Ngrams Obedience to Authority* (*Author-ity. Do you see what I did there?

) G Neil Martin
Theres never an idle or squandered moment on the internet, especially i you are searchin! or "do! canons# or " people named $uriel electrocuted %y $il!rams accomplice# (dont loo& or either- you will %e disappointed %eyond %itterness). 'ou can enrich a pantechnicon, ill a %ul!in! duodenum, a distended caecum o hours on (oo!le )cholar *so much so that you end up spendin! so much time on it, you have no time le t to %e an actual scholar and your +, %ecomes as thin as attendance as the Diederi& )tapel -i etime .chievement .ward /etschri t. 0ut now, there is another enticin! search tool, virtual catnip to the ruminatin! academic. (oo!le 1!ram. I discovered (oo!le 1!ram some years a!o and many people will %e as amiliar with it now as they are amiliar with the peccadilloes o 2345s 67 li!ht entertainers or the novel social interactions o senior -i%eral Democrats. 1!ram uses the vast *any %y vast, I mean oceanic- treasury o %oo&s that (oo!le holds. That is, appro8imately 9 million volumes or two trillion words or :; o all pu%lished te8ts since around (uten%er!s day (the 0i%le, not )teve). It allows you to search this data%ase or the requency o use o a word or phrase. 'ou can loo& up the requency o usa!e o the word "psycholo!y#, or e8ample, or "intelli!ence#, or " lannelette#, or "antimacassar#- in act, anythin! that its so tware reco!ni<es and which is pu%lished in (oo!les 0ro%di!na!ian di!ital %i%liotheque. 'ou can search over a whole century and you can search 0ritish-=n!lish or .merican-=n!lish (or one o si8 other lan!ua!es). .nd it

plots the requency o occurrence o that word on a !raph, which you can smooth or leave rou!h and ready. >sycholo!ists have e8ploited this acility, o%viously. )ome have tested ?ip s theory o lan!ua!e requency (that the most requent words in a lan!ua!e are the shortest) and ound that (oo!les %oo& data did not support it (>iantadosi et al, @522). Athers have ound that while the use o emotion words have decreased in the past ew decades, %oo&s in .merican =n!lish have %ecome more emotional than %oo&s in 0ritish-=n!lish a ter 2395 (.cer%i et al, @52B). )ome have ound that chan!es in ur%an livin! and declines in rural livin! have %een accompanied %y commensurate increases and decreases in the requency o ur%an and rural words ((reen ield, @52B). Athers have pointed out that you shouldnt use 1!ram or this sort o wor& and that these researchers should not %e so nau!hty. 'ou can even search or phrases. .nd this, spurred %y a recent twitter e8chan!e, is what I did. $atthew Can&ins, scour!e o the statistical "trend#, had searched or the phrase "more research is needed# - that ever!reen discussion re rain o the desperate and unadventurous- on (oo!le )cholar. Ce ound that its requency had increased e8ponentially in the past D5 years. Ceres his !raph, tweeted last wee& (/e% @2, @52:).

+urious to see whether this pattern was matched %y %oo&s, I searched or the same phrase in (oo!le 1!ram. I ound almost e8actly the same pattern. 'ou can see it hereE

0ut that was not all. )urely, there would %e su%tleties in temporal trends across the decades and !radations o nuance one could compare. .nother tipsy %eauty o 1!ram is that you can plot two search terms. )o, I insertedE " $ore research is needed# and "much more research is needed#. These were the resultsE

'ou can see that people are very reluctant to recommend a %ounty o new researchF they are happy to su!!est modestly that the ield %e nud!ed !ently orward, you &now, i you could, in your own time, not at all, a ter you. I tweeted %oth o these !raphs. Than&s to the retweets o =d 'on! (Gedyon!@53) and $atthew (GmcHhan&ins), the !raphs circulation e8panded rapidly and the response was a thin! o Ioy. $any e8pressed Ioyous surprise at what you could do with 1!ram. I elt as !uilty as a dealer lo!!in! crac& to toddlers. A course, once you delve into this theme, it is di icult to stop. +onsider thisE our disciplines, all our disciplines, have authoritarian completists. The conservative .dornos who close the %oo& orce ully and with stentorian inality proclaimE that is it, our wor& is done, our questions have %een answered. Jhat i , there ore, we plotted "more research is needed# with "the question has %een answered#? This is what you indE

>eople are o%viously more uncertainKless conclusive than convinced. 0ut it didnt stop there. 0y this time, I was a!o! with e8citement and potential trend- spottin!. $y discipline (psycholo!y) has sometimes %een dismissed *usually %y people %a led %y shoes- as unscienti ic. It is a rare, %ut nonetheless, e8pressed viewpoint. Jhat pattern o %elie and ar!ument would emer!e over a century i you plotted "psycholo!y is a science# and "psycholo!y is not a science#? This patternE

This shows an interestin! maelstrom o discussion in the @5s, B5s and :5s, when psycholo!y had already emer!ed rom its -eip<i! wom% and was startin! to %e %a led %y the visual cli and comin! to terms with conservation. The positive spi&es contrast star&ly with the dampened ne!ative trou!hs. This was the a!e o post-/reudianism, post-introspectionism, intelli!ence testin!, %ehaviourism, and neo%ehaviourism. This Ioustin! recedes rom the mid 95s * with the puerperal stirrin!s o the co!nitive revolution. .nd, or the avoidance o dou%tKthe %ene it o anyone wor&in! at =lsevier, it is. (. science). 0y this point, I was curious to see what other temporal treasures this would yield. Jhat i you compare mentions o science and psychoanalysis? 'ou !et thisE

>sycholo!y and psychoanalysis, you !et thisE

)i!mund /reud and Cans =ysenc&, sadly, !ives you thisE

(.lthou!h /reud had roundly trounced Darwin throu!hout the whole o the @5 th century, Darwin eventually cau!ht up in @559 and overtoo& psycholo!ys most amous lia%ility). Two, very well-researched and now widely-reco!nised developmental disorders, autism and dysle8ia, thisE

1ote how the requency o the use o the word autism has run away rom that or dysle8ia and that the increase starts with 7anners pioneerin! wor& o 23:B. $ore is now written a%out autism than dysle8ia, a trend re lected in the peer-reviewed literature where there are more Iournals pu%lished with Lautism in their titles than Ldysle8ia. >erhaps this increases re lects our lac& o , and

search or, understandin! and &nowled!e a%out autism. An %alance, we pro%a%ly &now more a%out the causes, traIectory, eatures, %iolo!ical %asis and treatment o developmental and acquired dysle8ia than we do a%out autism spectrum disorders. -i&e the acceptance o psycholo!y as a science, once we have answers, questions %ecome redundant. Mealisin! that I had three papers to write and that the rice I was %oilin! had made its way throu!h the pan and was merrily navi!atin! its way to the lat downstairs, I stoically called it a day. 0ut not %e ore one more. Jeve Iust cele%rated the time o year where we !ive the one we love (shops) all our money. Aur relationship with shops on ,alentines day is a %it li&e our quotidian romantic relationships. 1eedy, na!!in! and once it has what it wants rom you it moves onto someone else ($others Day, i Im not mista&en). )o, in one inal hurrah, I was curious to see whether the literature was !rinnin! with cardiovascularly enthusiastic romantics or suppuratin! with relentless acetic misanthropes. This is what you !et when you insert the phrasesE "I love you# and "I hate you# into 1!ramE

Isnt that sweet? Cappy $others Day.

.uthorE ( 1eil $artin, @B /e%ruary @52: TwitterE Gthatneilmartin HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH