skip to main content
10.1145/2441776.2441873acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagescscwConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Using edit sessions to measure participation in wikipedia

Authors Info & Claims
Published:23 February 2013Publication History

ABSTRACT

Many quantitative, log-based studies of participation and contribution in CSCW and CMC systems measure the activity of users in terms of output, based on metrics like posts to forums, edits to Wikipedia articles, or commits to code repositories. In this paper, we instead seek to estimate the amount of time users have spent contributing. Through an analysis of Wikipedia log data, we identify a pattern of punctuated bursts in editors' activity that we refer to as edit sessions. Based on these edit sessions, we build a metric that approximates the labor hours of editors in the encyclopedia. Using this metric, we first compare labor-based analyses with output-based analyses, finding that the activity of many editors can appear quite differently based on the kind of metric used. Second, we use edit session data to examine phenomena that cannot be adequately studied with purely output-based metrics, such as the total number of labor hours for the entire project.

References

  1. Adler, B. T., Alfaro, L. de, Pye, I., and Raman, V. Measuring Author Contributions to the Wikipedia. Proc WikiSym 2008, ACM Press (2008). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Barabási, A.-L. The origin of bursts and heavy tails in human dynamics. Nature 435, 7039 (2005), 207--211.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Brooks, F. P. The Mythical Man-Month. Addison-Wesley, 1995. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Burke, M. and Kraut, R. Taking up the mop: identifying future wikipedia administrators. Proc CHI 2008, ACM (2008), 3441--3446. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Cutler, D. Facts on the Channel Tunnel. Reuters, 2010. http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/10/07/siemens-eurostar-tunnel-idUSLDE69623720101007.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Geiger, R. and Ribes, D. The work of sustaining order in wikipedia: the banning of a vandal. Proc CSCW 2010, ACM (2010). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Geiger, R. S. and Ribes, D. Trace Ethnography: Following Coordination Through Documentary Practices. Proc HICSS 2011., IEEE (2011). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Halfaker, A., Geiger, R. S., Morgan, J. T., and Riedl, J. The Rise and Decline of an Open Collaboration System. American Behavioral Scientist. (In press). Accessed online 27 Aug 2012 at http://halfaker.info/archive/halfaker12rise.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Halfaker, A., Kittur, A., Kraut, R., and Riedl, J. A Jury of Your Peers: Quality, Experience and Ownership in Wikipedia. Proc WikiSym 2009, ACM Press (2009). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Halfaker, A., Kittur, A., and Riedl, J. Don't bite the newbies: how reverts affect the quantity and quality of Wikipedia work. Proc WikiSym 2011, ACM (2011). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Kogan, H. The Great EB: The Story of the Encyclopædia Britannica. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1958.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Kriplean, T., Beschastnikh, I., and McDonald, D. Articulations of wikiwork: uncovering valued work in wikipedia through barnstars. Proc CSCW 2008, ACM (2008), 47--56. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Lampe, C. and Resnick, P. Slash(dot) and burn: distributed moderation in a large online conversation space. Proc CHI 2004, ACM (2004), 543--550. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Langmead, D. and Garnaut, C. Encyclopedia of Architectural and Engineering Feats. ABC-CLIO, Santa Barbara, 2001.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. van Liere, D. and Fung, H. Editor Trends Study. 2011. Accessed 13 April 2012 from http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Editor_Trends_Study.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Lipponen, L., Rahikainen, M., Lallimo, J., and Hakkarainen, K. Patterns of participation and discourse in elementary students' computer-supported collaborative learning. Learning and Instruction 13, 5 (2003), 487--509.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. Ludford, P. J., Cosley, D., Frankowski, D., and Terveen, L. Think different: increasing online community participation using uniqueness and group dissimilarity. Proc CHI 2004, ACM Press (2004), 631--638. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Mark, G., Gonzalez, V. M., and Harris, J. No task left behind?: examining the nature of fragmented work. Proc CSCW 2005, ACM Press (2005).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. McDonald, D. W., Javanmardi, S., and Zachry, M. Finding patterns in behavioral observations by automatically labeling forms of wikiwork in Barnstars. Proc WikiSym 2011, ACM Press (2011). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Mongomery, Alan L., Li, S., Srinivasan, K., and Leichty, J. C. Modeling Online Browsing and Path Analysis Using Clickstream Data. Marketing Science 23, 4 (2004), 579--595. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Panciera, K., Halfaker, A., and Terveen, L. Wikipedians are born, not made: a study of power editors on Wikipedia. Proc GROUP 2009, ACM (2009), 51--60. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Priedhorsky, R., Chen, J., Lam, S. T. K., Panciera, K., Terveen, L., and Riedl, J. Creating, destroying, and restoring value in wikipedia. Proc GROUP 2007, ACM Press (2007), 259--268. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. S 23 WikiStats: List of Wikipedias. 2012. http://s23.org/wikistats/wikipedias_html.php.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Shirky, C. Cognitive Surplus: Creativity and Generosity in a Connected Age. Penguin, New York, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Smith, C. B. Program Management B. C. Civil Engineering 69, 6 (1999).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Smith, N. Classic Projects: Great Pyramid at Giza. Engineering and Technology Magazine 6, 1 (2011).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Suh, B., Convertino, G., Chi, E., and Pirolli, P. The Singularity is Not Near: Slowing Growth of Wikipedia. Proc WikiSym 2009, ACM (2009). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Wikipedia contributors. "Wikipedia:Editcountitis." Wikipedia. http://enwp.org/W:ITIS, accessed 7 Dec 2012.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Wilkinson, D. M. Strong regularities in online peer production. Proc EC 2008, ACM Press (2008), 302. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. Zachte, E. Wikipedia Statistics. 2012. Accessed 13 April 2012 at http://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/TablesWikipediaZZ.htmGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Using edit sessions to measure participation in wikipedia

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      CSCW '13: Proceedings of the 2013 conference on Computer supported cooperative work
      February 2013
      1594 pages
      ISBN:9781450313315
      DOI:10.1145/2441776

      Copyright © 2013 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 23 February 2013

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      Overall Acceptance Rate2,235of8,521submissions,26%

      Upcoming Conference

      CSCW '24

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader