First Monday

From WikiPapers
Jump to: navigation, search


Publications

Only those publications related to wikis already available at WikiPapers are shown here.
Title Author(s) Keyword(s) Language DateThis property is a special property in this wiki. Abstract R C
The visibility of Wikipedia in scholarly publications Taemin Kim Park English 1 August 2011 Publications in the Institute of Scientific Information’s (ISI, currently Thomson Reuters) Web of Science (WoS) and Elsevier’s Scopus databases were utilized to collect data about Wikipedia research and citations to Wikipedia. The growth of publications on Wikipedia research, the most active researchers, their associated institutions, academic fields and their geographic distribution are treated in this paper. The impact and influence of Wikipedia were identified, utilizing cited work found in (WoS) and Scopus. Additionally, leading authors, affiliated institutions, countries, academic fields, and publications that frequently cite Wikipedia are identified. 18 2
Evaluating WikiTrust: A trust support tool for Wikipedia Teun Lucassen
Jan Maarten Schraagen
English May 2011 Because of the open character of Wikipedia readers should always be aware of the possibility of false information. WikiTrust aims at helping readers to judge the trustworthiness of articles by coloring the background of less trustworthy words in a shade of orange. In this study we look into the effects of such coloring on reading behavior and trust evaluation by means of an eye–tracking experiment. The results show that readers had more difficulties reading the articles with coloring than without coloring. Trust in heavily colored articles was lower. The main concern is that the participants in our experiment rated usefulness of WikiTrust low. 7 0
Credibility judgment and verification behavior of college students concerning Wikipedia Lim
S. and Simon
C.
Wikipedia; credibility; theory of bounded rationality; verification; college students 2011 This study examines credibility judgments in relation to peripheral cues and genre of Wikipedia articles, and attempts to understand user information verification behavior based on the theory of bounded rationality. Data were collected employing both an experiment and a survey at a large public university in the midwestern United States in Spring 2010. This study shows some interesting patterns. It appears that the effect of peripheral cues on credibility judgments differed according to genre. Those who did not verify information displayed a higher level of satisficing than those who did. Students used a variety of peripheral cues of Wikipedia. The exploratory data show that peer endorsement may be more important than formal authorities for user generated information sources, such as Wikipedia, which calls for further research. 0 0
Evaluating WikiTrust: A Trust Support Tool for Wikipedia Jan Maarten Schraagen Teun Lucassen Wikipedia
Trust
WikiTrust
Support
2011 Because of the open character of Wikipedia readers should always be aware of the possibility of false information. WikiTrust aims at helping readers to judge the trustworthiness of articles by coloring the background of less trustworthy words in a shade of orange. In this study we look into the effects of such coloring on reading behavior and trust evaluation by means of an eye–tracking experiment. The results show that readers had more difficulties reading the articles with coloring than without coloring. Trust in heavily colored articles was lower. The main concern is that the participants in our experiment rated usefulness of WikiTrust low. 0 0
Understanding collaboration in Wikipedia Royce Kimmons English 2011 Wikipedia stands as an undeniable success in online participation and collaboration. However, previous attempts at studying collaboration within Wikipedia have focused on simple metrics like rigor (i.e., the number of revisions in an article’s revision history) and diversity (i.e., the number of authors that have contributed to a given article) or have made generalizations about collaboration within Wikipedia based upon the content validity of a few select articles. By looking more closely at metrics associated with each extant Wikipedia article (N=3,427,236) along with all revisions (N=225,226,370), this study attempts to understand what collaboration within Wikipedia actually looks like under the surface. Findings suggest that typical Wikipedia articles are not rigorous, in a collaborative sense, and do not reflect much diversity in the construction of content and macro–structural writing, leading to the conclusion that most articles in Wikipedia are not reflective of the collaborative efforts of the community but, rather, represent the work of relatively few contributors. 8 1
Beyond the legacy of the Enlightenment? Online encyclopaedias as digital heterotopias J. Haider
O. Sundin
2010 This article explores how we can understand contemporary participatory online encyclopaedic expressions, particularly Wikipedia, in their traditional role as continuation of the Enlightenment ideal, as well as in the distinctly different space of the Internet. Firstly we position these encyclopaedias in a historical tradition. Secondly, we assign them a place in contemporary digital networks which marks them out as sites in which Enlightenment ideals of universal knowledge take on a new shape. We argue that the Foucauldian concept of heterotopia, that is special spaces which exist within society, transferred online, can serve to understand Wikipedia and similar participatory online encyclopaedias in their role as unique spaces for the construction of knowledge, memory and culture in late modern society. 0 1
