{
  "source": "Cooked Index — occupational AI risk register",
  "page": "https://cookedindex.com/jobs/sociologists/",
  "methodology": "https://cookedindex.com/methodology",
  "notice": "Verdicts are re-examined as evidence accumulates. Re-fetch before relying on this; the page above always carries the current score.",
  "scored_at": "2026-08-11",
  "model": "claude-opus-5",
  "occupation": {
    "title": "Sociologists",
    "soc_code": "19-3041",
    "category": "Science",
    "us_employment": 2260,
    "median_annual_wage": 106030
  },
  "verdict": "EXPOSED",
  "risk_resistance": 34,
  "contested": false,
  "near_boundary": true,
  "dimensions": {
    "task_resistance": 8,
    "embodiment": 6,
    "liability_shield": 2,
    "trust_premium": 7,
    "judgment_accountability": 11
  },
  "reasoning": {
    "task_resistance": "An 8 reflects the split in a sociologist's week: coding open-ended responses, running Stata/R models, writing literature reviews and journal drafts are now draft-quality machine output, while framing a researchable question about, say, neighborhood effects and defending a sampling design through IRB and reviewer 2 still requires a person who knows the discipline's arguments — that's mixed, not resistant.",
    "embodiment": "The 6 comes from fieldwork that some sociologists actually do — ethnographic observation in a school or shelter, in-person interviews, recruiting respondents at a site — but most days are laptop, dataset, and manuscript, so this sits just above desk-only rather than in the field-truck range.",
    "liability_shield": "No state licenses the title 'sociologist'; a PhD is a hiring credential, not a legal gate, and nothing in your survey report requires your signature the way a PE stamp or clinical license does — hence a 2 rather than zero, since IRB approval and university appointment still put a named human on the protocol.",
    "trust_premium": "A 7 covers the relationships that matter — repeat access to a community that lets you back in, a named PI a foundation program officer trusts with a grant — but the journal article is read and cited without regard to who wrote it, and survey respondents talk to the study, not to you.",
    "judgment_accountability": "An 11 is right because you decide what counts as a case, where to cut a coding scheme, and whether a finding about disparity is robust enough to publish — real discretion with reputational stakes — but peer review, co-authors, and IRB spread the consequences, and no one's liberty or life turns on the call."
  },
  "rationale": "The daily output of a sociologist is text and data: literature reviews, survey instrument drafts, regression and coding runs, interview transcript analysis, grant narratives, journal manuscripts — the exact work current models do at usable draft quality. What resists is the front end (choosing which social question matters, designing a sample that survives peer review) and the field end (gaining access to communities, sitting with respondents, reading a setting in person). No licensure protects the title, and much of the employment is grant- and university-funded, so budget pressure hits before AI does.",
  "outlook": "The occupation is small and stays small; academic and pure-research slots shrink while applied evaluation, survey methodology, and field-based roles hold, so the median sociologist in 2035 is doing more primary data collection and less writing.",
  "what_would_raise_it": {
    "levers": [
      {
        "dimension": "task_resistance",
        "change": "Task-mix shift: if literature review, coding of transcripts, and regression scripting are fully absorbed by models, the residual job is research design, IRB-defensible sampling, and interpretation of contested findings — the tier journals and funders still demand a named human for. Watch for NSF Sociology program solicitations and top-journal (ASR, AJS) submission policies that require disclosure of AI-generated analysis and place design/interpretation on the author.",
        "plausibility": "plausible",
        "would_add": 4
      },
      {
        "dimension": "embodiment",
        "change": "If funders and journals tighten evidentiary standards for ethnography and in-person fieldwork — e.g. requiring documented field access, community consent, and observation logs that cannot be synthesized — the irreducibly in-person share of the occupation's hours grows relative to desk work. Visible in ASA ethics guidance and qualitative-data-transparency debates (the QTD initiative).",
        "plausibility": "plausible",
        "would_add": 3
      },
      {
        "dimension": "judgment_accountability",
        "change": "If IRB and human-subjects rules explicitly bar AI from serving as principal investigator or from making consent/risk determinations, the named sociologist owns every ambiguous call on harm, deception, and de-identification. Also applicable where sociologists serve as expert witnesses: FRE 702 and Daubert require a testifying human whose methodology is cross-examinable.",
        "plausibility": "already happening",
        "would_add": 4
      },
      {
        "dimension": "trust_premium",
        "change": "Narrow route only: litigation and government advisory work where the buyer is purchasing a deposable, cross-examinable human (class-action labor market experts, DOJ/EEOC consultants, census advisory panels). No general public trust premium exists for the title.",
        "plausibility": "plausible",
        "would_add": 2
      }
    ],
    "ceiling_note": "Liability shield has no realistic route — there is no sociology licensure anywhere in the US and no professional body seeking one, so signature authority cannot attach. The binding constraint is funding, not capability: grant and tenure-line contraction removes positions regardless of what models can do, so capability-side gains do not translate into employment."
  },
  "adjudication": {
    "method": "two independent runs agreed on the verdict",
    "outcome": "corroborated",
    "run_totals": [
      34,
      34
    ],
    "run_verdicts": [
      "EXPOSED",
      "EXPOSED"
    ]
  },
  "employment_history": {
    "points": [
      {
        "y": 2017,
        "emp": 2770,
        "wage": 79650
      },
      {
        "y": 2018,
        "emp": 2710,
        "wage": 82050
      },
      {
        "y": 2019,
        "emp": 2630,
        "wage": 83420
      },
      {
        "y": 2020,
        "emp": 2470,
        "wage": 86110
      },
      {
        "y": 2021,
        "emp": 2640,
        "wage": 92910
      },
      {
        "y": 2022,
        "emp": 2980,
        "wage": 98590
      },
      {
        "y": 2023,
        "emp": 2890,
        "wage": 101770
      },
      {
        "y": 2024,
        "emp": 2950,
        "wage": 101690
      },
      {
        "y": 2025,
        "emp": 2260,
        "wage": 106030
      }
    ],
    "from": 2017,
    "to": 2025,
    "change_pct": -18.4,
    "comparable_from": 2019,
    "spans_soc_revision": true
  },
  "pivots": [
    {
      "slug": "anthropology-and-archeology-teachers-postsecondary",
      "title": "Anthropology and Archeology Teachers, Postsecondary",
      "verdict": "EXPOSED",
      "risk_resistance": 51,
      "median_wage": 99650,
      "overlap": 88,
      "skills_to_close": [
        "Instructing",
        "Speaking",
        "Reading Comprehension",
        "Time Management"
      ]
    },
    {
      "slug": "law-teachers-postsecondary",
      "title": "Law Teachers, Postsecondary",
      "verdict": "EXPOSED",
      "risk_resistance": 59,
      "median_wage": 128500,
      "overlap": 79,
      "skills_to_close": [
        "Instructing",
        "Speaking"
      ]
    },
    {
      "slug": "economics-teachers-postsecondary",
      "title": "Economics Teachers, Postsecondary",
      "verdict": "EXPOSED",
      "risk_resistance": 45,
      "median_wage": 123920,
      "overlap": 79,
      "skills_to_close": []
    }
  ],
  "license": "https://cookedindex.com/terms"
}