Within our culture there exist theories that challenge the historical record or the
consensus among the scientific community, such as the notion that the moon landing
was fake, that global warming is a myth, that there was a conspiracy to assassinate JFK,
and that the US government staged the September 11th attacks. Which of the following
describes your views of these theories that challenge the historical record or the
consensus among the scientific community? I believe many of these theories. I believe
one or two of these theories. I don’t believe any of these theories.
We also asked a number of standard ANES questions measuring cynicism/trust in government
and created an additive scale out of those questions (Questions 12 and 20) along with the
conspiracy theory question above for our measure of cynicism.
Control Variables: We utilize a number of standard control variables—partisanship, ideology,
etc. (see discussion below)—when we run our multivariate analysis. One control variable that is
not typical, is our measure of whether the respondent was a reader. To assess that we asked
“Outside of the books you were assigned for school, what kind of reader were you when you
were younger?” (Question 51).
Results
The popularity Harry Potter books and movies are reflected in the extent of the
exposure to Harry Potter that we found when we surveyed Millennials in 2009. Thirty‐five
percent said that they had read all of the books while 31 percent read some of the books;
leaving only 34 percent who have not having read any of the books (see Figure 1). That is,
Page 27 of 58
2/3rds of the generation read at least some of the tale of the boy wizard. You won’t find any
other book with such reach for Millennials, let alone any other generation. In addition, 86
percent of Millennials have seen at least some of the film versions of the story (see Figure 2).
Eight out of ten Millennials have discussed the books with friends and/or family and the same
proportion have talked about the movies at some point.
[Figures 1 and 2 About Here]
When we asked Millennials to tell us how much of a fan of Harry Potter they were (on a
scale of 1 to 5, where a 5 meant they were very much into Harry Potter and a 1 meant they
hated the series) 29 percent told us they were big fans (putting themselves down as a 5 on the
fan scale). Another 21 and 23 percent said the fans, but of a bit lesser magnitude (a 4 or 3 on
the fan scale) and only 14 percent said they not fans.
[Figure 3 About Here]
Harry Potter Fans are Different
For the first look at the survey data, we compared Harry Potter fans (using our various
measures) with nonfans on all of the dependent variables. While all the measures of fandom
found differences between fans and nonfans, the question that asked how many of the books
the respondents read provided the greatest differences most consistently so we present the
results using that measure here. As Figures 4 through 10 indicate, the simple comparisons of
fans and nonfans offers preliminary support for all of our hypotheses. Those who read all of
the books, as compared to the rest of the sample, evince statistically significant warmer feelings
toward the different groups we asked about (averaging a 14.0 total on the additive score of
Page 28 of 58
feeling thermometer questions as compared to a 12.9 average for nonfans 12 ) suggesting a
greater acceptance of differences on the part of Harry Potter fans (see Figure 4). As
hypothesized Harry Potter fans scored lower on intolerance with an average score of 5.24 than
nonfans, with an average score of 6.31 (see Figure 4). 13 As shown in Figure 5, Harry Potter fans
also appear to value equality more, also as hypothesized.
[Figures 4 and 5 About Here]
Those who read all of the Harry Potter books scored lower on the measure of the
authoritarian predisposition, as hypothesized (see Figure 6). The average score for fans was
0.79, for nonfans 1.04 (statistically significant differences). 14 The correlations between the
authoritarian predisposition measure and the other two measures of fandom—self‐placement
on the Harry Potter fan scale and the sum of correct trivia questions answered—were ‐.13 and ‐
.20 (both significant at the .01 level). As shown in Figure 7 the hypotheses about the use of
deadly violence and torture have preliminary support: Harry Potter fans were less likely to favor
the death penalty (37.2 percent versus 46.6 percent); less likely to agree with the statement
that the “best way to deal with the threat of terrorism is to hunt down and kill all the terrorists”
(31.1 percent versus 43.3 percent); and less likely to find torture acceptable (20.6 percent
versus 30.8%). 15
[Figures 6 and 7 About Here]
12
ANOVA, F = 25.5, significant at the .000 level. Pearson correlation coefficients between feeling thermometer
scores and each measure of fandom, self‐placement on HP fan scale, the sum of the correct trivia questions, and
the number of HP books read, were, .13, .15, .20, all statistically significant.
