Difference between revisions of "Hill (2013)"

From Copyright EVIDENCE
m (1 revision imported)
m (Saved using "Save and continue" button in form)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Source
+
{{MainSource
|Author=Hill
+
|Source={{Source
 +
|Name of Study=Hill (2013)
 +
|Author=Hill, B.M.
 
|Title=Almost Wikipedia: Eight Early Encyclopedia Projects and the Mechanisms of Collective Action.
 
|Title=Almost Wikipedia: Eight Early Encyclopedia Projects and the Mechanisms of Collective Action.
 
|Year=2013
 
|Year=2013
Line 6: Line 8:
 
|Abstract=Before Wikipedia was created in January 2001, there were seven attempts to create English-language online collaborative encyclopedia projects. Several of these attempts built sus- tainable communities of volunteer contributors but none achieved anything near Wikipedia’s success. Why did Wikipedia, superficially similar and a relatively late entrant, attract a commu- nity of millions and build the largest and most comprehensive compendium of human knowl- edge in history? Using data from interviews of these Wikipedia-like projects’ initiators and extensive archival data, I suggest three propositions for why Wikipedia succeeded in mobilizing volunteers where these other projects failed. I also present disconfirming evidence for two im- portant alternative explanations. Synthesizing these results, I suggest that Wikipedia succeeded because its stated goal hewed closely to a widely shared concept of “encyclopedia” familiar to many potential contributors, while innovating around the process and the social organization of production.
 
|Abstract=Before Wikipedia was created in January 2001, there were seven attempts to create English-language online collaborative encyclopedia projects. Several of these attempts built sus- tainable communities of volunteer contributors but none achieved anything near Wikipedia’s success. Why did Wikipedia, superficially similar and a relatively late entrant, attract a commu- nity of millions and build the largest and most comprehensive compendium of human knowl- edge in history? Using data from interviews of these Wikipedia-like projects’ initiators and extensive archival data, I suggest three propositions for why Wikipedia succeeded in mobilizing volunteers where these other projects failed. I also present disconfirming evidence for two im- portant alternative explanations. Synthesizing these results, I suggest that Wikipedia succeeded because its stated goal hewed closely to a widely shared concept of “encyclopedia” familiar to many potential contributors, while innovating around the process and the social organization of production.
 
|Link=http://mako.cc/academic/hill-almost_wikipedia-DRAFT.pdf
 
|Link=http://mako.cc/academic/hill-almost_wikipedia-DRAFT.pdf
|Reference=Crowston et al. (2012)  
+
|Reference=Crowston et al. (2012); Benkler (2013);
 
|Plain Text Proposition=- Wikipedia attracted contributors because it was built around a familiar product.
 
|Plain Text Proposition=- Wikipedia attracted contributors because it was built around a familiar product.
  
Line 14: Line 16:
 
|FundamentalIssue=3. Harmony of interest assumption between authors and publishers (creators and producers/investors), 4. Effects of protection on industry structure (e.g. oligopolies; competition; economics of superstars; business models; technology adoption)
 
|FundamentalIssue=3. Harmony of interest assumption between authors and publishers (creators and producers/investors), 4. Effects of protection on industry structure (e.g. oligopolies; competition; economics of superstars; business models; technology adoption)
 
|EvidenceBasedPolicy=D. Licensing and Business models (collecting societies; meta data; exchanges/hubs; windowing; crossborder availability)
 
|EvidenceBasedPolicy=D. Licensing and Business models (collecting societies; meta data; exchanges/hubs; windowing; crossborder availability)
|Discipline=Sociology
+
|Discipline=O33: Technological Change: Choices and Consequences • Diffusion Processes
 +
|Intervention-Response=Welfare can be promoted by flexible legal frameworks that allow the combination of product familiarity and innovative structures of organisation.
 +
|Description of Data=Data used in this analysis came primarily from interviews with project initiators and was supplemented with archival data. All interviews were opened-ended and semi-structured. Interviews lasted between 30 minutes and 3 hours with the median length near 90 minutes. All interviews – 11 in total – were recorded and fully transcribed.
 +
|Data Year=Not stated
 +
|Data Type=Primary and Secondary data
 +
|Data Source=Nupedia; Interpedia; Wayback Machine;
 +
|Method of Collection=Qualitative Collection Methods, Semi-Structured Interview, Archival Research
 +
|Method of Analysis=Qualitative Analysis Methods, Qualitative Coding / Sorting (e.g. of interview data), Grounded Theory
 +
|Industry=Computer programming; Cultural education;
 +
|Country=Not Stated;
 +
|Cross-country=No
 +
|Comparative=No
 +
|Government or policy=No
 +
|Literature review=No
 +
|Funded By=Not stated;
 
