(Alternative names for this keyword)
|Export and share|
|BibTeX, CSV, RDF, JSON|
|Browse properties · List of keywords|
participation is included as keyword or extra keyword in 0 datasets, 0 tools and 16 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|
|Similar Gaps, Different Origins? Women Readers and Editors at Greek Wikipedia||Ioannis Protonotarios
|Tenth International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media||English||17 May 2016||As a global, multilingual project, Wikipedia could serve as a repository for the world’s knowledge on an astounding range of topics. However, questions of participation and diversity among editors continue to be burning issues. We present the first targeted study of participants at Greek Wikipedia, with the goal of better understanding their motivations. Smaller Wikipedias play a key role in fostering the project’s global character, but typically receive little attention from researchers. We developed two survey instruments, administered in Greek, based on the 2011 Wikipedia Readership and Editors Surveys. Consistent with previous studies, we found a gender gap, with women making up only 38% and 15% of readers and editors, respectively, and with men editors being much more active. Our data suggest two salient explanations: 1) women readers more often lack confidence with respect to their knowledge and technical skills as compared to men, and 2) women’s behaviors may be driven by personal motivations such as enjoyment and learning, rather than by “leaving their mark” on the community, a concern more common among men. Interestingly, while similar proportions of men and women readers use multiple language editions, more women contribute to English Wikipedia in addition to the Greek language community. Future research should consider how this impacts their participation at Greek Wikipedia||11||0|
|Making Peripheral Participation Legitimate: Reader Engagement Experiments in Wikipedia||Aaron Halfaker
|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||Aaron Halfaker
|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|
|Wikifolios and participatory assessment for engagement, understanding, and achievement in online courses||Hickey D.T.
|Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia||English||2013||This paper presents new insights from ongoing design-based research of graduate-level online courses in a school of education. This research has been refining the use of widely available wikis and online assessment tools to deliver broad learning outcomes. The research started with a general goal that reflects current situative theories of instruction and assessment, and resulted in five general design principles and course features used to enact those principles. Reflecting the first two principles, each student articulates the relative relevance of chapter concepts for a personally meaningful problem context and then engages threaded discussions within and across networking groups via comments placed directly on wikifolios. Reflecting the third principle, wikifolios and comments are not directly graded; rather, they are evaluated using student reflections placed directly in their wikifolio. Reflecting the fourth and fifth principles, conceptual understanding and aggregated achievement are discreetly assessed with timed exams using conventional items. Examples and learning outcomes from two recent courses are presented.||0||0|
|An innovative approach to collaborative document improvement||Burov V.
|Proceedings of the IADIS International Conference Web Based Communities and Social Media 2012, IADIS International Conference Collaborative Technologies 2012||English||2012||The paper describes an innovative approach to lawmaking. A draft of a law is split into segments and is improved by a network community which members can vote for the segments and suggest their own versions. The case of the Russian Law on Education crowdsourcing improvement is discussed. The Wikivote technology can be used in E-government, E-work, E-society and E-learning.||0||0|
|Classroom Wikipedia participation effects on future intentions to contribute||Cliff Lampe
|Computer-Supported Cooperative Work||English||2012||One of the biggest challenges faced by social media sites like Wikipedia is how to motivate users to contribute content. Research continues to demonstrate that only a small percentage of users contribute to user-generated content sites. In this study we assess the results of a Wikimedia Foundation initiative, which had graduate and undergraduate students from 22 U.S. universities contribute content to Wikipedia articles as part of their coursework. 185 students were asked about their participation in the initiative and their intention to participate on Wikipedia in the future. Results suggest that intentions to continue contributing are influenced by the initial attitude towards the class, and the degree to which students perceived they were writing for a global audience.||7||2|
|Gender differences in Wikipedia editing||Judd Antin
|WikiSym||English||2011||As Wikipedia has become an indispensable source of online information, concerns about who writes, edits, and maintains it have come to the forefront. In particular, the 2010 UNU-MERIT survey found evidence of a significant gender skew: fewer than 13% of Wikipedia contributors are women. However, the number of contributors is just one way to examine gender differences in contribution. In this paper we take a more fine-grained perspective by examining how much and what types of Wiki-work men and women tend to do. First, we find that the so-called “Gender Gap” in number of editors may not be as wide as prior studies have suggested. Second, although more than 80% of editors in our sample were men, among the bottom 75% of editors by activity level, we find that men and women made similar numbers of revisions. However, among the most active Wikipedians men tended to make many more revisions than women. Finally, we find that the most active women in our sample tended to make larger revisions than the most active men. We conclude by discussing directions for future research.||0||2|
|Motivation and its mechanisms in virtual communities||De Melo Bezerra J.