13
ANOVA, F= 23.2, significant at the .000 level. Pearson correlation coefficients between the level of intolerance
and each measure of fandom, self‐placement on HP fan scale, the sum of the correct trivia questions, and the
number of HP books read, were, ‐.09, ‐.17, ‐.18, all statistically significant
14
ANOVA, F = 16.4, significant at the .000 level.
15
Margin of error at the 95 percent confidence level is ± 2.9 percentage points.
Page 29 of 58
In terms of the impact of the series on fans’ views of real life politicians, as we
hypothesized, a greater percentage of Harry Potter fans believe that historians will view the
George W. Bush administration unfavorably (83 percent of fans thought so, 74 percent of
nonfans, see Figure 8). 16 On the flip side, as Figure 10 shows, a greater percentage of Harry
Potter fans voted for Barack Obama than nonfans (58 percent versus 45 percent, and fewer
Potter fans failed to vote). 17 In Figure 9 we also find preliminary support for our hypotheses
regarding participation and cynicism—Harry Potter fans appear to be less cynical and have
participated in more political activities than nonfans. 18 Overall, the preliminary analysis
provides across the board support for all of the hypotheses regarding the differences between
Harry Potter fans and nonfans. While Harry Potter fans are different, and while the theories
discussed above suggest that these differences are likely due in part to the Harry Potter series,
a more sophisticated statistical analysis is called for in order to rule out other reasons that
Harry Potter fans are different, reasons aside from the exposure to the politics of the series.
Was the Story of the Boy‐Who‐Lived Responsible?
In order to attempt to rule out alternative explanations for the our findings about the
differences between Harry Potter fans and nonfans we developed and ran a series of regression
analyses to control for confounding or spurious relationships. The models contain control
variables commonly found in the literature for the various dependent variables. The series of
regression equations also allow us to assess the direct and indirect effects of being a fan of
Harry Potter so we not only ran regressions for our dependent variables, but also a number of
16
Margin of error at the 95 percent confidence level is ± 2.9 percentage points.
17
Margin of error at the 95 percent confidence level is ± 2.9 percentage points.
18
ANOVA of differences of means for cynicism, F = 16.0, significance level .000, for participation, F = 7.0,
significance level at .008.
Page 30 of 58
the control variables through which we hypothesized the Harry Potter series had an indirect
effect. The equations are as follows:
Equation 1: reader = b1(HP) + b2(father’s education)
Equation 2: ideology = b1(HP) + b2(UVM) + b3(gender)+ b4(city)
Equation 3: openness to experience = b1(HP) + b2(reader) + b3(ideology)+ b4(city)
Equation 4: Authoritarian_pred = b1(HP) + b2(reader) + b3(openness to experience) + b4(father’s
education)
Equation 5: political tolerance = b1(HP) + b2(authoritarian_ pred) + b3(race) + b4(city) + b5(UVM)
Equation 6: feelings toward out groups = b1(HP) + b2(authoritarian_ pred) + b3(race) +
b4(gender) + b5(city) + b6(UVM)
Equation 7: cynicism = b1(HP) + b2(reader) + b3(partisanship)
Equation 8: internal political efficacy = b1(HP) + b2(reader) + b3(partisanship) + b4(pol science)
Equation 9: participation = b1(HP) + b2(reader) + b3(partisanship) + b4(internal political efficacy)
+ b5(pol science)
Equation 10: opposition to use of violence = b1(HP) + b2(authoritarian_ pred) + b3(ideology) +
b4(feeling therm)
We built into our regression analyses the measure of whether the respondent was a
reader when they were young in order to control for the effect of reading on cognitive skills,
which might explain the effect of the Harry Potter series on our dependent variables as
opposed to the political content of the series. We also modeled an indirect route for Harry
Potter through the measure of reading in the Equation 1, regressing having been a reader on
the number of Harry Potter books read and the respondent’s father’s education (Question 54).
