Re: [Wiki-research-l] a cautious note on gender stats Re: Fwd: [Gendergap] Wikipedia readers

2015-02-14 Thread Gerard Meijssen
Hoi,
Obviously I know. My point is that when we talk about diversity, it is
because it was recognised as a problem ... When papers of 2011 are quoted
in 2015 when diversity is mentioned, it does not give us a clue if the
problem is as bad, worse or very much improved. Consequently it is very
much beside the point.
Thanks,
   GerardM

On 15 February 2015 at 07:48,  wrote:

> Hi GerardM,
>
> why not have a guess ;-)
>
> Claudia
> -- Original Message ---
> From:Gerard Meijssen 
> To:Research into Wikimedia content and communities  l...@lists.wikimedia.org>
> Sent:Sat, 14 Feb 2015 18:42:08 +0100
> Subject:Re: [Wiki-research-l] a cautious note on gender stats Re: Fwd:
> [Gendergap] Wikipedia readers
>
> > Hoi,
> > What year are we living ?
> > Thanks,
> >  GerardM
> >
> > On 14 February 2015 at 17:24,
> >   wrote:
> >
> > >  my2cents re figures on percentages (... in a gender binary paradigm),
> > > well...
> > >
> > > I'd suggest to take into account User:Pundit's thoughtful
> considerations,
> > >
> > > author of: Jemielniak, Dariusz (2014), Common knowledge? An
> ethnography
> > > of Wikipedia, Stanford University Press, pp. 14-15
> > >
> > > Dariusz Jemielniak writes:
> > > "According to Wikipedia Editors Study, published in 2011, 91 percent of
> > > all Wikipedia editors are male ([reference to a study of 2011] This
> figure
> > > may not be accurate, since it is based on a voluntary online survey
> > > advertised to 31,699 registered users and resulting on 5,073 complete
> and
> > > valid responses [...] it is possible that male editors are more likely
> to
> > > respond than female editors. Similarly, a study of self-declarations of
> > > gender showing only 16 percent are female editors (Lam et al. 2011)
> may be
> > > distorted, since more females may choose not to reveal their gender in
> a
> > > community perceived as male dominated."
> > >
> > > additionally, asserting status and flaunting seniority (also described
> > > by Jemielniak at the end of the paragraph previous to the one quoted
> above)
> > > is generally perceived to be a commonly employed trick to resist any
> > > changes;
> > >
> > > and, last but not least, one might argue that the group perceived as
> > > "in power" might feel to find strongly unbalanced outcomes most
> rewarding,
> > > and hence might tend to publish them as widely as possible and not
> least
> > > quote from them persistently, too...
> > >
> > > any rebuttals from stats experts here?
> > >
> > > best,
> > > Claudia
> > > koltzenb...@w4w.net
> > > My GPG-Key-ID: DDD21523
> > >
> > > -- Original Message ---
> > > From:Jane Darnell 
> > > To:Research into Wikimedia content and communities  > > l...@lists.wikimedia.org>
> > > Sent:Sat, 14 Feb 2015 10:49:29 +0100
> > > Subject:[Wiki-research-l] Fwd: [Gendergap] Wikipedia readers
> > >
> > > > Forwarding here in case anyone has information
> > > > that could benefit Yana
> > > > -- Forwarded message --
> > > > From: Jane Darnell 
> > > > Date: Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 9:44 AM
> > > > Subject: Re: [Gendergap] Wikipedia readers
> > > > To: "Addressing gender equity and exploring ways
> > > > to increase the participation of women within
> > > > Wikimedia projects." < gender...@lists.wikimedia.org>
> > > >
> > > > In 2013 the Dutch Wikimedia chapter hired an
> > > > external party to conduct a survey and the results
> > > > (translated to English) are here:
> > >
> https://nl.wikimedia.org/wiki/Bestand:Motivaction_report_translation_v02.pd
> > > f
> > > >
> > > > The study was split into two parts; one on the
> > > > contributors and one on the "users", aka readers.
> > > > Users were 50/50 male female (page 51),
> > > >  contributors were 88% male, 6% female, and 6%
> > > > would not say (page 26)
> > > >
> > > > On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 8:11 AM, Yana Welinder
> > > >  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi all,
> > > > >
> > > > > What are some good studies of the gender of Wikipedia readers?
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > Yana
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > ___
> > > > > Gendergap mailing list
> > > > > gender...@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > > To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing,
> > > please
> > > > > visit:
> > > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
> > > > >
> > > --- End of Original Message ---
> > >
> > > ___
> > > Wiki-research-l mailing list
> > > Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
> > >
> > >
> --- End of Original Message ---
>
>
> ___
> Wiki-research-l mailing list
> Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
>
___
Wiki-research-l mailing list
Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/m