|Lecture Notes in Computer Science||English||2011||Participation is a key aspect of success of virtual communities. Participation is dependent on the members' motivation that is driven by individual and environmental characteristics. This article investigates the individual and environmental factors that contribute to motivation and discusses mechanisms to improve motivation in virtual communities. The study is based on the Hersey and Blanchard's motivation model, the Maslow's hierarchy of needs, and the virtual community model. For the discussion of motivation mechanisms, we reviewed the literature and made qualitative interviews with members of the Wikipedia community.||0||0|
|My kind of people? Perceptions about wikipedia contributors and their motivations||Judd Antin||Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - Proceedings||English||2011||Perceptions of information products such as Wikipedia can depend on assumptions and stereotypes about the people who create them. As new Wikipedians consider contributing they are likely to apply such assumptions and ask themselves: "Are Wikipedia contributors my kind of people? Is this a group I'd like to belong to?" In this qualitative study I address the potential challenge of these questions by exploring readers and infrequent editors' perceptions of Wikipedia contributors and their motivations. Through analysis of twenty semi-structured interviews, I find evidence of strong negative perceptions as well as positive ones which nonetheless prevent users from identifying with active Wikipedia contributors. I argue that these perceptions present a barrier to the progression of participation over time. I conclude by discussing the practical challenges of my findings for Wikipedia and other online collaborative systems. Copyright 2011 ACM.||0||1|
|Technology-mediated social participation: The next 25 years of HCI challenges||Shneiderman B.||Lecture Notes in Computer Science||English||2011||The dramatic success of social media such as Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, blogs, and traditional discussion groups empowers individuals to become active in local and global communities. Some enthusiasts believe that with modest redesign, these technologies can be harnessed to support national priorities such as healthcare/wellness, disaster response, community safety, energy sustainability, etc. However, accomplishing these ambitious goals will require long-term research to develop validated scientific theories and reliable, secure, and scalable technology strategies. The enduring questions of how to motivate participation, increase social trust, and promote collaboration remain grand challenges even as the technology rapidly evolves. This talk invites researchers across multiple disciplines to participate in redefining our discipline of Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) along more social lines to answer vital research questions while creating inspirational prototypes, conducting innovative evaluations, and developing robust technologies. By placing greater emphasis on social media, the HCI community could constructively influence these historic changes.||0||0|
|Readers are not free-riders: reading as a form of participation on Wikipedia||Judd Antin
|Computer-Supported Cooperative Work||English||2010||The success of Wikipedia as a large-scale collaborative effort has spurred researchers to examine the motivations and behaviors of Wikipedia's participants. However, this research has tended to focus on active involvement rather than more common forms of participation such as reading. In this paper we argue that Wikipedia's readers should not all be characterized as free-riders -- individuals who knowingly choose to take advantage of others' effort. Furthermore, we illustrate how readers provide a valuable service to Wikipedia. Finally, we use the notion of legitimate peripheral participation to argue that reading is a gateway activity through which newcomers learn about Wikipedia. We find support for our arguments in the results of a survey of Wikipedia usage and knowledge. Implications for future research and design are discussed.||0||5|
|The collaborative construction of "fact" on Wikipedia||Jason Swarts||SIGDOC||English||2009||0||0|
|The collaborative construction of 'fact' on wikipedia||Jason Swarts||SIGDOC'09 - Proceedings of the 27th ACM International Conference on Design of Communication||English||2009||For years Wikipedia has come to symbolize the potential of Web 2.0 for harnessing the power of mass collaboration and collective intelligence. As wikis continue to develop and move into streams of cultural, social, academic, and enterprise work activity, it is appropriate to consider how collective intelligence emerges from mass collaboration. Collective intelligence can take many forms - this paper examines one, the emergence of stable facts on Wikipedia. More specifically, this paper examines ways of participating that lead to the creation of facts. This research will show how we can be more effective consumers, producers, and managers of wiki information by understanding how collaboration shapes facts.||0||0|