Other control variables found in the equations include, gender, whether the respondent grew
up in a large city, whether the respondent was a political science major or minor, internal
Page 31 of 58
political efficacy, and, given its liberal reputation, whether the respondent was a student at the
University of Vermont. We created one more index for our dependent variables, an additive
scale of the responses to the three questions about the use of deadly force and torture.
In terms of the authoritarian predisposition, we included a measure of openness to
experience in order to model what we believed to be one of the routes through which the
Harry Potter series may have affected the authoritarian predisposition. That is, we argued
above that the fans may have adopted the protagonist’s open approach to different
experiences and that may then have lead them to be less like to adopt characteristics of the
authoritarian predisposition. A second indirect route for the effects of the Harry Potter series
operates through the effect of the series on individuals becoming readers. And, finally, because
of the series depiction of authoritarian types, we also expected a direct effect on the subjects’
level of authoritarianism.
Before running the analyses we standardized all of the measures. For the results
reported here we used the measure of fandom based on how many of the Harry Potter books
the respondent had read. The results from the regression analyses are summarized in Figure 11
(individual regression results are reported in Appendix B). As is detailed in the figure, even after
controlling for all the other factors in the models above, the impact of the Harry Potter series
on all of our dependent variables remained significant and in the hypothesized direction.
Furthermore, the effect of exposure to the series had significant indirect effects as well. The
levels of political tolerance, for example, were not only affected directly by having read all of
the Harry Potter books, but also through the authoritarian predisposition; the authoritarian
Page 32 of 58
predisposition was, in turn, affected by the Harry Potter books through all three routes
expected above (directly, through becoming a reader, and through openness to experience).
Conclusion
The results of our study show that the large segment of the Millennial Generation who
became fans of the Harry Potter series are politically distinct from the rest of their generation;
and, furthermore our analysis suggests that the Harry Potter series may have had something to
do with that distinctiveness. We found Harry Potter fans were more accepting of differences,
more politically tolerant, less likely to evince the authoritarian predisposition, more opposed to
the use of violence and deadly force, more likely to believe the Bush Administration will be
viewed negatively by historians, more likely to have voted for Barack Obama in 2008, more
skeptical than cynical, and more likely participate in politics. Given the timing and scope of the
Harry Potter phenomenon for Millennials—they were exposed to the material in their
formative years—and given the political content of the series, these findings make a great deal
of sense (that is, from a theoretical perspective, to be expected).
Political scientists have not paid much attention to entertainment media effects on the
political views of citizens. The results of our study suggest that we may enhance our
understanding of the origins of people’s political views and how those views change by
examining the impact of the entertainment media they consume, whether it is books, movies,
television shows, or video games. There have been other widespread entertainment
phenomena that may have had similar effects—the Star Wars immediately comes to mind as
having had an extensive impact on one of the author’s generation, Gen X—or that will in the
future. After all, as put by Kyle Broflovski:
Page 33 of 58
Haven't Luke Skywalker and Santa Claus affected your lives more than most real people
in this room? I mean, whether Jesus is real or not, he... he's had a bigger impact on the
world than any of us have. And the same could be said of Bugs Bunny and, a‐and
Superman and Harry Potter. They've changed my life, changed the way I act on the
Earth. (South Park, Episode 1112, “Imaginationland: Episode III,” originally aired on
March 7, 2007.)
