Network Structure, Efficiency, and Performance in WikiProjects

The internet has enabled collaborations at a scale never before possible, but the best practices for organizing such large collaborations are still not clear. Wikipedia is a visible and successful example of such a collaboration which might offer insight into what makes large-scale, decentralized collaborations successful. We analyze the relationship between the structural properties of WikiProject coeditor networks and the performance and efficiency of those projects. We confirm the existence of an overall performance-efficiency trade-off, while observing that some projects are higher than others in both performance and efficiency, suggesting the existence factors correlating positively with both. Namely, we find an association between low-degree coeditor networks and both high performance and high efficiency. We also confirm results seen in previous numerical and small-scale lab studies: higher performance with less skewed node distributions, and higher performance with shorter path lengths. We use agent-based models to explore possible mechanisms for degree-dependent performance and efficiency. We present a novel local-majority learning strategy designed to satisfy properties of real-world collaborations. The local-majority strategy as well as a localized conformity-based strategy both show degree-dependent performance and efficiency, but in opposite directions, suggesting that these factors depend on both network structure and learning strategy. Our results suggest possible benefits to decentralized collaborations made of smaller, more tightly-knit teams, and that these benefits may be modulated by the particular learning strategies in use.Comment: 11 pages, 5 figures, to appear in ICWSM 201

Are anonymity-seekers just like everybody else? An analysis of contributions to Wikipedia from Tor

User-generated content sites routinely block contributions from users of privacy-enhancing proxies like Tor because of a perception that proxies are a source of vandalism, spam, and abuse. Although these blocks might be effective, collateral damage in the form of unrealized valuable contributions from anonymity seekers is invisible. One of the largest and most important user-generated content sites, Wikipedia, has attempted to block contributions from Tor users since as early as 2005. We demonstrate that these blocks have been imperfect and that thousands of attempts to edit on Wikipedia through Tor have been successful. We draw upon several data sources and analytical techniques to measure and describe the history of Tor editing on Wikipedia over time and to compare contributions from Tor users to those from other groups of Wikipedia users. Our analysis suggests that although Tor users who slip through Wikipedia's ban contribute content that is more likely to be reverted and to revert others, their contributions are otherwise similar in quality to those from other unregistered participants and to the initial contributions of registered users.Comment: To appear in the IEEE Symposium on Security & Privacy, May 202

Wikipedia Conflict Representation in Articles of War: A critical discourse analysis of current, on-going, socio-political Wikipedia articles about war

With the help of a discourse-historical approach, a textual corpus composed of the talk pages of three controversial, socio-political Wikipedia articles about ongoing wars was analyzed in order to shed light on the way in which conflict is represented through the editing and discussion process. Additionally, a rational discourse was employed in order to unravel communication distortions within the editing process in an attempt to improve communication and consensus-seeking. Finally, semi-structured interviews of participating contributors within studied articles were used in order to better understand Wikipedian experience in a controversial collaboration scenario. Results unveiled a set of discursive practices in which Wikipedians participate, as well as the creation of a Wikipedian argumentation topoi framework useful for further Wikipedia-specific discourse analysis involving the content change-retain negotiation process

CONTROLLING THE OPEN CONTENT CREATION PROCESS: AN ANALYSIS OF CONTROL MECHANISMS USING THE REPERTORY GRID METHOD

We develop a governance framework for open collaboration, specifically for the process of collaborative content creation. Our analysis is based on in-depth interviews with 12 active Wikipedians using the repertory grid method. The framework reflects the governance of wiki-based peer production by identifying the different structures, processes and mechanisms which guide and control the contributions and activities of individuals. Our findings concerning the driving principles for successful governance recognize four such principles: the power of the many, the influence of the few, the role of (persistent) conversations, and the value of rules

The role of cognitive conflict in open-content collaboration

IS research on participant’s motivation1 in Knowledge Management System have paid relatively limited attention to the effect of diversifying the technological artifacts while they focused more on identifying the generic motivational factors that apply across the varying contexts. However, the manifest success of disruptive collaboration system outside of the corporate boundaries such as Wikipedia calls for our extended attention to the motivational factors that may not be emergent without the provision of context and artifacts that challenge the assumptions made by KMS within the organizational setting. Through the online survey of 100 Wikipedians, this study evaluates the effect of one novel construct (i.e., socio-cognitive conflict) proposed by Cress and Kimmerle (2008) as an example of such emergent motivation made explicit by maneuvering specific design of collaboration system which otherwise would remain immaterial. In parallel, the analysis also explores the generic motivational constructs the effects of which have been extensively studied within organizational contexts but not sufficiently examined outside of such boundaries

Changing Higher Education Learning with Web 2.0 and Open Education Citation, Annotation, and Thematic Coding Appendices

Appendices of citations, annotations and themes for research conducted on four websites: Delicious, Wikipedia, YouTube, and Facebook

What makes Individual I's a Collective We; Coordination mechanisms & costs

For a collective to become greater than the sum of its parts, individuals' efforts and activities must be coordinated or regulated. Not readily observable and measurable, this particular aspect often goes unnoticed and understudied in complex systems. Diving into the Wikipedia ecosystem, where people are free to join and voluntarily edit individual pages with no firm rules, we identified and quantified three fundamental coordination mechanisms and found they scale with an influx of contributors in a remarkably systemic way over three order of magnitudes. Firstly, we have found a super-linear growth in mutual adjustments (scaling exponent: 1.3), manifested through extensive discussions and activity reversals. Secondly, the increase in direct supervision (scaling exponent: 0.9), as represented by the administrators' activities, is disproportionately limited. Finally, the rate of rule enforcement exhibits the slowest escalation (scaling exponent 0.7), reflected by automated bots. The observed scaling exponents are notably robust across topical categories with minor variations attributed to the topic complication. Our findings suggest that as more people contribute to a project, a self-regulating ecosystem incurs faster mutual adjustments than direct supervision and rule enforcement. These findings have practical implications for online collaborative communities aiming to enhance their coordination efficiency. These results also have implications for how we understand human organizations in general.Comment: 27 pages, 7 figure

Wikitruth Through Wikiorder

How does large-scale social production coordinate individual behavior to produce public goods? In 1968, Hardin denied that the creation of public goods absent markets or the State is possible. Benkler, Shirky, Zittrain, and Lessig recently countered that the necessary coordination might emerge though social norms. However, scholars have not fully explained how this coordination is to occur. Game theorists have modeled large-scale social production as a solution to the herder problem/multi-player Prisoner¿s Dilemma. But we demonstrate that the ¿weeding in function reflects dynamics more accurately captured in coordination games. In this way, dispute resolution can provide a constitutive function for the community