Topic
Social Science Credibility
19 items
· 6 aliases
· peaked week of 19 Apr 2026
· first seen 11 May 2026
The post sarcastically questions the reliability of social scientists interpreting reality, implying a distrust in their objectivity and findings.
Volume by source orientation Methodology →
Stacked weekly counts; colour by lean. “n/a” covers government and iwi-Māori sources where lean isn't applicable.
Alias drift
How this topic has been named, week by week. A new alias winning out is usually a framing shift.
Free account
Watch this topic with a free account — get alerted when framing shifts, when an MP adopts new language, or when discourse and press diverge.
Create a free account
Log in
Sample framings
Up to 12 framings spread across orientations.
Each framing is a short phrase the topic extractor generated to characterise the piece's stance —
not a quote from the source. Click through to read the original.
Free account
Create a free account to unlock the full set here — plus alerts when framing shifts or an MP adopts new language.
Create a free account
Log in
How the public reacted
Social-media signal on the same topic, drawn from
the social lens. Engagement is
likes + 2×shares + 3×replies, the same weighting used
across the digest cards.
View on /social →
12 social posts
·
45 engagement
Stance — 12 classified edges
Critical
12
Sentiment — 12 classified posts
Positive
2
Neutral
2
Negative
8
Most-engaged posts on this topic
-
reddit
· u/Inevitable-Move4941
· sentiment: neutral
· ♥ 2
· ↻ 0
· 💬 3
· 11 engagement
19 May
-
youtube
· @UCbYSV3LCywAKvYzK8vDNrfg
· sentiment: positive
· ♥ 11
· ↻ 0
· 💬 0
· 11 engagement
13 May
-
twitter
· @bobmccoskrienz
· sentiment: negative
· ♥ 1
· ↻ 1
· 💬 1
· 6 engagement
18 May
Spotted something wrong on this page?
Report a correction.