This review aims to map the literature on crisis and disasters by means of a machine‐read assessment of the scholarly debate in these domains. The software analyzed abstracts of over 1,000 articles of four related crisis and disaster journals—to find out how the software categorizes their content in a set of topics, what the dominant topics of discussion are, how the topics are distributed over the journals, and what profiles the journals de facto have. The review reflects on the advantages and the limits of machine‐read classification and analysis vis‐à‐vis the manual approach. The conclusion offers an agenda for further research and debate.

中文翻译：

---

手动还是机器？危机与灾难文学述评

这篇综述旨在通过对这些领域学术辩论的机器阅读评估，来绘制有关危机和灾难的文献。该软件分析了四个相关危机和灾难杂志的1000篇文章的摘要，以了解该软件如何将它们的内容分类为一组主题，讨论的主要主题是什么，主题在期刊上的分布方式以及什么？事实期刊的简介。审查反映了相对于手动方法的机器读取分类和分析的优点和局限性。结论为进一步研究和辩论提供了议程。