|Method=Case Study, interviews, digital content analysis
 
|Method=Case Study, interviews, digital content analysis
|Intervention-Response=Welfare can be promoted by flexible legal frameworks that allow the combination of product familiarity and innovative structures of organisation.
 
 
|Data=Interviews and historical records on 8 failed wikipedia projects (founders and users) to interrogate incentives for participation.
 
|Data=Interviews and historical records on 8 failed wikipedia projects (founders and users) to interrogate incentives for participation.
 +
}}
 +
|Dataset={{Dataset
 +
|Sample Size=11
 +
|Level of Aggregation=Individual semistructured interviews,
 +
|Data Material Year=Not stated
 +
}}{{Dataset
 +
|Sample Size=3,000
 +
|Level of Aggregation=Pages of text from archival research,
 +
|Data Material Year=Not stated
 +
}}
 
}}
 
}}
 
'''Hill, B. M. Almost Wikipedia: Eight Early Encyclopedia Projects and the Mechanisms of Collective Action.''' [http://mako.cc/academic/hill-almost_wikipedia-DRAFT.pdf]
 
'''Hill, B. M. Almost Wikipedia: Eight Early Encyclopedia Projects and the Mechanisms of Collective Action.''' [http://mako.cc/academic/hill-almost_wikipedia-DRAFT.pdf]

Revision as of 09:18, 23 August 2015

Advertising Architectural Publishing of books, periodicals and other publishing Programming and broadcasting Computer programming Computer consultancy Creative, arts and entertainment Cultural education

Film and motion pictures Sound recording and music publishing Photographic activities PR and communication Software publishing (including video games) Specialised design Television programmes Translation and interpretation

1. Relationship between protection (subject matter/term/scope) and supply/economic development/growth/welfare 2. Relationship between creative process and protection - what motivates creators (e.g. attribution; control; remuneration; time allocation)? 3. Harmony of interest assumption between authors and publishers (creators and producers/investors) 4. Effects of protection on industry structure (e.g. oligopolies; competition; economics of superstars; business models; technology adoption) 5. Understanding consumption/use (e.g. determinants of unlawful behaviour; user-generated content; social media)

A. Nature and Scope of exclusive rights (hyperlinking/browsing; reproduction right) B. Exceptions (distinguish innovation and public policy purposes; open-ended/closed list; commercial/non-commercial distinction) C. Mass digitisation/orphan works (non-use; extended collective licensing) D. Licensing and Business models (collecting societies; meta data; exchanges/hubs; windowing; crossborder availability) E. Fair remuneration (levies; copyright contracts) F. Enforcement (quantifying infringement; criminal sanctions; intermediary liability; graduated response; litigation and court data; commercial/non-commercial distinction; education and awareness)

Source Details

Hill (2013)
Title: Almost Wikipedia: Eight Early Encyclopedia Projects and the Mechanisms of Collective Action.
Author(s): Hill, B.M.
Year: 2013
Citation: Hill, B. M. (2013). Almost Wikipedia: Eight Early Encyclopedia Projects and the Mechanisms of Collective Action.
Link(s): , Open Access
Key Related Studies:
Discipline:
Linked by:
About the Data
Data Description: Data used in this analysis came primarily from interviews with project initiators and was supplemented with archival data. All interviews were opened-ended and semi-structured. Interviews lasted between 30 minutes and 3 hours with the median length near 90 minutes. All interviews – 11 in total – were recorded and fully transcribed.
Data Type: Primary and Secondary data
Secondary Data Sources:
Data Collection Methods:
Data Analysis Methods:
Industry(ies):
Country(ies):
Cross Country Study?: No
Comparative Study?: No
Literature review?: No
Government or policy study?: No
Time Period(s) of Collection:
  • Not stated
Funder(s):
  • Not stated