Unfortunately, such findings as those presented in this study and those that may be
completed on the effects of entertainment media in the future may fuel existing paranoia
among some in society that the “liberal elite” are trying to brainwash their children. Again, as
asserted above we do not suspect that J. K. Rowling wrote her stories in order to brainwash
children or turn them against their religion. She was simply telling a compelling story. It is the
nature of storytelling that the development of a story includes politically relevant lessons for
the characters in the story, which may be internalized by the audience. While awareness of
such effects enhances our understanding of how individuals acquire their political perspectives,
and while many of the political perspectives examined here are deemed good for citizens of a
democracy regardless of ideology—such as political tolerance, political participation, and a
predisposition supportive of democracy (anti‐authoritarian)—there have ever been those who
will use such research findings negatively for their own political purposes and no way to stop
them.
Our research does have some limitations; chief among those is the nature of the
sample—one drawn from college students. The diversity of the schools utilized, including a
Page 34 of 58
community college, should have minimized this problem to a certain degree, nonetheless we
are limited in generalizing our findings to Millennials attending college. Our study also focus on
the older cohort of Millennials and may only apply to that segment of the generation; younger
Millennials did not have the same experience as their elders who were serially exposed to the
series as they grew up.
Page 35 of 58
References
Barton, Benjamin H. 2006. “Harry Potter and the Half‐Crazed Bureaucracy.” University of
Michigan Law Review, Vol. 104, pp. 1523‐1538.
Baumgartner, Jody and Jonathan S. Morris. 2006. “The Daily Show Effect: Candidate
Evaluations, Efficacy, and American Youth.” American Politics Research Volume 34,
Number 3 (May), pp. 341‐367.
Cunningham, Anne E. and Keith E. Stanovich. 2001. “What Reading Does for the Mind.” Journal
of Direct Instruction, Vol. 1, No. 2, pp. 137–149.
Dawson, Richard E., Kenneth Prewitt, Karen S. Dawson. 1977. Political socialization: An Analytic
Study (New York: Little, Brown and Co.).
Delli Carpini, Michael X. and Bruce A. Williams. 1996. “Constructing Public Opinion: The Uses of
Fictional and Nonfictional Television in Conversations about the Environment.” In The
Psychology of Political Communication, Ann N. Crigler, Editor (Ann Arbor, MI: University
Michigan Press).
Feldman, Stanley and Lee Sigelman. 1985. “The Political Impact of Prime‐Time Television: ‘The
Day After.’” The Journal of Politics, Vol. 47, No. 2 (Jun.), pp. 556‐578.
Feldman, Stanley and Karen Stenner. 1997. “Perceived Threat and Authoritarianism.” Political
Psychology, Vol. 18, No. 4, pp. 741‐770.
Gabriel, Shira and Ariana F. Young. 2011. “Becoming a Vampire Without Being Bitten: The
Narrative Collective‐Assimilation Hypothesis.” Psychological Science.
Gerbner, George, Larry Gross, Michael Morgan, and Nancy Signorielli, N. 2002. “Growing Up
with Television: The Cultivation Perspective.” In J. Bryant and D. Zillmann (Eds.), Media
Effects: Advances in Theory and Research (pp. 43–68). (Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates Inc.).
Howe, Neil and William Strauss. 2000. Millennials Rising: The Next Great Generation (New York:
Vintage Books).
Jennings, M. Kent and Richard G. Niemi. 1968. “The Transmission of Political Values from
Parent to Child.” The American Political Science Review, Vol. 62, No. 1 (March), pp. 169‐
184.
Lenart, Silvo and Kathleen McGraw. 1989. “America Watches "Amerika:" Television Docudrama
and Political Attitudes.” The Journal of Politics, Vol. 51, No. 3 (Aug.), pp. 697‐712.
Page 36 of 58
Perse, Elizabeth M. 2001. Media Effects and Society (Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates, Inc).
Rowling, J. K. 1997. Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone (New York: Scholastic, Inc.).
__________. 1999. Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets (New York: Scholastic, Inc.).
__________. 1999. Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban (New York: Scholastic, Inc.).
__________. 2000. Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (New York: Scholastic, Inc.).
__________. 2003. Harry Potter and the Order of the Pheonix (New York: Scholastic, Inc.).
__________. 2005. Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince (New York: Scholastic, Inc.).
__________. 2007. Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows (New York: Scholastic, Inc.).
Sester, Marc and Melanie C. Green. 2010. “You Are Who You Watch: Identification and
Transportation Effects on Temporary Self‐Concept.” Social Influence, 5 (4), 272‐288.
