Aaron Halfaker

From WikiPapers
Jump to: navigation, search

Aaron Halfaker is an author from United States.

Publications

Only those publications related to wikis are shown here.
Title Keyword(s) Published in Language DateThis property is a special property in this wiki. Abstract R C
Snuggle: Designing for efficient socialization and ideological critique H.5.2. Information Interfaces and Presentation: Graphical user interfaces (GUI) Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - Proceedings English 2014 Wikipedia, the encyclopedia "anyone can edit", has become increasingly less so. Recent academic research and popular discourse illustrates the often aggressive ways newcomers are treated by veteran Wikipedians. These are complex sociotechnical issues, bound up in infrastructures based on problematic ideologies. In response, we worked with a coalition of Wikipedians to design, develop, and deploy Snuggle, a new user interface that served two critical functions: Making the work of newcomer socialization more effective, and bringing visibility to instances in which Wikipedians current practice of gatekeeping socialization breaks down. Snuggle supports positive socialization by helping mentors quickly find newcomers whose good-faith mistakes were reverted as damage. Snuggle also supports ideological critique and reflection by bringing visibility to the consequences of viewing newcomers through a lens of suspiciousness. 0 0
Making Peripheral Participation Legitimate: Reader Engagement Experiments in Wikipedia Wikipedia
Social learning
Legitimate peripheral participation
Quatitative
Experiment
Participation
Open production
Computer-Supported Cooperative Work English 2013 Open collaboration communities thrive when participation is plentiful. Recent research has shown that the English Wikipedia community has constructed a vast and accurate information resource primarily through the monumental effort of a relatively small number of active, volunteer editors. Beyond Wikipedia's active editor community is a substantially larger pool of potential participants: readers. In this paper we describe a set of field experiments using the Article Feedback Tool, a system designed to elicit lightweight contributions from Wikipedia's readers. Through the lens of social learning theory and comparisons to related work in open bug tracking software, we evaluate the costs and benefits of the expanded participation model and show both qualitatively and quantitatively that peripheral contributors add value to an open collaboration community as long as the cost of identifying low quality contributions remains low. 8 0
Making peripheral participation legitimate: Reader engagement experiments in wikipedia Experiment
Legitimate peripheral participation
Open production
Participation
Quatitative
Social learning
Wikipedia
English 2013 Open collaboration communities thrive when participation is plentiful. Recent research has shown that the English Wikipedia community has constructed a vast and accurate information resource primarily through the monumental effort of a relatively small number of active, volunteer editors. Beyond Wikipedia's active editor community is a substantially larger pool of potential participants: readers. In this paper we describe a set of field experiments using the Article Feedback Tool, a system designed to elicit lightweight contributions fromWikipedia's readers. Through the lens of social learning theory and comparisons to related work in open bug tracking software, we evaluate the costs and benefits of the expanded participation model and show both qualitatively and quantitatively that peripheral contributors add value to an open collaboration community as long as the cost of identifying low quality contributions remains low. Copyright 2013 ACM. 0 0
The Rise and Decline of an Open Collaboration System: How Wikipedia's Reaction to Popularity Is Causing Its Decline Governance
Peer production
Quality control
Retention
Wikipedia
American Behavioral Scientist English 2013 Open collaboration systems, such as Wikipedia, need to maintain a pool of volunteer contributors to remain relevant. Wikipedia was created through a tremendous number of contributions by millions of contributors. However, recent research has shown that the number of active contributors in Wikipedia has been declining steadily for years and suggests that a sharp decline in the retention of newcomers is the cause. This article presents data that show how several changes the Wikipedia community made to manage quality and consistency in the face of a massive growth in participation have ironically crippled the very growth they were designed to manage. Specifically, the restrictiveness of the encyclopedia's primary quality control mechanism and the algorithmic tools used to reject contributions are implicated as key causes of decreased newcomer retention. Furthermore, the community's formal mechanisms for norm articulation are shown to have calcified against changes-especially changes proposed by newer editors. 0 0