Re: [Wiki-research-l] a cautious note on gender stats Re: Fwd: [Gendergap] Wikipedia readers

2015-02-14 Thread koltzenburg
Hi GerardM, 

why not have a guess ;-)

Claudia
-- Original Message ---
From:Gerard Meijssen 
To:Research into Wikimedia content and communities 
Sent:Sat, 14 Feb 2015 18:42:08 +0100
Subject:Re: [Wiki-research-l] a cautious note on gender stats Re: Fwd: 
[Gendergap] Wikipedia readers

> Hoi,
> What year are we living ?
> Thanks,
>  GerardM
> 
> On 14 February 2015 at 17:24,
>   wrote:
> 
> >  my2cents re figures on percentages (... in a gender binary paradigm),
> > well...
> >
> > I'd suggest to take into account User:Pundit's thoughtful considerations,
> >
> > author of: Jemielniak, Dariusz (2014), Common knowledge? An 
ethnography
> > of Wikipedia, Stanford University Press, pp. 14-15
> >
> > Dariusz Jemielniak writes:
> > "According to Wikipedia Editors Study, published in 2011, 91 percent of
> > all Wikipedia editors are male ([reference to a study of 2011] This figure
> > may not be accurate, since it is based on a voluntary online survey
> > advertised to 31,699 registered users and resulting on 5,073 complete 
and
> > valid responses [...] it is possible that male editors are more likely to
> > respond than female editors. Similarly, a study of self-declarations of
> > gender showing only 16 percent are female editors (Lam et al. 2011) 
may be
> > distorted, since more females may choose not to reveal their gender in a
> > community perceived as male dominated."
> >
> > additionally, asserting status and flaunting seniority (also described
> > by Jemielniak at the end of the paragraph previous to the one quoted 
above)
> > is generally perceived to be a commonly employed trick to resist any
> > changes;
> >
> > and, last but not least, one might argue that the group perceived as
> > "in power" might feel to find strongly unbalanced outcomes most 
rewarding,
> > and hence might tend to publish them as widely as possible and not 
least
> > quote from them persistently, too...
> >
> > any rebuttals from stats experts here?
> >
> > best,
> > Claudia
> > koltzenb...@w4w.net
> > My GPG-Key-ID: DDD21523
> >
> > -- Original Message ---
> > From:Jane Darnell 
> > To:Research into Wikimedia content and communities  > l...@lists.wikimedia.org>
> > Sent:Sat, 14 Feb 2015 10:49:29 +0100
> > Subject:[Wiki-research-l] Fwd: [Gendergap] Wikipedia readers
> >
> > > Forwarding here in case anyone has information
> > > that could benefit Yana
> > > -- Forwarded message --
> > > From: Jane Darnell 
> > > Date: Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 9:44 AM
> > > Subject: Re: [Gendergap] Wikipedia readers
> > > To: "Addressing gender equity and exploring ways
> > > to increase the participation of women within
> > > Wikimedia projects." < gender...@lists.wikimedia.org>
> > >
> > > In 2013 the Dutch Wikimedia chapter hired an
> > > external party to conduct a survey and the results
> > > (translated to English) are here:
> > 
https://nl.wikimedia.org/wiki/Bestand:Motivaction_report_translation_v02.pd
> > f
> > >
> > > The study was split into two parts; one on the
> > > contributors and one on the "users", aka readers.
> > > Users were 50/50 male female (page 51),
> > >  contributors were 88% male, 6% female, and 6%
> > > would not say (page 26)
> > >
> > > On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 8:11 AM, Yana Welinder
> > >  wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi all,
> > > >
> > > > What are some good studies of the gender of Wikipedia readers?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Yana
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ___
> > > > Gendergap mailing list
> > > > gender...@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing,
> > please
> > > > visit:
> > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
> > > >
> > --- End of Original Message ---
> >
> > ___
> > Wiki-research-l mailing list
> > Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
> >
> >
--- End of Original Message ---


