Our research investigates how Natural Language Processing (NLP) can be u sed to extract main topics from a larger corpus of written data, as applied to the case of identifying signaling themes in Presidential Directives (PDs) from the Reagan through Clinton administrations . Analysts and NLP both identified relevant documents, demonstrating the potential utility of NLPs in research involving large written corpuses. H owever, we also identified discrepancies between NLP and human - labeled results that indicate a need for more research to assess the validity of NLP in this use case . The research was conducted in 2023, and the rapidly evolving landscape of AIML means existing tools have improved and new tools have been developed; this research displays the inherent capabilities of a potentially dated AI tool in emerging social science applications .

As large language models (LLMs) transition from static tools to fully agentic systems, their potential for transforming social science research has become increasingly evident. This paper introduces a structured framework for understanding the diverse applications of LLM-based agents, ranging from simple data processors to complex, multi-agent systems capable of simulating emergent social dynamics. By mapping this developmental continuum across six levels, the paper clarifies the technical and methodological boundaries between different agentic architectures, providing a comprehensive overview of current capabilities and future potential. It highlights how lower-tier systems streamline conventional tasks like text classification and data annotation, while higher-tier systems enable novel forms of inquiry, including the study of group dynamics, norm formation, and large-scale social processes. However, these advancements also introduce significant challenges, including issues of reproducibility, ethical oversight, and the risk of emergent biases. The paper critically examines these concerns, emphasizing the need for robust validation protocols, interdisciplinary collaboration, and standardized evaluation metrics. It argues that while LLM-based agents hold transformative potential for the social sciences, realizing this promise will require careful, context-sensitive deployment and ongoing methodological refinement. The paper concludes with a call for future research that balances technical innovation with ethical responsibility, encouraging the development of agentic systems that not only replicate but also extend the frontiers of social science, offering new insights into the complexities of human behavior.

Are AI systems truly representing human values, or merely averaging across them? Our study suggests a concerning reality: Large Language Models (LLMs) fail to represent diverse cultural moral frameworks despite their linguistic capabilities. We expose significant gaps between AI-generated and human moral intuitions by applying the Moral Foundations Questionnaire across 19 cultural contexts. Comparing multiple state-of-the-art LLMs' origins against human baseline data, we find these models systematically homogenize moral diversity. Surprisingly, increased model size doesn't consistently improve cultural representation fidelity. Our findings challenge the growing use of LLMs as synthetic populations in social science research and highlight a fundamental limitation in current AI alignment approaches. Without data-driven alignment beyond prompting, these systems cannot capture the nuanced, culturally-specific moral intuitions. Our results call for more grounded alignment objectives and evaluation metrics to ensure AI systems represent diverse human values rather than flattening the moral landscape.

This paper examines how large language models (LLMs) are transforming core quantitative methods in communication research in particular, and in the social sciences more broadly-namely, content analysis, survey research, and experimental studies. Rather than replacing classical approaches, LLMs introduce new possibilities for coding and interpreting text, simulating dynamic respondents, and generating personalized and interactive stimuli. Drawing on recent interdisciplinary work, the paper highlights both the potential and limitations of LLMs as research tools, including issues of validity, bias, and interpretability. To situate these developments theoretically, the paper revisits Lasswell's foundational framework -- "Who says what, in which channel, to whom, with what effect?" -- and demonstrates how LLMs reconfigure message studies, audience analysis, and effects research by enabling interpretive variation, audience trajectory modeling, and counterfactual experimentation. Revisiting the metaphor of the methodological compass, the paper argues that classical research logics remain essential as the field integrates LLMs and generative AI. By treating LLMs not only as technical instruments but also as epistemic and cultural tools, the paper calls for thoughtful, rigorous, and imaginative use of LLMs in future communication and social science research.

Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) or large language models (LLMs) have the potential to revolutionize computational social science, particularly in automated textual analysis. In this paper, we conduct a systematic evaluation of the promises and risks of using LLMs for diverse coding tasks, with social movement studies serving as a case example. We propose a framework for social scientists to incorporate LLMs into text annotation, either as the primary coding decision-maker or as a coding assistant. This framework provides tools for researchers to develop the optimal prompt, and to examine and report the validity and reliability of LLMs as a methodological tool. Additionally, we discuss the associated epistemic risks related to validity, reliability, replicability, and transparency. We conclude with several practical guidelines for using LLMs in text annotation tasks, and how we can better communicate the epistemic risks in research.

Large-scale surveys are essential tools for informing social science research and policy, but running surveys is costly and time-intensive. If we could accurately simulate group-level survey results, this would therefore be very valuable to social science research. Prior work has explored the use of large language models (LLMs) for simulating human behaviors, mostly through prompting. In this paper, we are the first to specialize LLMs for the task of simulating survey response distributions. As a testbed, we use country-level results from two global cultural surveys. We devise a fine-tuning method based on first-token probabilities to minimize divergence between predicted and actual response distributions for a given question. Then, we show that this method substantially outperforms other methods and zero-shot classifiers, even on unseen questions, countries, and a completely unseen survey. While even our best models struggle with the task, especially on unseen questions, our results demonstrate the benefits of specialization for simulation, which may accelerate progress towards sufficiently accurate simulation in the future.

