Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34975665›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2021

Diversity in Psychological Research Activities: Quantitative Approach With Topic Modeling.

Sachio Otsuka, Yoshiyuki Ueda, Jun Saiki

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. 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

3 authors.

Sachio OtsukaGraduate School of Human and Environmental Studies, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan.
Yoshiyuki UedaKokoro Research Center, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan.
Jun SaikiGraduate School of Human and Environmental Studies, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent cultural studies have discussed universality and diversity in human behavior using numerous samples investigated worldwide. We aimed to quantitatively extend this discussion to various research activities in psychology in terms of geographic regions and time trends. Most psychology departments have specialists in various fields of psychology. Further, research institutions in all regions typically aim to provide systematic and balanced research education. Nevertheless, most researchers recognize universal features and patterns of diversity in research activities in psychology in terms of regional differences and time trends. However, these arguments remain intuitive and vague, and no studies have conducted quantitative analyses. To this end, we conducted topic modeling for the abstracts of psychological articles with the regions of author affiliations and publication periods as covariates. The results showed that the topic proportions related to basic research were high in North-Central America, whereas those related to clinical research were high in Europe. Interestingly, the regional differences shown by topic modeling were not observed in the frequency analysis of keywords, indicating that topic modeling revealed implicit characteristics. Moreover, we observed an increasing trend of neuroscience topics across publication periods. However, this trend was not valid for the psychology journal

Indexed as

diversitypublication periodregional differencetext miningtopic modeling

Identifiers

PMID34975665
PMCPMC8716499

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.