Cited by 379Ethics and Social Impacts of AIComputational and Text Analysis MethodsArtificial Intelligence Applications

AI and the transformation of social science research

Grossmann, Igor, Feinberg, Matthew, Parker, Dawn C., Christakis, Nicholas A., Tetlock, Philip E., Cunningham, William A.·2023·Science

Abstract

Careful bias management and data fidelity are key

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1126/science.adi1778

Cites

10 of 10 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Researchers have noted GPT's ability to help with computational social science tasks, detect misinformation, infer politicians' ideologies, write persuasive political arguments, respond to patient questions, simulate human research participants, and model collective behavior.

    “Researchers have also recently noted GPT’s ability to help with computational social science tasks (49–54), detect misinformation (55), infer politicians’ ideologies (56), write persuasive political arguments (57), respond to patient questions (58), simulate human research participants (59–61), and model collective behavior (56).”
  • LLMs may be unwilling to impersonate biased groups because they have been fine-tuned according to the normative preferences of highly educated liberals, who may have more concern about protecting marginalized groups than others.

    “Researchers who want to use LLMs to impersonate biased groups, for example, may discover these tools are unwilling to perform such roles because they have been fine-tuned according to the normative preferences of highly educated liberals who may have more concern about the protection of marginalized groups than others (12, 64).”

    From Can Generative AI improve social science? (2024) · cites this paper as [12]

  • Guard-rails in Generative AI probably improve safety for public use but may impede social scientists' ability to leverage bias for research purposes.

    “Though such guard-rails probably improve the safety of Generative AI tools for public use, they may impede the ability of social scientists to leverage bias for research purposes (12).”

    From Can Generative AI improve social science? (2024) · cites this paper as [12]

  • Generative AI may help increase external validity but may come at the cost of internal validity-the capacity of different groups to reproduce or replicate each other's results.

    “Though Generative AI may help researchers increase the external validity of their research designs, this may come at the cost of internal validity—or the capacity of different groups of researchers to reproduce or replicate each other’s results (2, 12).”

    From Can Generative AI improve social science? (2024) · cites this paper as [12]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Grossmann, I., Feinberg, M., Parker, D. C., Christakis, N. A., Tetlock, P. E., & Cunningham, W. A.
Affiliations
  • University of Waterloo (CA)
  • University of Toronto (CA)
  • Yale University (US)
  • University of Pennsylvania (US)
Venue
Science
Published
2023-06-16
Volume
380
Issue
6650
Pages
1108-1109
ISSN
  • 0036-8075 (ISSN-L)
  • 1095-9203
OpenAlex
W4380763235
Cited by
377
References
10
Citations by year
2026: 110 · 2025: 156 · 2024: 92 · 2023: 19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Science (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
  • Social Sciences › General Social Sciences › Computational and Text Analysis Methods
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Artificial Intelligence Applications
Keywords
artificial intelligence, social science research, research transformation, algorithmic bias, data fidelity, artificial intelligence in research
MeSH terms
Artificial Intelligence, Humans, Social Sciences, Bias

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review