Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 241

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Some Comments on “Sequence Analysis and Optimal Matching Methods in Sociology: Review and Prospect”

WU, LAWRENCE L.·2000·Sociological Methods & Research

Abstract

Apres un rappel methodologique de l'analyse sequentielle, l'A. expose les forces et les faiblesses de cette technique. Il emet un jugement critique sur les avis de Abbott et Tsay a propos de l'application de l'analyse sequentielle aux carrieres professionnelles. En particulier, l'A. met l'accent sur la question de l'asymetrie des relations unissant les differentes sequences composant une carriere professionnelle. Ce probleme souleve la question des couts en jeu dans les transitions entre les sequences. L'A. defend la methode de l'analyse historique evenementielle et expose en quoi son avis diverge de celui d'Abbott et Tsay

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0049124100029001003

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 241

Metadata

Authors
WU, L. L.
Venue
Sociological Methods & Research
Published
2000-08
Volume
29
Issue
1
Pages
41-64
ISSN
  • 0049-1241 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-8294
OpenAlex
W2113751261
Cited by
241
References
0
FWCI
11.18
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Some Comments on “Sequence Analysis and Optimal Matching Methods in Sociology: Review and Prospect”. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/0049124100029001003
The paper
WU, L. L. (2000). Some Comments on “Sequence Analysis and Optimal Matching Methods in Sociology: Review and Prospect”. Sociological Methods & Research. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124100029001003

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.