Stenner, Karen. 2005. The Authoritarian Dynamic (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
Sullivan, John L., James Piereson, and George E. Marcus. 1993. Political Tolerance and American
Democracy (Chicago: University of Chicago Press).
Tedin, Kent L. 1974. “The Influence of Parents on the Political Attitudes of Adolescents.” The
American Political Science Review, Vol. 68, No. 4 (Dec.), pp. 1579‐1592.
Page 37 of 58
Table 1: Sample by School
Frequency Percent
Mississippi State 180 15.8
UVM Film Showing 42 3.7
UVM Spring 2009 273 23.9
Ole Miss 57 5.0
Cal Poly 91 8.0
Iowa State 30 2.6
Adirondack Comm. Col. 157 13.8
UVM Fall 2009 279 24.5
Pacific Lutheran 32 2.8
Total 1141 100.0
Page 38 of 58
How many Harry Potter Books
Have you Read?
all of none of
them them
35% 34%
some of
them
31%
Figure 1: Harry Potter Books Read (margin of error at 95 percent confidence level ± 2.9
percent).
_________________________
none of
them
14%
all of
them
45%
some of
them
41%
Figure 2: Harry Potter Movies Seen
Page 39 of 58
Harry Potter Fan Scale
5 Big fan
29% 4
21%
1 Not a
fan
14%
3
2
23%
13%
Figure 3: Fan Scale
Page 40 of 58
16.0
14.0
12.0
10.0
mean score on...
8.0
6.0
4.0
2.0
0.0
feeling therm intolerance
did not read all 12.9 6.31
read all hp books 14.0 5.24
Figure 4: Sum of feeling thermometer scores and tolerance scores by whether respondent read
all of the Harry Potter books. ANOVA, F = 25.5, significant at the .000 level, for feeling
thermometer scores; F= 23.2, significant at the .000 level, for the intolerance scale.
Page 41 of 58
40.0%
35.0%
30.0%
25.0%
20.0%
%
15.0%
10.0%
5.0%
0.0%
value somewhat
don't value
equality value
equality
highly equality
read all books 37.2% 32.2% 30.7%
read some or none 29.5% 35.3% 33.2%
Figure 5: Value equality by Harry Potter fan (margin of error at 95 percent confidence level ±
2.9 percent).
Question: 5. Some people feel the government in Washington should see to it that every
person has a job and a good standard of living. Suppose these people are at one end of a scale,
at point ‘a.’ Others think the government should just let each person get ahead on their own.
Suppose these people are at the other end, at point ‘e.’ And, of course, some other people have
opinions somewhere in between. Where would you place YOURSELF on this scale?
Page 42 of 58
1.2
1.04
0.79
0.8
did not read all
0.6
read all hp
books
0.4
0.2
0
authoritarianism
Figure 6: Mean score on orientation to authority and whether respondent read all of the Harry
Potter books. ANOVA, F = 16.4, significant at the .000 level.
Page 43 of 58
50.0%
45.0%
40.0%
35.0%
30.0%
%
25.0%
20.0%
15.0%
10.0%
5.0%
0.0%
favor death torture
kill terrorists
penalty acceptable
read all books 37.2% 31.1% 20.6%
read some or none 46.6% 43.3% 30.8%
Figure 7: Attitudes toward deadly violence and torture.
Page 44 of 58
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
favorably neither unfavorably
read all books 8% 9% 83%
read some or none 15% 11% 74%
Figure 8: How historians will view Bush Administration by Harry Potter reader.
Question: Ultimately, how do you think historians will view the George W. Bush administration?
Page 45 of 58
4.5
4.21
4 3.89
3.5
3.32
2.97
3
2.5
mean score
did not read all
2 read all hp books
1.5
0.5
0
particip cynicism
Figure 9: Participation and cynicism by Harry Potter reader.