Evaluating quality control of Wikipedia's feature articIes D. Lindsey 2010 The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of Wikipedia's premier internal quality control mechanism, the featured article" process which assesses articles against a stringent set of criteria. To this end scholars were asked to evaluate the quality and accuracy of Wikipedia featured articles within their area of expertise. A total of 22 usable responses were collected from a variety of disciplines. Out of the Wikipedia articles assessed only 12 of 22 were found to pass Wikipedia's own featured article criteria indicating that Wikipedia's process is ineffective. This finding suggests both that Wikipedia must take steps to improve its featured article process and that scholars interested in studying Wikipedia should be careful not to naively believe its assertions of quality." 0 0
How today's college students use Wikipedia for course-related research A.J. Head
M.B. Eisenberg
2010 Findings are reported from student focus groups and a large-scale survey about how and why students (enrolled at six different {U.S.} colleges) use Wikipedia during the course-related research process. A majority of respondents frequently used Wikipedia for background information, but less often than they used other common resources, such as course readings and Google. Architecture, engineering, and science majors were more likely to use Wikipedia for course-related research than respondents in other majors. The findings suggest Wikipedia is used in combination with other information resources. Wikipedia meets the needs of college students because it offers a mixture of coverage, currency, convenience, and comprehensibility in a world where credibility is less of a given or an expectation from today's students. 0 0
Identifying and understanding the problems of Wikipedia's peer governance: The case of inclusionists versus deletionists V. Kostakis 2010 Wikipedia has been hailed as one of the most prominent peer projects that led to the rise of the concept of peer governance. However, criticism has been levelled against Wikipedia's mode of governance. This paper, using the Wikipedia case as a point of departure and building upon the conflict between inclusionists and deletionists, tries to identify and draw some conclusions on the problematic issue of peer governance. 0 1
Individual focus and knowledge contribution L.A. Adamic
Xiao Wei
Jiang Yang
S. Gerrish
K.K. Nam
G.S. Clarkson
2010 Before contributing new knowledge, individuals must attain requisite background knowledge or skills through schooling, training, practice, and experience. Given limited time, individuals often choose either to focus on few areas, where they build deep expertise, or to delve less deeply and distribute their attention and efforts across several areas. In this paper we measure the relationship between the narrowness of focus and the quality of contribution across a range of both traditional and recent knowledge sharing media, including scholarly articles, patents, Wikipedia, and online question and answer forums. Across all systems, we observe a small but significant positive correlation between focus and quality. 0 1
Comparing featured article groups and revision patterns correlations in Wikipedia G. Poderi 2009 Collaboratively written by thousands of people, Wikipedia produces entries which are consistent with criteria agreed by Wikipedians and of high quality. This article focuses on Wikipedia's featured articles and shows that not every contribution can be considered as being of equal quality. Two groups of articles are analysed by focusing on the edits distribution and the main editors' contribution. The research shows how these aspects of the revision patterns can change dependent upon the category to which the articles belong. 0 2
Learning in and with an open Wiki project: Wikiversity's potential in global capacity building T. Leinonen
T. Vaden
J. Suoranta
2009 There is a chance that Wikiversity will become the Internet's free university just as Wikipedia is the free encyclopedia on the Internet. The building of an educational entity demands considering a number of philosophical and practical questions such as pedagogy and organization. In this paper we will address some of these, starting by introducing several earlier approaches and ideas related to wikis' potential for education. We continue by presenting three commonly used metaphors of learning: acquisition, participation and knowledge creation. Then we will present the main principles of two existing alternative educational approaches: free {aduH} education and free school movement. To test these educational approaches and practices on Wikiversity and increase our understanding of the possibilities of this initiative, in the spring of 2008 we implemented an experimental course in Wikiversity. We conclude with several recommendations essentially advocating for Wikiversity and the use of wikis in education. However, more than just presenting our opinions, as authors we aim to make an educated - traditionally and in the wiki way - contribution to the international discussion about the future of education for all in the digital era. 0 0
Learning in and with an open wiki project: Wikiversity's potential in global capacity building English 2009 0 0
Wikiversity; or education meets the free culture movement: An ethnographic investigation Norm Friesen
Janet Hopkins
English 6 October 2008 Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia, has challenged the way that reference works are used and understood, and even the way that the collective enterprise of knowledge construction and circulation is itself conceptualized. The article presents an ethnographic study of Wikiversity, an educationally–oriented sister project to Wikipedia. It begins by providing an overview of the orientations and aims of Wikiversity, which seeks to provide for participants both open educational contents and an open educational community. It then undertakes a detailed examination of this project’s emerging, overlapping communities and cultures by providing descriptions produced through a combination of ethnographic techniques. These descriptions focus on the experiences of a participant–observer in the context of an 11–week course developed and delivered via Wikiversity, titled Composing Free and Open Online Educational Resources. These descriptions are discussed and interpreted through reference to qualitative studies of the more developed dynamics of the Wikipedia effort — allowing this study to trace the possible trajectories for the future development of the fledgling Wikiversity project. In this way, this paper investigates the communal and cultural dynamics of an undertaking that — should it meet only with a fraction of Wikipedia’s success — will be of obvious significance to education generally. 2 0
Early response to false claims in Wikipedia P.D. Magnus 2008 A number of studies have assessed the reliability of entries in Wikipedia at specific times. One important difference between Wikipedia and traditional media, however, is the dynamic nature of its entries. An entry assessed today might be substantially extended or reworked tomorrow. This study paper assesses the frequency with which small, inaccurate changes are quickly corrected. 0 3
The reach and richness of Wikipedia: is Wikinomics only for rich countries? M. Rask 2008 This study examined the impact of technological and economic factors on the global diffusion of Wikinomics among developed and developing countries. Examining different language editions of Wikipedia, this study found significant correlation between a variety of socio-economic factors and involvement in Wikipedia. 0 1
Visualizing the overlap between the 100 most visited pages on Wikipedia for September 2006 to January 2007 A. Spoerri 2008 This paper compares the monthly lists of the 100 most visited Wikipedia pages for the period of September 2006 to January 2007. {searchCrystal} is used to visualize the overlap between the five monthly Top 100 lists to show which pages are highly visited in all five months; which pages in four of the five months and so on. It is shown that almost 40 percent of a month's top 100 pages are visited in all five months, whereas 25 percent are highly visited only in a single month. The presented visualizations make it possible to gain quick insights into the overlap and topical relationships between the monthly lists. 0 0
Scientific citations in Wikipedia Finn Årup Nielsen Wikipedia
Citations
Information quality
English 6 August 2007 The Internet–based encyclopædia Wikipedia has grown to become one of the most visited Web sites on the Internet, but critics have questioned the quality of entries. An empirical study of Wikipedia found errors in a 2005 sample of science entries. Biased coverage and lack of sources are among the “Wikipedia risks.” This paper describes a simple assessment of these aspects by examining the outbound links from Wikipedia articles to articles in scientific journals with a comparison against journal statistics from Journal Citation Reports such as impact factors. The results show an increasing use of structured citation markup and good agreement with citation patterns seen in the scientific literature though with a slight tendency to cite articles in high–impact journals such as Nature and Science. These results increase confidence in Wikipedia as a reliable information resource for science in general. 7 7
What is popular on Wikipedia and why? A. Spoerri 2007 This paper analyzes which pages and topics are the most popular on Wikipedia and why. For the period of September 2006 to January 2007, the 100 most visited Wikipedia pages in a month are identified and categorized in terms of the major topics of interest. The observed topics are compared with search behavior on the Web. Search queries, which are identical to the titles of the most popular Wikipedia pages, are submitted to major search engines and the positions of popular Wikipedia pages in the top 10 search results are determined. The presented data helps to explain how search engines, and Google in particular, fuel the growth and shape what is popular on Wikipedia. 0 4
