Hi Angela,
Thanks for your responses. Here are my comments:
I am currently working on a couple of research projects involving
Wikipedia.
Two specific projects involve:
- Obtaining a scholarly evaluation of the quality of its articles by
comparing Wikipedia articles with those of other encyclopedias; and
ANGELA> This part sounds great. CHITU> I think this study is very important both for Wikipedia's publicity, and also for my research program, so that I can "prove" to other scholars the legitimacy of researching Wikipedia. You know the usual reactions: "You mean ANYONE can write whatever they like? How do they control this?" ... and so on. "Scholarly types" are even more uncomfortable than average with these ideas. I believe such a study would help provide verification in terms they understand of what I already believe (but am trying to prove with scholastic rigour): that Wikipedia is CURRENTLY a top-notch encyclopedia, and its only uphill from here.
- Mapping the sociological networks of Wikipedians among each other in
their wiki activities, and the effects of these networks on their
individual
and group performance in Wikipedia.
ANGELA> This part concerns me slightly. Could you explain what you mean by ANGELA> this please? What would you be doing other than surveying people? Will ANGELA> it cause any disruption to Wikipedia? Will the users be aware they are ANGELA> being studied? Will they be able to opt out?
CHITU> Actually, this part is much more benign than it sounds. This project (which I am currently working on as we speak) doesn't involve any involvement at all by Wikipedians or the Wikimedia Foundation. I've replicated the English Wikipedia using a database dump, and I'm analyzing the historical entries directly via SQL queries and special social networking software to observe these relationships. No problemo. As much as possible of my research will work directly from my replicated Wikipedia installations and will involve no direct interaction with Wikipedia or Wikipedians.
In return, they would have to send you a letter of support indicating that they will be
helping
you to collect the data you need via surveys, etc.
ANGELA> We might be able to help, but we can't guarantee any particular ANGELA> response rate since completion of the surveys would obviously have to ANGELA> remain completely optional to the users.
CHITU> Of course; response rates are a basic risk with any survey research. Which is why I LOVE the database dumps--the data is all right there! But for this kind of investigation, we would have to beg the users to respond as usual. For the SourceForge hacker survey (http://www.bcg.com/opensource/BCGHACKERSURVEY.pdf), they got 526 responses out of 1,648 developers contacted--an awesome response rate of 34.2%. On the other hand, when they surveyed the Linux Kernel group, they got 134 out of around 4000--a measly 2.4%.
However, some of the further research I might need to do could need substantial help from the Wikimedia Foundation. One particular idea I
have
in mind would be to conduct a survey of Wikipedians to figure out who
they
are, and why they do what they do.
ANGELA> What sort of support were you expecting from us here? Do you want us ANGELA> to host the surveys? Do you want us to create the database where the ANGELA> responses will be stored? Or would simply advertising them and linking ANGELA> to them on an external site be enough? Is there any reason the surveys ANGELA> would need to be on Wikipedia itself?
CHITU> I was thinking of something like a temporary link (perhaps for a week or two) on all pages (kind of like the fundraising banner) asking for participation in the survey. This link could link to an external Web survey host that I would manage directly, so that it would not need to expend any further Wikipedia/Wikimedia resources other than the links. Of course, the survey questionnaire itself would have to be fully approved by the Wikimedia Foundation. I was thinking of at least two different surveys--one for Wikipedia readers, available for every article page, and a second one for Wikipedia contributors, available only when they click "Edit this page". Just thoughts out load. Either way, I would only do what was approved by the Wikimedia Foundation.
Chitu Okoli wrote:
CHITU> I was thinking of something like a temporary link (perhaps for a week or two) on all pages (kind of like the fundraising banner) asking for participation in the survey. This link could link to an external Web survey host that I would manage directly, so that it would not need to expend any further Wikipedia/Wikimedia resources other than the links. Of course, the survey questionnaire itself would have to be fully approved by the Wikimedia Foundation. I was thinking of at least two different surveys--one for Wikipedia readers, available for every article page, and a second one for Wikipedia contributors, available only when they click "Edit this page". Just thoughts out load. Either way, I would only do what was approved by the Wikimedia Foundation.
Whould this be a study of only the English Wikipedia or also others? Maybe it is also interesting to find out of there are real differences between the Wikipedias besides the language.