Page 46 of 58
70%
60%
50%
40%
%
30%
20%
10%
0%
McCain Obama Other did not vote
read all books 15% 58% 3% 24%
read some or none 23% 45% 3% 29%
Figure 10: Vote for president in 2008 by Harry Potter reader.
Page 47 of 58
+
‐.13
+
Conservatism
+
‐.15
Reader Political
‐.15 .37 (cognitive .18 intolerance
+
+
‐.05
.10
Authoritarian
+
‐.05
+
predisposition
+
‐.14 Feelings
.11 toward out
Harry
+
experience ‐.10
reader/fan +
+
.11 Political
Cynicism participation
‐.08
+
+
.53
Opposition
to use of
.08
violence and +
‐.37
deadly force
+
.15
+
.05* +
.13
Internal political
efficacy
Figure 11: Direct and indirect effects of Harry Potter.
Numbers reported are unstandardized regression coefficients (measures were standardized prior to analysis). All coefficients are significant at
the .05 level or better.
* relationship without controlling for whether respondent was an avid reader (asked for only ½ the sample); not significant when readership
controlled for (using ½ of the sample).
Appendix A: The Harry Potter Survey
Thank you for agreeing to take part in our class research project. Your participation and honest
opinions are of utmost importance to the success of our research and will remain completely
anonymous. Please answer the following questions by filling out the bubble on the scan form for the
option that best fits what you think and feel.
Below are 4 pairs of words. Please choose the word that appeals to you more or that sounds better to
you.
1. Independence or respect for elders a. Independence b. Respect for elders
2. Curiosity or good manners a. Curiosity b. Good manners
3. Obedience or self respect a. Obedience b. Self‐respect
4. Being considerate or well‐behaved a. Considerate b. Well‐behaved
5. Some people feel the government in Washington should see to it that every person has a job and a
good standard of living. Suppose these people are at one end of a scale, at point ‘a.’ Others think the
government should just let each person get ahead on their own. Suppose these people are at the
other end, at point ‘e.’ And, of course, some other people have opinions somewhere in between.
Where would you place YOURSELF on this scale?
a. b. c. d. e.
Government should see to Government should just let
job and standard of living each person get ahead on
their own
6. If you had to pick, which of the following groups would you say you like the least?
a. Atheists b. Homosexuals c. Muslims d. Fascists e. Communists
Considering the group that you picked in the Agree Agree Disagree Disagree
question above, do you agree or disagree strongly somewhat somewhat strongly
with the feeling that members of that group
7. should be banned from being president? a. b. c. d.
8. should be allowed to teach in public schools? a. b. c. d.
9. should be allowed to make a speech in your a. b. c. d.
city/town?
10. should have their phones tapped by our a. b. c. d.
government?
11. should be outlawed? a. b. c. d.
12. In general, would you say that most of what government does makes things better or worse for
people?
a. Most of what the b. Most of what the c. Don’t know
government makes things government makes things
better for people worse for people
13. Within our culture there exist theories that challenge the historical record or the consensus among
the scientific community, such as the notion that the moon landing was fake, that global warming is
a myth, that there was a conspiracy to assassinate JFK, and that the US government staged the
September 11th attacks. Which of the following describes your views of these theories that
challenge the historical record or the consensus among the scientific community?
a. I believe many of these b. I believe one or two of these c. I don’t believe any of these
theories. theories. theories.