The Rise and Decline of an Open Collaboration System: How Wikipedia's Reaction to Sudden Popularity is Causing its Decline American Behavioral Scientist English 2013 Open collaboration systems like Wikipedia need to maintain a pool of volunteer contributors in order to remain relevant. Wikipedia was created through a tremendous number of contributions by millions of contributors. However, recent research has shown that the number of active contributors in Wikipedia has been declining steadily for years, and suggests that a sharp decline in the retention of newcomers is the cause. This paper presents data that show that several changes the Wikipedia community made to manage quality and consistency in the face of a massive growth in participation have ironically crippled the very growth they were designed to manage. Specifically, the restrictiveness of the encyclopedia's primary quality control mechanism and the algorithmic tools used to reject contributions are implicated as key causes of decreased newcomer retention. Further, the community's formal mechanisms for norm articulation are shown to have calcified against changes – especially changes proposed by newer editors. 22 0
Using edit sessions to measure participation in wikipedia Activity
Labor
Labor-hours
Peer production
Quantitative methods
Sessions
Wikipedia
Work
Work practices
English 2013 Many quantitative, log-based studies of participation and contribution in CSCW and CMC systems measure the activity of users in terms of output, based on metrics like posts to forums, edits to Wikipedia articles, or commits to code repositories. In this paper, we instead seek to estimate the amount of time users have spent contributing. Through an analysis of Wikipedia log data, we identify a pattern of punctuated bursts in editors' activity that we refer to as edit sessions. Based on these edit sessions, we build a metric that approximates the labor hours of editors in the encyclopedia. Using this metric, we first compare labor-based analyses with output-based analyses, finding that the activity of many editors can appear quite differently based on the kind of metric used. Second, we use edit session data to examine phenomena that cannot be adequately studied with purely output-based metrics, such as the total number of labor hours for the entire project. Copyright 2013 ACM. 0 0
When the levee breaks: Without bots, what happens to wikipedia's quality control processes? Automation
Robot
Information quality
Peer production
Socio-technical systems
Software agents
Wikipedia
Proceedings of the 9th International Symposium on Open Collaboration, WikiSym + OpenSym 2013 English 2013 In the first half of 2011, ClueBot NG - one of the most prolific counter-vandalism bots in the English-language Wikipedia - went down for four distinct periods, each period of downtime lasting from days to weeks. In this paper, we use these periods of breakdown as naturalistic experiments to study Wikipedia's heterogeneous quality control network, which we analyze as a multi-tiered system in which distinct classes of reviewers use various reviewing technologies to patrol for different kinds of damage at staggered time periods. Our analysis showed that the overall time-to-revert edits was almost doubled when this software agent was down. Yet while a significantly fewer proportion of edits made during the bot's downtime were reverted, we found that those edits were later eventually reverted. This suggests that other agents in Wikipedia took over this quality control work, but performed it at a far slower rate. Categories and Subject Descriptors H.5.3 [Information Systems]: Group and Organization Interfaces-computer-supported collaborative work. Copyright 2010 ACM. 0 0
Bots and cyborgs: Wikipedia's immune system Robot
Cyborgs
Social computing
Wikipedia
Computer English 2012 Bots and cyborgs are more than tools to better manage content quality on Wikipediathrough their interaction with humans, they're fundamentally changing its culture. 0 0
What aren't we measuring?: Methods for quantifying wiki-work Measure
Method
Metric
Open collaboration
Peer production
Wiki
WikiSym 2012 English 2012 Wikis and other open collaboration systems rely on the work of contributors to survive. But what is work and how do we quantify it? Answering this question in the right context is essential for attaining robust and generalizable results across open contribution systems. Our goal is to develop a repertoire of metrics and understand their possible dimensions in order to refine our ability as a research community to measure wikis and wiki activity appropriately across a wide range of contexts. This panel explores the current practice of measuring work in wikis, offers perspectives about the limitations of current approaches and suggests new opportunities for measuring contribution behavior. 0 0
Don't bite the newbies: how reverts affect the quantity and quality of Wikipedia work WikiWork
Wikipedia
Experience
Motivation
Productivity
Quality
Revert
WikiSym English 2011 Reverts are important to maintaining the quality of Wikipedia. They fix mistakes, repair vandalism, and help enforce policy. However, reverts can also be damaging, especially to the aspiring editor whose work they destroy. In this research we analyze 400,000 Wikipedia revisions to understand the effect that reverts had on editors. We seek to understand the extent to which they demotivate users, reducing the workforce of contributors, versus the extent to which they help users improve as encyclopedia editors. Overall we find that reverts are powerfully demotivating, but that their net influence is that more quality work is done in Wikipedia as a result of reverts than is lost by chasing editors away. However, we identify key conditions – most specifically new editors being reverted by much more experienced editors – under which reverts are particularly damaging. We propose that reducing the damage from reverts might be one effective path for Wikipedia to solve the newcomer retention problem. 0 2