|Web 2.0 in e-government: The challenges and opportunities of wiki in legal matters||Decman M.||Proceedings of the European Conference on e-Government, ECEG||English||2009||Web 2.0 is a new concept intended to enhance the creativity, collaboration, information sharing and functionality of the web. Blogs, wikis, social networking and folksonomies are often focused on personal life, and many on professional life. In the professional or business environment, both private and public sectors are very interested in offering the best services to the users. The question is how these new concepts and ideas can be integrated into (existing or redesigned) processes and services to achieve this task. This paper in its first part presents an overview of Web 2.0 and links its concepts to the idea of e-government. It searches the possibilities for its implementation in e-government and tries to discover some best cases of Web 2.0 used in public administration. In the second part, the paper focuses on the specific topic of wikis, and introduces a case that suggests the use of a wiki for the interpretation of legislation, especially legislation used by public employees in their everyday tasks. The wiki solution links people in the field of public administration who are drafting legislation with those who have to use the legislation, such as citizens, public employees, legal experts, etc. Wiki is used in a form of a common web site, Administrative Legislation Wiki (AL-Wiki), which offers general information, basic legal theory, use cases, etc. At the same time, all users can use the same Web 2.0 solution to communicate, exchange knowledge, search, correct and improve. The paper suggests and shows that it is not the technology, but the way it is used that makes an improvement in e-government and many other situations. It suggests that the wiki concept is relevant for e-government and could have a significant impact.||0||0|
|Social rewarding in wiki systems - motivating the community||Bernhard Hoisl
|Lecture Notes in Computer Science||English||2007||Online communities have something in common: their success rise and fall with the participation rate of active users. In this paper we focus on social rewarding mechanisms that generate benefits for users in order to achieve a higher contribution rate in a wiki system. In an online community, social rewarding is in the majority of cases based on accentuation of the most active members. As money cannot be used as a motivating factor others like status, power, acceptance, and glory have to be employed. We explain different social rewarding mechanisms which aim to meet these needs of users. Furthermore, we implemented a number of methods within the MediaWiki system, where social rewarding criteria are satisfied by generating a ranking of most active members.||0||0|
|E-Democracy: Can blogs and wikis enhance the participation of gen Y in the democratic process?||Backhouse J.||Proceedings of the European Conference on e-Government, ECEG||English||2006||Over the last decade or so, a significant proportion of citizens in many liberal democracies have demonstrated a declining interest in the trappings of the democratic process and a related apathy about voting itself. There is a particular concern for the attitudes of young adult citizens, part of the demographic often-called Generation Y. For this generation, many of the customary styles of community involvement and interaction with government no longer seem relevant to the way they live their everyday lives. For example, while newspaper readership in general is falling worldwide, this trend is especially noticeable among Gen Y. They are not adopting the reading habits of their parents. This is a noteworthy development since newspapers, as part of mainstream media, have traditionally been an important source of information and engagement in political debate. An obvious response to this dilemma is to use ICT technologies, including blogs and wikis, to provide replacements for, or indeed enhancements to, traditional communal and democratic artefacts. Stereotypically, these are the technologies that Gen Y relates to and that help provide their sense of community and involvement. This paper reviews the nature and growth of blogs and wikis. It examines the literature on the relevance and effectiveness of these technologies for enhancing democratic participation particularly for Gen Y. The paper concludes that these tools have some potential to engage a significant proportion of Gen Y constituents. Nevertheless they are not a magic bullet. These tools need to have a societal fit and to be implemented in a way that encourages broad participation rather than just strident involvement by a few activists. Even amongst Gen Y, a generation usually considered being ICT literate and eager, there is a risk that systems not well implemented, will only serve to increase disengagement.||0||0|