Abstract
Measures of textual similarity and divergence are increasingly used to studycultural change. But which measures align, in practice, with social evidenceabout change? We apply three different representations of text (topic models,document embeddings, and word-level perplexity) to three different corpora(literary studies, economics, and fiction). In every case, works byhighly-cited authors and younger authors are textually ahead of the curve. Wedon't find clear evidence that one representation of text is to be preferredover the others. But alignment with social evidence is strongest when texts arerepresented through the top quartile of passages, suggesting that a text'simpact may depend more on its most forward-looking moments than on sustaining ahigh level of innovation throughout.