Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34824489›Full record

ArticleAnnual review of sociology2020

Computational Social Science and Sociology.

Achim Edelmann, Tom Wolff, Danielle Montagne, Christopher A Bail

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annual review of sociology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed
22.7field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

27 citing papers in PubMed, 281 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. A Statistical Mechanics Model to Decode Tissue Crosstalk During Graft Formation.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. New opportunities and challenges for conservation evidence synthesis from advances in natural language processing.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Observational
  11. Article
  12. Progress in modeling dynamic systems for sustainable development.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.

Achim EdelmannInstitute of Sociology, University of Bern, 3012 Bern, Switzerland.
Tom WolffDepartment of Sociology, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina 27708, USA.
Danielle MontagneDepartment of Sociology, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina 27708, USA.
Christopher A BailDepartment of Sociology, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina 27708, USA.
Duke University · USUniversity of Bern · CH

Funding

Science CoreP2CHD065563 · NICHD · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI James Moody · 2015 to 2026
$5.7M
NICHD NIH HHS P2C HD065563
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The integration of social science with computer science and engineering fields has produced a new area of study: computational social science. This field applies computational methods to novel sources of digital data such as social media, administrative records, and historical archives to develop theories of human behavior. We review the evolution of this field within sociology via bibliometric analysis and in-depth analysis of the following subfields where this new work is appearing most rapidly: (

Indexed as

computational social sciencecultural sociologydemographyeconomic sociologymachine learningnetwork analysispolitical sociologysocial psychologysociology of knowledgetext analysis

Identifiers

PMID34824489
PMCPMC8612450
OpenAlexW3022499311

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.