Meta-analysis for Sociology – A Measure-driven Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Meta-analytic methods are becoming increasingly important in sociological research. In this article we present an approach for meta-analysis which is especially helpful for sociologists. Conventional approaches to meta-analysis often prioritize "concept-driven" literature searches. However, in disciplines with high theoretical diversity, such as sociology, this search approach might constrain the researcher's ability to fully exploit the entire body of relevant work. We explicate a "measure-driven" approach, in which iterative searches and new computerized search techniques are used to increase the range of publications found (and thus the range of possible analyses) and to traverse time and disciplinary boundaries. We demonstrate this measure-driven search approach with two meta-analytic projects, examining the effects of various social variables on all-cause mortality.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.353 | 0.545 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.014 | 0.014 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.023 | 0.016 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".