___
Wiki-research-l mailing list
Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l


Re: [Wiki-research-l] a cautious note on gender stats Re: Fwd: [Gendergap] Wikipedia readers

2015-02-14 Thread Jeremy Foote
Mako Hill and Aaron Shaw wrote a paper which combined a 2008 WMF survey
with Pew Research to try to find a less biased estimation of the Wikipedia
gender gap. Their paper is titled "The Wikipedia Gender Gap Revisited:
Characterizing Survey Response Bias with Propensity Score Estimation", and
is at
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0065782#pone-0065782-t002
.

It's not a perfect fit for eliminating the bias to participate in editor
surveys, but it's a step toward a more realistic value for the gender gap
(although it's still pretty bleak - with only 16% of gobal editors
estimated to be female).

Best,
Jeremy

On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 11:42 AM, Gerard Meijssen  wrote:

> Hoi,
> What year are we living ?
> Thanks,
>  GerardM
>
> On 14 February 2015 at 17:24,  wrote:
>
>>  my2cents re figures on percentages (... in a gender binary paradigm),
>> well...
>>
>> I'd suggest to take into account User:Pundit's thoughtful considerations,
>>
>> author of: Jemielniak, Dariusz (2014), Common knowledge? An ethnography
>> of Wikipedia, Stanford University Press, pp. 14-15
>>
>> Dariusz Jemielniak writes:
>> "According to Wikipedia Editors Study, published in 2011, 91 percent of
>> all Wikipedia editors are male ([reference to a study of 2011] This figure
>> may not be accurate, since it is based on a voluntary online survey
>> advertised to 31,699 registered users and resulting on 5,073 complete and
>> valid responses [...] it is possible that male editors are more likely to
>> respond than female editors. Similarly, a study of self-declarations of
>> gender showing only 16 percent are female editors (Lam et al. 2011) may be
>> distorted, since more females may choose not to reveal their gender in a
>> community perceived as male dominated."
>>
>> additionally, asserting status and flaunting seniority (also described
>> by Jemielniak at the end of the paragraph previous to the one quoted above)
>> is generally perceived to be a commonly employed trick to resist any
>> changes;
>>
>> and, last but not least, one might argue that the group perceived as
>> "in power" might feel to find strongly unbalanced outcomes most rewarding,
>> and hence might tend to publish them as widely as possible and not least
>> quote from them persistently, too...
>>
>> any rebuttals from stats experts here?
>>
>> best,
>> Claudia
>> koltzenb...@w4w.net
>> My GPG-Key-ID: DDD21523
>>
>> -- Original Message ---
>> From:Jane Darnell 
>> To:Research into Wikimedia content and communities > l...@lists.wikimedia.org>
>> Sent:Sat, 14 Feb 2015 10:49:29 +0100
>> Subject:[Wiki-research-l] Fwd: [Gendergap] Wikipedia readers
>>
>> > Forwarding here in case anyone has information
>> > that could benefit Yana
>> > -- Forwarded message --
>> > From: Jane Darnell 
>> > Date: Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 9:44 AM
>> > Subject: Re: [Gendergap] Wikipedia readers
>> > To: "Addressing gender equity and exploring ways
>> > to increase the participation of women within
>> > Wikimedia projects." < gender...@lists.wikimedia.org>
>> >
>> > In 2013 the Dutch Wikimedia chapter hired an
>> > external party to conduct a survey and the results
>> > (translated to English) are here:
>>
>> https://nl.wikimedia.org/wiki/Bestand:Motivaction_report_translation_v02.pd
>> f
>> >
>> > The study was split into two parts; one on the
>> > contributors and one on the "users", aka readers.
>> > Users were 50/50 male female (page 51),
>> >  contributors were 88% male, 6% female, and 6%
>> > would not say (page 26)
>> >
>> > On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 8:11 AM, Yana Welinder
>> >  wrote:
>> >
>> > > Hi all,
>> > >
>> > > What are some good studies of the gender of Wikipedia readers?
>> > >
>> > > Thanks,
>> > > Yana
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > ___
>> > > Gendergap mailing list
>> > > gender...@lists.wikimedia.org
>> > > To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing,
>> please
>> > > visit:
>> > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>> > >
>> --- End of Original Message ---
>>
>> ___
>> Wiki-research-l mailing list
>> Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
>>
>>
>
> ___
> Wiki-research-l mailing list
> Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
>
>
___
Wiki-research-l mailing list
Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l