An empirical exploration of Wikipedia's credibility Thomas Chesney English 6 November 2006 Wikipedia is an free, online encyclopaedia; anyone can add content or edit existing content. The idea behind Wikipedia is that members of the general public can add their own personal knowledge, anonymously if they wish. Wikipedia then evolves over time into a comprehensive knowledge base on all things. Its popularity has never been questioned, although some have speculated about its authority. By its own admission, Wikipedia contains errors. A number of people have tested Wikipedia’s accuracy using destructive methods, i.e. deliberately inserting errors. This has been criticised by Wikipedia. This short study examines Wikipedia’s credibility by asking 258 research staff with a response rate of 21 percent, to read an article and assess its credibility, the credibility of its author and the credibility of Wikipedia as a whole. Staff were either given an article in their own expert domain or a random article. No difference was found between the two group in terms of their perceived credibility of Wikipedia or of the articles’ authors, but a difference was found in the credibility of the articles — the experts found Wikipedia’s articles to be more credible than the non–experts. This suggests that the accuracy of Wikipedia is high. However, the results should not be seen as support for Wikipedia as a totally reliable resource as, according to the experts, 13 percent of the articles contain mistakes. 0 0
Limits of self-organization: Peer production and laws of quality P. Duguid 2006 People often implicitly ascribe the quality of peer production projects such as Project Gutenberg or Wikipedia to what the author calls œlaws? of quality. These are drawn from open source software development and it is not clear how applicable they are outside the realm of software. In this article, the author looks at examples from peer production projects to ask whether faith in these laws does not so much guarantee quality as hide the need for improvement. The author concludes that, given the bulk of these projects (52 million tracks in the Gracenote database, 1 million entries on the English Wikipedia site, 17,000 books on Project Gutenberg), sampling for quality is both difficult and tendentious. Clearly, the author's is not a scientific survey. Nor was his intention simply to find flaws. Rather, the author used these examples to try, however inadequately, to raise questions about the transferability of open source quality assurance to other domains. The author's underlying argument is that the social processes of open source software production may transfer to other fields of peer production, but, with regard to quality, software production remains a special case. 0 0
Puppy smoothies: improving the reliability of open, collaborative wikis Tom Cross 2006 The reliability of information collected from at large Internet users by open collaborative wikis such as Wikipedia has been a subject of widespread debate. This paper provides a practical proposal for improving user confidence in wiki information by coloring the text of a wiki article based on the venerability of the text. This proposal relies on the philosophy that bad information is less likely to survive a collaborative editing process over large numbers of edits. Colorization would provide users with a clear visual cue as to the level of confidence that they can place in particular assertions made within a wiki article. 0 5
Phantom authority, self–selective recruitment and retention of members in virtual communities: The case of Wikipedia Andrea Ciffolilli English 1 December 2003 Virtual communities constitute a building block of the information society. These organizations appear capable to guarantee unique outcomes in voluntary association since they cancel physical distance and ease the process of searching for like-minded individuals. In particular, open source communities, devoted to the collective production of public goods, show efficiency properties far superior to the traditional institutional solutions to the public goods issue (e.g. property rights enforcement and secrecy). This paper employs team and club good theory as well as transaction cost economics to analyse the Wikipedia online community, which is devoted to the creation of a free encyclopaedia. An interpretative framework explains the outstanding success of Wikipedia thanks to a novel solution to the problem of graffiti attacks - the submission of undesirable pieces of information. Indeed, Wiki technology reduces the transaction cost of erasing graffiti and therefore prevents attackers from posting unwanted contributions. The issue of the sporadic intervention of the highest authority in the system is examined, and the relatively more frequent local interaction between users is emphasized. The constellation of different motivations that participants may have is discussed, and the barriers-free recruitment process analysed. A few suggestions, meant to encourage long term sustainability of knowledge assemblages, such as Wikipedia, are provided. Open issues and possible directions for future research are also discussed. 0 4
Open source intelligence Felix Stalder
Jesse Hirsh
Academic peer review
Article
Free sharing of information
GNU encyclopedia
Nettime
NoLogo.org
Nupedia
Open source intelligence
Open Source movement
Open source software
OS-INT
OSS
Social community
Technology
Wikipedia
Wikiweb
English 3 June 2002 The Open Source movement has established over the last decade a new collaborative approach, uniquely adapted to the Internet, to developing high-quality informational products. Initially, its exclusive application was the development of software (GNU/Linux and Apache are among the most prominent projects), but increasingly we can observe this collaborative approach being applied to areas beyond the coding of software. One such area is the collaborative gathering and analysis of information, a practice we term "Open Source Intelligence". In this article, we use three case studies - the nettime mailing list, the Wikipedia project and the NoLogo Web site - to show some the breadth of contexts and analyze the variety of socio-technical approaches that make up this emerging phenomenon. 0 2