Collective intelligence

Collective intelligence (Alternative names for this keyword)
Related keyword(s)	Unknown [+]
Export and share
BibTeX, CSV, RDF, JSON
Browse properties · List of keywords

Collective intelligence is included as keyword or extra keyword in 0 datasets, 0 tools and 7 publications.

Datasets

There is no datasets for this keyword.

Tools

There is no tools for this keyword.

Publications

Title	Author(s)	Published in	Language	DateThis property is a special property in this wiki.	Abstract	R	C
Mass Collaboration or Mass Amateurism? A comparative study on the quality of scientific information produced using Wiki tools and concepts	Fernando Rodrigues	Universidade Évora	Portuguese	December 2012	With this PhD dissertation, we intend to contribute to a better understanding of the Wiki phenomenon as a knowledge management system which aggregates private knowledge. We also wish to check to what extent information generated through anonymous and freely bestowed mass collaboration is reliable as opposed to the traditional approach. In order to achieve that goal, we develop a comparative study between Wikipedia and Encyclopaedia Britannica with regard to accuracy, depth and detail of information in both, in order to confront the quality of the knowledge repository produced by them. That will allow us to reach a conclusion about the efficacy of the business models behind them. We will use a representative random sample which is composed by the articles that are comprised in both encyclopedias. Each pair of articles was previously reformatted and then graded by an expert in its subject area. At the same time, we collected a small convenience sample which only integrates Management articles. Each pair of articles was graded by several experts in order to determine the uncertainty associated with having diverse gradings of the same article and apply it to the evaluations carried out by just one expert. The conclusion was that the average quality of the Wikipedia articles which were analysed was superior to its peers’ and that this difference was statistically significant. An inquiry was conducted within the academia which certified that traditional information sources were used by a minority as the first approach to seeking information. This inquiry also made clear that reliance on these sources was considerably larger than reliance on information obtained through Wikipedia. This quality perception, as well as the diametrically opposed results of its evaluation through a blind test, reinforces the evaluating panel’s exemption. However much the chosen sample is representative of the universe to be studied, results have depended on the evaluators’ personal opinion and chosen criteria. This means that the reproducibility of this study’s conclusions using a different grading panel cannot be guaranteed. Nevertheless, this is not enough of a reason to reject the study results obtained through more than five hundred evaluations. This thesis is thus an attempt to help clarifying this topic and contributing to a better perception of the quality of a tool which is daily used by millions of people, of the mass collaboration which feeds it and of the collaborative software that supports it.	0	0
A Research for the Centrality of Article Edit Collective in Wikipedia	Dongjie Zhao Haitao Yang Jian Jiang Deyi Li Haisu Zhang	ICM	English	2011		0	0
A Wiki-based collective intelligence approach to formulate a body of knowledge (BOK) for a new discipline	Yoshifumi Masunaga Yoshiyuki Shoji Kazunari Ito	WikiSym	English	2010		0	0
Beyond Wikipedia: Coordination and Conflict in Online Production Groups	Aniket Kittur Robert E. Kraut	Computer-Supported Cooperative Work	English	2010	Online production groups have the potential to transform the way that knowledge is produced and disseminated. One of the most widely used forms of online production is the wiki, which has been used in domains ranging from science to education to enterprise. We examined the development of and interactions between coordination and conflict in a sample of 6811 wiki production groups. We investigated the influence of four coordination mechanisms: intra-article communication, inter-user communication, concentration of workgroup structure, and policy and procedures. We also examined the growth of conflict, finding the density of users in an information space to be a significant predictor. Finally, we analyzed the effectiveness of the four coordination mechanisms on managing conflict, finding differences in how each scaled to large numbers of contributors. Our results suggest that coordination mechanisms effective for managing conflict are not always the same as those effective for managing task quality, and that designers must take into account the social benefits of coordination mechanisms in addition to their production benefits.	0	2
Collective wisdom: information growth in wikis and blogs	Sanmay Das Malik Magdon-Ismail	EC	English	2010		0	0
On Supporting HCOME-3O Ontology Argumentation Using Semantic Wiki Technology	Konstantinos Kotis	OTM	English	2008		0	0
How and why Wikipedia works: an interview with Angela Beesley, Elisabeth Bauer, and Kizu Naoko	Dirk Riehle	WikiSym	English	2006	This article presents an interview with Angela Beesley, Elisabeth Bauer, and Kizu Naoko. All three are leading Wikipedia practitioners in the English, German, and Japanese Wikipedias and related projects. The interview focuses on how Wikipedia works and why these three practitioners believe it will keep working. The interview was conducted via email in preparation of WikiSym 2006, the 2006 International Symposium on Wikis, with the goal of furthering Wikipedia research. Interviewer was Dirk Riehle, the chair of WikiSym 2006. An online version of the article provides simplified access to URLs.	0	1