Re: [Wiki-research-l] a cautious note on gender stats Re: Fwd: [Gendergap] Wikipedia readers

2015-02-14 Thread Gerard Meijssen
Hoi,
What year are we living ?
Thanks,
 GerardM

On 14 February 2015 at 17:24,  wrote:

>  my2cents re figures on percentages (... in a gender binary paradigm),
> well...
>
> I'd suggest to take into account User:Pundit's thoughtful considerations,
>
> author of: Jemielniak, Dariusz (2014), Common knowledge? An ethnography
> of Wikipedia, Stanford University Press, pp. 14-15
>
> Dariusz Jemielniak writes:
> "According to Wikipedia Editors Study, published in 2011, 91 percent of
> all Wikipedia editors are male ([reference to a study of 2011] This figure
> may not be accurate, since it is based on a voluntary online survey
> advertised to 31,699 registered users and resulting on 5,073 complete and
> valid responses [...] it is possible that male editors are more likely to
> respond than female editors. Similarly, a study of self-declarations of
> gender showing only 16 percent are female editors (Lam et al. 2011) may be
> distorted, since more females may choose not to reveal their gender in a
> community perceived as male dominated."
>
> additionally, asserting status and flaunting seniority (also described
> by Jemielniak at the end of the paragraph previous to the one quoted above)
> is generally perceived to be a commonly employed trick to resist any
> changes;
>
> and, last but not least, one might argue that the group perceived as
> "in power" might feel to find strongly unbalanced outcomes most rewarding,
> and hence might tend to publish them as widely as possible and not least
> quote from them persistently, too...
>
> any rebuttals from stats experts here?
>
> best,
> Claudia
> koltzenb...@w4w.net
> My GPG-Key-ID: DDD21523
>
> -- Original Message ---
> From:Jane Darnell 
> To:Research into Wikimedia content and communities  l...@lists.wikimedia.org>
> Sent:Sat, 14 Feb 2015 10:49:29 +0100
> Subject:[Wiki-research-l] Fwd: [Gendergap] Wikipedia readers
>
> > Forwarding here in case anyone has information
> > that could benefit Yana
> > -- Forwarded message --
> > From: Jane Darnell 
> > Date: Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 9:44 AM
> > Subject: Re: [Gendergap] Wikipedia readers
> > To: "Addressing gender equity and exploring ways
> > to increase the participation of women within
> > Wikimedia projects." < gender...@lists.wikimedia.org>
> >
> > In 2013 the Dutch Wikimedia chapter hired an
> > external party to conduct a survey and the results
> > (translated to English) are here:
> https://nl.wikimedia.org/wiki/Bestand:Motivaction_report_translation_v02.pd
> f
> >
> > The study was split into two parts; one on the
> > contributors and one on the "users", aka readers.
> > Users were 50/50 male female (page 51),
> >  contributors were 88% male, 6% female, and 6%
> > would not say (page 26)
> >
> > On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 8:11 AM, Yana Welinder
> >  wrote:
> >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > What are some good studies of the gender of Wikipedia readers?
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Yana
> > >
> > >
> > > ___
> > > Gendergap mailing list
> > > gender...@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing,
> please
> > > visit:
> > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
> > >
> --- End of Original Message ---
>
> ___
> Wiki-research-l mailing list
> Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
>
>
___
Wiki-research-l mailing list
Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l


