(Alternative names for this keyword)
|Export and share|
|BibTeX, CSV, RDF, JSON|
|Browse properties · List of keywords|
conflict is included as keyword or extra keyword in 0 datasets, 0 tools and 22 publications.
There is no datasets for this keyword.
There is no tools for this keyword.
|Title||Author(s)||Published in||Language||DateThis property is a special property in this wiki.||Abstract||R||C|
|Jointly They Edit: Examining the Impact of Community Identification on Political Interaction in Wikipedia||Jessica J. Neff
Karolin E. Kappler
|PLOS ONE||English||3 April 2013||Background
In their 2005 study, Adamic and Glance coined the memorable phrase ‘divided they blog’, referring to a trend of cyberbalkanization in the political blogosphere, with liberal and conservative blogs tending to link to other blogs with a similar political slant, and not to one another. As political discussion and activity increasingly moves online, the power of framing political discourses is shifting from mass media to social media.
Continued examination of political interactions online is critical, and we extend this line of research by examining the activities of political users within the Wikipedia community. First, we examined how users in Wikipedia choose to display their political affiliation. Next, we analyzed the patterns of cross-party interaction and community participation among those users proclaiming a political affiliation. In contrast to previous analyses of other social media, we did not find strong trends indicating a preference to interact with members of the same political party within the Wikipedia community.
Conclusions/SignificanceOur results indicate that users who proclaim their political affiliation within the community tend to proclaim their identity as a ‘Wikipedian’ even more loudly. It seems that the shared identity of ‘being Wikipedian’ may be strong enough to triumph over other potentially divisive facets of personal identity, such as political affiliation.
|The role of conflict in determining consensus on quality in wikipedia articles||Osman K.||Proceedings of the 9th International Symposium on Open Collaboration, WikiSym + OpenSym 2013||English||2013||This paper presents research that investigated the role of conflict in the editorial process of the online encyclopedia, Wikipedia. The study used a grounded approach to analyzing 147 conversations about quality from the archived history of the Wikipedia article Australia. It found that conflict in Wikipedia is a generative friction, regulated by references to policy as part of a coordinated effort within the community to improve the quality of articles. Categories and Subject Descriptors K.4.3 [Computers and society]: Organizational Impacts - Computer-supported collaborative work. General Terms Human Factors, Theory. Copyright 2010 ACM.||0||0|
|Value Production in a Collaborative Environment: Sociophysical Studies of Wikipedia||Taha Yasseri
|Journal of Statistical Physics||English||2013||We review some recent endeavors and add some new results to characterize and understand underlying mechanisms in Wikipedia (WP), the paradigmatic example of collaborative value production. We analyzed the statistics of editorial activity in different languages and observed typical circadian and weekly patterns, which enabled us to estimate the geographical origins of contributions to WPs in languages spoken in several time zones. Using a recently introduced measure we showed that the editorial activities have intrinsic dependencies in the burstiness of events. A comparison of the English and Simple English WPs revealed important aspects of language complexity and showed how peer cooperation solved the task of enhancing readability. One of our focus issues was characterizing the conflicts or edit wars in WPs, which helped us to automatically filter out controversial pages. When studying the temporal evolution of the controversiality of such pages we identified typical patterns and classified conflicts accordingly. Our quantitative analysis provides the basis of modeling conflicts and their resolution in collaborative environments and contribute to the understanding of this issue, which becomes increasingly important with the development of information communication technology.||0||0|
|Collaboration amidst disagreement and moral judgment: The dynamics of Jewish and Arab students' collaborative inquiry of their joint past||Pollack S.
|International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning||English||2012||We present an instructional model involving a computer-supported collaborative learning environment, in which students from two conflicting groups collaboratively investigate an event relevant to their past using historical texts. We traced one enactment of the model by a group comprised of two Israeli Jewish and two Israeli Arab students. Our data sources included the texts participants wrote-pre-, post- and during the activity, jointly and individually-the transcripts of the e-discussion and reflections written after the activity. The setting enabled us to further our understanding of what collaboration means when students' voices do not converge. We examined whether the activity was productive in terms of learning, and the dynamics of collaboration within the milieu, especially the intersubjective meaning making. The e-discussion that was co-constructed by participants was a chain of disagreements. However, participants' reflections reveal that the group structure and the e-communication method were perceived as affording sensitive collaboration. Furthermore, a comparison between the individual texts, pre- and post- the group discussion, revealed that the activity was productive, since students moved from a one-sided presentation of the event to a more multi-sided representation. Based on the analysis of the e-discussion, we conclude that the setting provided students with opportunities to examine their voices in light of alternatives. We propose the term fission to articulate certain moments of intersubjectivity, where a crack is formed in one's voice as the Other's voice impacts it, and one's voice become more polyphonic. © 2012 International Society of the Learning Sciences, Inc.; Springer Science + Business Media, LLC.||0||0|
|Conflict, confidence, or criticism: An empirical examination of the gender gap in wikipedia||Benjamin Collier
|English||2012||A recent survey of contributors to Wikipedia found that less than 15% of contributors are women. This gender contribution gap has received significant attention from both researchers and the media. A panel of researchers and practitioners has offered several insights and opinions as to why a gender gap exists in contributions despite gender anonymity online. The gender research literature suggests that the difference in contribution rates could be due to three factors: (1) the high levels of conflict in discussions, (2) dislike of critical environments, and (3) lack of confidence in editing other contributors' work. This paper examines these hypotheses regarding the existence of the gender gap in contribution by using data from an international survey of 176,192 readers, contributors, and former contributors to Wikipedia, including measures of demographics, education, motivation, and participation. Implications for improving the design and culture of online communities to be more gender inclusive are discussed.||0||0|
|Incentivizing collaborative learning through visual feedback about conflict in Wiki||Wu K.