14. Do you agree or disagree with the statement: People like me don’t have any say about what the
government does?
a. Agree b. Agree c. Neither agree nor d. Disagree e. Disagree
strongly somewhat disagree somewhat strongly
15. Do you FAVOR or OPPOSE the death penalty?
a. Favor b. Oppose c. Don’t know
We’d like to get your feelings about
some groups in American society
using a version of what is called a 100° very
feeling thermometer. Using the 0° very cold or cold or warm or warm or
thermometer to the right how would unfavorable unfavorable 50° favorable favorable
you rate feeling feeling neutral feeling feeling
16. Muslims? a. b. c. d. e.
17. Blacks/African Americans? a. b. c. d. e.
18. Undocumented immigrants a. b. c. d. e.
19. Homosexuals a. b. c. d. e.
20. Over the years, how much attention do you feel the government pays to what people think when it
decides what to do? The government
a. ALWAYS pays b. USUALLY pays c. SOMETIMES pays d. RARELY pays e. NEVER pays
attention to attention to attention to what attention to attention to
what people what people people think what people what people
think think think think
Have you done any of the following during your life?
21. Voted in a presidential primary election in 2008 or participated in a caucus a. yes b. no
22. Written a letter/email to or called a public official a. yes b. no
23. Worked on a political campaign a. yes b. no
24. Volunteer or worked in a government or political official’s office a. yes b. no
25. Watched a political debate a. yes b. no
26. Contributed money to a political campaign a. yes b. no
27. Attempted to convince someone to vote a certain way a. yes b. no
28. Been part of an organization that involves itself in politics in some way, such as a. yes b. no
environmental groups, gun rights groups, student organizations that deal with
politics, etc.
Page 1 of 58
29. Ultimately, how do you think historians will view the George W. Bush administration?
a. Very b. Somewhat c. Neither d. Somewhat e. Very
favorably favorably favorably nor unfavorably unfavorably
unfavorably
30. For whom did you vote in the November 2008 presidential election?
a. McCain b. Obama c. Other d. I did not vote
31. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement: The best way to deal with the threat of
terrorism is to hunt down and kill all the terrorists.
a. Agree strongly b. Agree somewhat c. Disagree somewhat d. Disagree strongly
32. Would you regard the use of torture against people suspected of involvement in terrorism as
acceptable or unacceptable?
a. Acceptable b. Unacceptable c. No opinion
We are interested in finding out what people think about the Harry Potter books and the movies.
Please answer the following questions on the Harry Potter series.
33. How many of the Harry Potter books have you read?
a. None of them b. Some of them c. All of them
34. Regardless of whether you have read the books, have you discussed the books with any good friend
or family member who read them?
a. Yes b. No
35. With regard to the Harry Potter book series, did your parents
a. Encourage you to read the b. Not really play any role in your c. Discourage you from
books or read them with/to decision whether to read the reading the books?
you? books?
36. How many of the Harry Potter MOVIES did you see?
a. None of them b. Some of them c. All of them
37. Regardless of whether you have seen the movies, have you discussed the MOVIES with any good
friend or family member who saw them?
a. Yes b. No
38. On the scale below where ‘a’ represents a fans who are/were very much into the Harry Potter series
and ‘e’ people who haven’t read/seen any of the series or if they did, hated it, where would you
place yourself?
a. b. c. d. e.
Was or is into the Harry Not a fan/did not read
Potter books and/or movies books or watch movies
Page 2 of 58
If you did not read the books, please skip to question number 41
39. At about what grade level did you start to read the books (or have them read to you)?
a. Prior to 4th b. 4th to 6th c. 7th to 9th grade d. 10th to 12th e. College or later
grade grade grade
40. Which of the following best describes the effect of the Harry Potter book series on your reading
habits?
a. I was not much of a reader b. I was not much of a reader until c. I was an avid reader
until I read the Harry Potter I read the Harry Potter series even before I read the
series, but after reading and after reading Harry Potter I Harry Potter series.
Harry Potter, I began to read still wasn't much of a reader of
more books. books.