Abstract

Before Wikipedia was created in January 2001, there were seven attempts to create English-language online collaborative encyclopedia projects. Several of these attempts built sus- tainable communities of volunteer contributors but none achieved anything near Wikipedia’s success. Why did Wikipedia, superficially similar and a relatively late entrant, attract a commu- nity of millions and build the largest and most comprehensive compendium of human knowl- edge in history? Using data from interviews of these Wikipedia-like projects’ initiators and extensive archival data, I suggest three propositions for why Wikipedia succeeded in mobilizing volunteers where these other projects failed. I also present disconfirming evidence for two im- portant alternative explanations. Synthesizing these results, I suggest that Wikipedia succeeded because its stated goal hewed closely to a widely shared concept of “encyclopedia” familiar to many potential contributors, while innovating around the process and the social organization of production.

Main Results of the Study

- Wikipedia attracted contributors because it was built around a familiar product.

- Wikipedia attracted contributors because it offered low barriers to contribution.

- Wikipedia attracted contributors because it offered low attribution and low social ownership of content.

Policy Implications as Stated By Author

Welfare can be promoted by flexible legal frameworks that allow the combination of product familiarity and innovative structures of organisation.


Coverage of Study

Coverage of Fundamental Issues
Issue Included within Study
Relationship between protection (subject matter/term/scope) and supply/economic development/growth/welfare
Relationship between creative process and protection - what motivates creators (e.g. attribution; control; remuneration; time allocation)?
Harmony of interest assumption between authors and publishers (creators and producers/investors)
Green-tick.png
Effects of protection on industry structure (e.g. oligopolies; competition; economics of superstars; business models; technology adoption)
Green-tick.png
Understanding consumption/use (e.g. determinants of unlawful behaviour; user-generated content; social media)
Coverage of Evidence Based Policies
Issue Included within Study
Nature and Scope of exclusive rights (hyperlinking/browsing; reproduction right)
Exceptions (distinguish innovation and public policy purposes; open-ended/closed list; commercial/non-commercial distinction)
Mass digitisation/orphan works (non-use; extended collective licensing)
Licensing and Business models (collecting societies; meta data; exchanges/hubs; windowing; crossborder availability)
Green-tick.png
Fair remuneration (levies; copyright contracts)
Enforcement (quantifying infringement; criminal sanctions; intermediary liability; graduated response; litigation and court data; commercial/non-commercial distinction; education and awareness)

Datasets

Sample size: 11
Level of aggregation: Individual semistructured interviews
Period of material under study: Not stated


Sample size: 3,000
Level of aggregation: Pages of text from archival research
Period of material under study: Not stated

Hill, B. M. Almost Wikipedia: Eight Early Encyclopedia Projects and the Mechanisms of Collective Action. [1]


Abstract: Before Wikipedia was created in January 2001, there were seven attempts to create English-language online collaborative encyclopedia projects. Several of these attempts built sus- tainable communities of volunteer contributors but none achieved anything near Wikipedia’s success. Why did Wikipedia, superficially similar and a relatively late entrant, attract a commu- nity of millions and build the largest and most comprehensive compendium of human knowl- edge in history? Using data from interviews of these Wikipedia-like projects’ initiators and extensive archival data, I suggest three propositions for why Wikipedia succeeded in mobilizing volunteers where these other projects failed. I also present disconfirming evidence for two im- portant alternative explanations. Synthesizing these results, I suggest that Wikipedia succeeded because its stated goal hewed closely to a widely shared concept of “encyclopedia” familiar to many potential contributors, while innovating around the process and the social organization of production.


Propositions

- Wikipedia attracted contributors because it was built around a familiar product.

- Wikipedia attracted contributors because it offered low barriers to contribution.

- Wikipedia attracted contributors because it offered low attribution and low social ownership of content.

Method

- Multiple case study Analysis, interviews, digital content analysis

Discipline

- Sociology

Data

- Interviews and historical records on 8 failed wikipedia projects (founders and users) to interrogate incentives for participation

Interventions-Response

- Welfare can be promoted by flexible legal frameworks that allow the combination of product familiarity and innovative structures of organisation.