I think this section addresses that sort of bias (a limitation of the used data):
>The availability of large-scale historical records of published languages going back centuries may provide a unique opportunity for the quantitative investigation of important cultural and linguistic dynamics (“culturomics”) (21), while acknowledging limitations with respect to verifying hypotheses and testing the causal mechanisms that underlie any observations from these data.
I enjoyed that overall the article does not try to sell the idea that there is/was an actual change in the society, but rather showing how this analysis may be an indicator of that and inciting future work on the topic.
>The availability of large-scale historical records of published languages going back centuries may provide a unique opportunity for the quantitative investigation of important cultural and linguistic dynamics (“culturomics”) (21), while acknowledging limitations with respect to verifying hypotheses and testing the causal mechanisms that underlie any observations from these data.
I enjoyed that overall the article does not try to sell the idea that there is/was an actual change in the society, but rather showing how this analysis may be an indicator of that and inciting future work on the topic.