The following questions cover your knowledge of the series. If you haven’t read the books or seen the
movies, please skip to question 46
41. Who is the Half Blood Prince?
a. Severus Snape b. Harry Potter c. Voldemort d. Draco Malfoy e. I don’t know
42. Who is Peeves?
a. Professor of b. Harry’s c. A troublesome d. Dumbledore’s e. I don’t
Muggle secret crush poltergeist at Phoenix know
Studies Hogwarts
43. What is Ron’s position in Quidditch?
a. Seeker b. Keeper c. Chaser d. Beater e. I don’t know
44. Which of the magical spells wards off Dementor attacks?
a. Alohmora b. Avada c. Expecto Patronum d. Stupify e. I don’t know
Kedavra
45. The vanishing cabinet connects Hogwarts to
a. Malfoy’s b. The shrieking c. The Hog’s d. Borgin & Burke’s e. I don’t
Mansion shack Head know
Finally, please answer the following questions about yourself.
46. What year are you in school?
a. 1st b. 2nd c. 3rd d. 4th e. 5th or more (including graduate school)
47. Are you a political science major or minor?
a. Yes b. No
48. Please indicate your gender
a. Female b. Male c. Transgendered
49. Please tell us your age
a. 17‐18 b. 19‐20 c. 21‐22 d. 23‐25 e. 25 or above
50. How would you characterize the place you grew up?
a. In a large city b. In suburbia c. In a small city d. In a rural area
Page 3 of 58
51. Outside of the books you were assigned for school, what kind of reader were you when you were younger?
a. I was not much of a reader of b. I was an occasional reader of books c. I was an avid reader of
books books
52. What race do you consider yourself?
a. White b. Black or African c. American Indian or Alaska d. Asian e. Of Mixed race or some
American Native other race
53. Do you consider yourself Hispanic or Latino(a)?
a. Yes b. No c. I am part
Hispanic/Latino(a)
54. Which of the following best describes your father’s education?
a. He stopped after b. He attended some c. He earned a d. He earned a e. I don’t
high school or college and/or earned B.A. or B.S. professional know
before an Assoc degree degree degree
55. How prestigious did you think your father’s job was when you were about 16?
a. Very prestigious b. Somewhat prestigious c. Not d. My father was e. I don’t
prestigious at not employed know/NA
all
56. Please indicate the number of times you were spanked as a child.
a. Never spanked b. Spanked once c. Spanked on d. Spanked
occasion frequently
57. Generally speaking do you consider yourself a Democrat, Republican, Independent, or other?
a. Democrat b. Republican c. Independent d. Other e. Don’t know
Strongl
Agree Disagree y
Please whether you agree or disagree with the following Strongl somewh neutr somewh disagr
statements y agree at al at ee
58. I am a productive person who always gets the job done. a b c d E
59. I have a wide range of intellectual interests. a b c d E
60. I don’t feel like I’m driven to get ahead a b c d E
61. If I feel my mind starting to drift off into daydreams, I a b c d E
usually get busy and start concentrating on some work or
activity instead.
62. I find philosophical arguments boring. a b c d E
63. I would rather keep my options open than plan a b c d E
everything in advance.
64. When it comes to politics, do you usually think of yourself as very liberal, liberal, moderate or middle of the
road, conservative, or very conservative?
a. Very liberal b. Liberal c. Moderate d. Conservative e. Very conservative
Page 4 of 58
Appendix B: Regression Analysis Results
Equation 1 Coefficientsa
Standardized
Unstandardized Coefficients Coefficients
Equation 2 Coefficientsa
Standardized
Unstandardized Coefficients Coefficients
Equation 3 Coefficientsa
Standardized
Unstandardized Coefficients Coefficients
Standardized
Unstandardized Coefficients Coefficients
Standardized
Unstandardized Coefficients Coefficients
Standardized
Unstandardized Coefficients Coefficients
Page 1 of 58
Equation 7 Coefficientsa
Standardized
Unstandardized Coefficients Coefficients
Equation 8 Coefficientsa
Standardized
Unstandardized Coefficients Coefficients
Equation 9 Coefficientsa
Standardized
Unstandardized Coefficients Coefficients
Model B Std. Error Beta t Sig.
Page 2 of 58
Equation 10 Coefficientsa
Standardized
Unstandardized Coefficients Coefficients
Page 3 of 58