Difference between revisions of "Hill (2013)"
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= | + | |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 | ||
− | |||
|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
Contents
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: |
|
Funder(s): |
|
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
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
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.