Large-N nationally representative surveys, which have profoundly shaped American politics scholarship, represent related but distinct domains -a key condition for transfer learning applications. These surveys are related through their shared demographic, party identification, and ideological variables, yet differ in that individual surveys often lack specific policy preference questions that researchers require. Our study introduces a novel application of transfer learning (TL) to address these gaps, marking the first systematic use of TL paradigms in the context of survey data. Specifically, models pre-trained on the Cooperative Election Study (CES) dataset are fine-tuned for use in the American National Election Studies (ANES) dataset to predict policy questions based on demographic variables. Even with a naive architecture, our transfer learning approach achieves approximately 92 percentage accuracy in predicting missing variables across surveys, demonstrating the robust potential of this method. Beyond this specific application, our paper argues that transfer learning is a promising framework for maximizing the utility of existing survey data. We contend that artificial intelligence, particularly transfer learning, opens new frontiers in social science methodology by enabling systematic knowledge transfer between well-administered surveys that share common variables but differ in their outcomes of interest.

Achieving consistent word interpretations across different time spans is crucial in social sciences research and text analysis tasks, as stable semantic representations form the foundation for research and task correctness, enhancing understanding of socio-political and cultural analysis. Traditional models like Word2Vec have provided significant insights into long-term semantic changes but often struggle to capture stable meanings in short-term contexts, which may be attributed to fluctuations in embeddings caused by unbalanced training data. Recent advancements, particularly BERT (Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers), its pre-trained nature and transformer encoder architecture offer contextual embeddings that improve semantic consistency, making it a promising tool for short-term analysis. This study empirically compares the performance of Word2Vec and BERT in maintaining stable word meanings over time in text analysis tasks relevant to social sciences research. Using articles from the People's Daily spanning 20 years (2004-2023), we evaluated the semantic stability of each model across different timeframes. The results indicate that BERT consistently outperforms Word2Vec in maintaining semantic stability, offering greater stability in contextual embeddings. However, the study also acknowledges BERT's limitations in capturing gradual semantic shifts over longer periods due to its inherent stability. The findings suggest that while BERT is advantageous for short-term semantic analysis in social sciences, researchers should consider complementary approaches for long-term studies to fully capture semantic drift. This research underscores the importance of selecting appropriate word embedding models based on the specific temporal context of social science analyses.

The recent wave of artificial intelligence, epitomized by large language models (LLMs), has presented opportunities and challenges for methodological innovation in political science, sparking discussions on a potential paradigm shift in the social sciences. However, how can we understand the impact of LLMs on knowledge production and paradigm transformation in the social sciences from a comprehensive perspective that integrates technology and methodology? What are LLMs' specific applications and representative innovative methods in political science research? These questions, particularly from a practical methodological standpoint, remain underexplored. This paper proposes the "Intelligent Computing Social Modeling" (ICSM) method to address these issues by clarifying the critical mechanisms of LLMs. ICSM leverages the strengths of LLMs in idea synthesis and action simulation, advancing intellectual exploration in political science through "simulated social construction" and "simulation validation." By simulating the U.S. presidential election, this study empirically demonstrates the operational pathways and methodological advantages of ICSM. By integrating traditional social science paradigms, ICSM not only enhances the quantitative paradigm's capability to apply big data to assess the impact of factors but also provides qualitative paradigms with evidence for social mechanism discovery at the individual level, offering a powerful tool that balances interpretability and predictability in social science research. The findings suggest that LLMs will drive methodological innovation in political science through integration and improvement rather than direct substitution.

This paper investigates the presence of political bias in emotion inference models used for sentiment analysis (SA) in social science research. Machine learning models often reflect biases in their training data, impacting the validity of their outcomes. While previous research has highlighted gender and race biases, our study focuses on political bias - an underexplored yet pervasive issue that can skew the interpretation of text data across a wide array of studies. We conducted a bias audit on a Polish sentiment analysis model developed in our lab. By analyzing valence predictions for names and sentences involving Polish politicians, we uncovered systematic differences influenced by political affiliations. Our findings indicate that annotations by human raters propagate political biases into the model's predictions. To mitigate this, we pruned the training dataset of texts mentioning these politicians and observed a reduction in bias, though not its complete elimination. Given the significant implications of political bias in SA, our study emphasizes caution in employing these models for social science research. We recommend a critical examination of SA results and propose using lexicon-based systems as a more ideologically neutral alternative. This paper underscores the necessity for ongoing scrutiny and methodological adjustments to ensure the reliability and impartiality of the use of machine learning in academic and applied contexts.