|CollaborateCom 2012 - Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Collaborative Computing: Networking, Applications and Worksharing||English||2012||Conflict emerging from collaboration in wiki can be helpful to achieve a better quality of collaborative learning. However, few studies have utilized conflict to support collaborative learning and wiki systems themselves have limitations. This paper proposes to provide visual feedback about conflict in wiki based on the 'page history' to create a sense of audience, psychological ownership and support information seeking. Theoretical model is built upon literature, and the Partial Least Squares (PLS) results from a survey study (208 responses) indicate that conflict awareness can motivate students to participate, achieve better conflict resolution and improve the quality of learning. The results also show that the new design is well accepted by students and can significantly enhance the influence of conflict awareness on participation and conflict resolution.||0||0|
|Entre o agrupamento e a comunidade virtual: colaboração e conflitos na edição das biografias dos jogadores “Adriano” e “Ronaldo” na Wikipédia em português||Carlos Frederico de Brito d’Andréa||XXXIV Congresso Brasileiro de Ciências da Comunicação||Portuguese||September 2011||9||0|
|Autorégulation de rapports sociaux et dispositif dans Wikipedia||Jacquemin B.||Document Numerique||French||2011||As a collaborative work, the online encyclopaedia Wikipedia leads naturally the contributors to work with each other and to face their opinions. But no frame is provided to control the collaboration, neither in the five fundamental principles, nor from the wiki software. This article studies how the contributing community thinks up original ways to promote collaboration, social exchanges and conflict resolution. The concept of device (dispositif), and especially how governance shows itself in a collaborative device, is used to analyse these ways. Two views of the power conflict in the community: one permits contributors to break the rules to strive to Wikipedia's goal; the other one makes sure to enforce strictly the rules. Even though the latter seems to prevail, there is some evidence that loyalty may sometimes be illusory.||0||0|
|Characterization and prediction of Wikipedia edit wars||Róbert Sumi
|WebSci Conference||English||2011||We present a new, eficient method for automatically detecting conict cases and test it on five diferent language Wikipedias. We discuss how the number of edits, reverts, the length of discussions deviate in such pages from those following the general workow.||4||2|
|Vandalism and conflict resolution in wikipedia. An empirical analysis on how a large-scale web-based community deals with breaches of the online peace||Roessing T.||Proceedings of the IADIS International Conferences - Web Based Communities and Social Media 2011, Social Media 2011, Internet Applications and Research 2011, Part of the IADIS, MCCSIS 2011||English||2011||The paper discusses the proceedings on the anti-vandalism page of the German language version of the online encyclopedia Wikipedia. Research questions address the structure of vandalism reports, the distribution over time of day and the relationship between conflict potential and conflict resolution. A quantitative analysis of 500 vandalism reports reveals that the anti-vandalism page is a good indicator for conflicts within the community and its deficits in dealing with them.||0||0|
|Wikipedia's "Neutral Point of View": Settling Conflict through Ambiguity||Sorin Adam Matei
|The Information Society||English||2011||0||0|
|Wikipedia's "neutral point of view": Settling conflict through ambiguity||Matei S.A.
|Information Society||English||2011||This article discusses how one of the most importantWikipedia policies, the "neutral point of view" (NPOV), is appropriated and interpreted by the participants in the Wikipedia project. By analyzing a set of constitutive documents for the Wikipedian universe, including discussion about NPOV, the authors conclude that ambiguity is at the heart of the policy process on Wikipedia. The overarching conclusion is that ambiguity onWikipedia is not extraneous, but a central ingredient of this wiki project's policymaking. Ambiguity naturally develops from the pluralist and nonhierarchic values of the culture that brought Wikipedia to life, and this conclusion requires that we reconsider the nature of "neutrality" practiced on Wikipedia. Copyright||0||0|
|As relações de poder entre editores da Wikipédia||Paulo Henrique Souto Maior Serrano||IX Encontro do Círculo de Estudos Linguísticos do Sul||Portuguese||October 2010||The collaborative encyclopedia Wikipedia is guided by several policies, recommendations and standards, developed by its community of users from five basic principles: 1) encyclopedist, 2) the neutral point of view, 3) free license, 4) how to conduct encrypted, 5) freedom in the rules (Wikipedia: 2009b). This article analyses through the greimasian´s and tensive semiotics the application of the five principles in the discussion of conflicting entries.||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||4|
|Escalada do conflito em processos colaborativos online: uma análise do verbete Web 2.0 da Wikipédia||Aline de Campos||Intexto||Portuguese||January 2010||Collaborative actions are naturally interlocking with conflict processes. In other words, collaboration can lead to conflicts and vice versa. This article discusses the implications of this mutual influence, checking the dynamics of conflict escalation often present in online collaborative practices. To do so, it examines the trajectory of building an entry from Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia, evaluating the tensions introduced in the pages of debate over the collective and computer-mediated production.||0||0|
|Understanding dispute resolution online: Using text to reflect personal and substantive issues in conflict||Billings M.
|Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - Proceedings||English||2010||Conflict is a natural part of human communication with implications for the work and well-being of a community. It can cause projects to stall or fail. Alternatively new insights can be produced that are valuable to the community, and membership can be strengthened. We describe how Wikipedia mediators create and maintain a 'safe space'. They help conflicting parties to express, recognize and respond positively to their personal and substantive differences. We show how the 'mutability' of wiki text can be used productively by mediators: to legitimize and restructure the personal and substantive issues under dispute; to actively and visibly differentiate personal from substantive elements in the dispute, and to maintain asynchronous engagement by adjusting expectations of timeliness. We argue that online conflicts could be effectively conciliated in other text-based web communities, provided power differences can be controlled, by policies and technical measures for maintaining special 'safe' conflict resolution spaces.||0||1|
|The asymmetrical influence of identity: A triadic interaction among Israeli Jews, Israeli Arabs, and historical texts||Kolikant Y.B.-D.
|Journal of Curriculum Studies||English||2009||This study engaged Israeli-Jewish and Israeli-Arab students in a joint investigation of their common past by means of secondary historical sources. The hypothesis was that a triadic interaction among agents of groups with opposing views and historical texts can foster historical thinking. It was expected that while ethnic identity would drive both sides, the mutual criticism in a setting that encourages analytic discussion would bring about learning. Following an analysis of essays written before and during the inter-ethnic collaboration as well as transcripts of students' meetings, it was found that students' work was influenced by majority-minority power relations. In a joint writing effort, the Jews dominated actions that did not directly concern the conflict, and the Arabs dominated those that did. Nonetheless, the students' epistemology evolved to recognize the interpretive nature of history and the bias inherent in humans, as reflected in the analysis of the essays.||0||0|
|What's in Wikipedia?: mapping topics and conflict using socially annotated category structure||Aniket Kittur
Ed H. Chi
|Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems||English||2009||0||1|
|What's in wikipedia? Mapping topics and conflict using socially annotated category structure||Aniket Kittur
|Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - Proceedings||English||2009||Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia which has undergone tremendous growth. However, this same growth has made it difficult to characterize its content and coverage. In this paper we develop measures to map Wikipedia using its socially annotated, hierarchical category structure. We introduce a mapping technique that takes advantage of socially-annotated hierarchical categories while dealing with the inconsistencies and noise inherent in the distributed way that they are generated. The technique is demonstrated through two applications: mapping the distribution of topics in Wikipedia and how they have changed over time; and mapping the degree of conflict found in each topic area. We also discuss the utility of the approach for other applications and datasets involving collaboratively annotated category hierarchies. Copyright 2009 ACM.||0||1|
|Managing conflicts between users in Wikipedia||Jacquemin B.
|CEUR Workshop Proceedings||English||2008||Wikipedia is nowadays a widely used encyclopedia, and one of the most visible sites on the Internet. Its strong principle of collaborative work and free editing sometimes generates disputes due to disagreements between users. In this article we study how the wikipedian community resolves the conflicts and which roles do wikipedian choose in this process. We observed the users behavior both in the article talk pages, and in the Arbitration Committee pages specifically dedicated to serious disputes. We first set up a users typology according to their involvement in conflicts and their publishing and management activity in the encyclopedia. We then used those user types to describe users behavior in contributing to articles that are tagged by the wikipedian community as being in conflict with the official guidelines of Wikipedia, or conversely as being well featured.||0||0|
|Ambiguity and conflict in the Wikipedian knowledge production system||Caius Dobrescu Sorin Adam Matei||International Communication Association Annual Conference, Dresden, Germany||2006||The paper analyzes the manner in which the most important implicit explanatory framework, emergence theory, and the central Wikipedia policy, the "Neutral point of view," are appropriated and reinterpreted by Wikipedia actors. Analyzing mailing list messages posted on Wikipedia-l and on Wikipedia's "Neutral Point of View Policy" discussion page (a footnoting space used for coordinating the editorial process on Wikipedia) the paper comes to the conclusion that the debates are often conflictual and their solution is found in ambiguity. The overarching conclusion is that conflict and ambiguity on Wikipedia are not extraneous, but central ingredients of this wiki project. They naturally develop from the pluralist and non-hierarchic nature of the medium and of the culture that brought it to life.||0||1|