NICE: Social translucence through UI intervention Contribution
Experiment
Interface
Revert
Wikipedia
WikiSym 2011 Conference Proceedings - 7th Annual International Symposium on Wikis and Open Collaboration English 2011 Social production systems such as Wikipedia rely on attracting and motivating volunteer contributions to be successful. One strong demotivating factor can be when an editor's work is discarded, or "reverted", by others. In this paper we demonstrate evidence of this effect and design a novel interface aimed at improving communication between the reverting and reverted editors. We deployed the interface in a controlled experiment on the live Wikipedia site, and report on changes in the behavior of 487 contributors who were reverted by editors using our interface. Our results suggest that simple interface modifications (such as informing Wikipedians that the editor they are reverting is a newcomer) can have substantial positive effects in protecting against contribution loss in newcomers and improving the quality of work done by more experienced contributors. 0 0
A Jury of your Peers: Quality, Experience and Ownership in Wikipedia Wikipedia peer peer review wikiwork experience ownership quality WikiSym2009: Symposium on Wikis and Open Collaboration 2009 Wikipedia is a highly successful example of what mass collaboration in an informal peer review system can accomplish. In this paper, we examine the role that the quality of the contributions, the experience of the contributors and the ownership of the content play in the decisions over which contributions become part of Wikipedia and which ones are rejected by the community. We introduce and justify a versatile metric for automatically measuring the quality of a contribution. We find little evidence that experience helps contributors avoid rejection. In fact, as they gain experience, contributors are even more likely to have their work rejected. We also find strong evidence of ownership behaviors in practice despite the fact that ownership of content is discouraged within Wikipedia. 0 6
A jury of your peers: Quality, experience and ownership in Wikipedia Experience
Ownership
Peer
Peer review
Quality
Wikipedia
WikiWork
WikiSym English 2009 Wikipedia is a highly successful example of what mass collaboration in an informal peer review system can accomplish. In this paper, we examine the role that the quality of the contributions, the experience of the contributors and the ownership of the content play in the decisions over which contributions become part of Wikipedia and which ones are rejected by the community. We introduce and justify a versatile metric for automatically measuring the quality of a contribution. We find little evidence that experience helps contributors avoid rejection. In fact, as they gain experience, contributors are even more likely to have their work rejected. We also find strong evidence of ownership behaviors in practice despite the fact that ownership of content is discouraged within Wikipedia. Copyright 0 6
Wikipedians are born, not made: A study of power editors on Wikipedia Collaboration
Contribution
Power editors
Wiki
Wikipedia
GROUP'09 - Proceedings of the 2009 ACM SIGCHI International Conference on Supporting Group Work English 2009 Open content web sites depend on users to produce information of value. Wikipedia is the largest and most well-known such site. Previous work has shown that a small fraction of editors - Wikipedians - do most of the work and produce most of the value. Other work has offered conjectures about how Wikipedians differ from other editors and how Wikipedians change over time. We quantify and test these conjectures. Our key findings include: Wikipedians' edits last longer; Wikipedians invoke community norms more often to justify their edits; on many dimensions of activity, Wikipedians start intensely, tail off a little, then maintain a relatively high level of activity over the course of their career. Finally, we show that the amount of work done by Wikipedians and non-Wikipedians differs significantly from their very first day. Our results suggest a design opportunity: customizing the initial user experience to improve retention and channel new users' intense energy. 0 5
Wikipedians are born, not made: a study of power editors on Wikipedia GROUP English 2009 Open content web sites depend on users to produce information of value. Wikipedia is the largest and most well-known such site. Previous work has shown that a small fraction of editors --Wikipedians -- do most of the work and produce most of the value. Other work has offered conjectures about how Wikipedians differ from other editors and how Wikipedians change over time. We quantify and test these conjectures. Our key findings include: Wikipedians' edits last longer; Wikipedians invoke community norms more often to justify their edits; on many dimensions of activity, Wikipedians start intensely, tail off a little, then maintain a relatively high level of activity over the course of their career. Finally, we show that the amount of work done by Wikipedians and non-Wikipedians differs significantly from their very first day. Our results suggest a design opportunity: customizing the initial user experience to improve retention and channel new users' intense energy. 0 5