[Wiki-research-l] a cautious note on gender stats Re: Fwd: [Gendergap] Wikipedia readers

2015-02-14 Thread koltzenburg
my2cents re figures on percentages (... in a gender binary paradigm), well...

I'd suggest to take into account User:Pundit's thoughtful 
considerations,

author of: Jemielniak, Dariusz (2014), Common knowledge? An ethnography
of Wikipedia, Stanford University Press, pp. 14-15

Dariusz Jemielniak writes:
"According to Wikipedia Editors Study, published in 2011, 91 percent of all 
Wikipedia editors are male ([reference to a study of 2011] This figure may not 
be accurate, since it is based on a voluntary online survey advertised to 
31,699 registered users and resulting on 5,073 complete and valid responses 
[...] it is possible that male editors are more likely to respond than female 
editors. Similarly, a study of self-declarations of gender showing only 16 
percent are female editors (Lam et al. 2011) may be distorted, since more 
females may choose not to reveal their gender in a community perceived as male 
dominated."

additionally, asserting status and flaunting seniority (also described by 
Jemielniak at the end of the paragraph previous to the one quoted above) is 
generally perceived to be a commonly employed trick to resist any changes;

and, last but not least, one might argue that the group perceived as "in power" 
might feel to find strongly unbalanced outcomes most rewarding, and hence might 
tend to publish them as widely as possible and not least quote from them 
persistently, too...

any rebuttals from stats experts here?

best,
Claudia
koltzenb...@w4w.net
My GPG-Key-ID: DDD21523

-- Original Message ---
From:Jane Darnell 
To:Research into Wikimedia content and communities 
Sent:Sat, 14 Feb 2015 10:49:29 +0100
Subject:[Wiki-research-l] Fwd: [Gendergap] Wikipedia readers

> Forwarding here in case anyone has information
> that could benefit Yana
> -- Forwarded message --
> From: Jane Darnell 
> Date: Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 9:44 AM
> Subject: Re: [Gendergap] Wikipedia readers
> To: "Addressing gender equity and exploring ways
> to increase the participation of women within
> Wikimedia projects." < gender...@lists.wikimedia.org>
>
> In 2013 the Dutch Wikimedia chapter hired an
> external party to conduct a survey and the results
> (translated to English) are here:
https://nl.wikimedia.org/wiki/Bestand:Motivaction_report_translation_v02.pd
f
>
> The study was split into two parts; one on the
> contributors and one on the "users", aka readers.
> Users were 50/50 male female (page 51),
> contributors were 88% male, 6% female, and 6%
> would not say (page 26)
>
> On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 8:11 AM, Yana Welinder
>  wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > What are some good studies of the gender of Wikipedia readers?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Yana
> >
> >
> > ___
> > Gendergap mailing list
> > gender...@lists.wikimedia.org
> > To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing,
please
> > visit:
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
> >
--- End of Original Message --- 
___
Wiki-research-l mailing list
Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l


[Wiki-research-l] Fwd: [Gendergap] Wikipedia readers

2015-02-14 Thread Jane Darnell
Forwarding here in case anyone has information that could benefit Yana
-- Forwarded message --
From: Jane Darnell 
Date: Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 9:44 AM
Subject: Re: [Gendergap] Wikipedia readers
To: "Addressing gender equity and exploring ways to increase the
participation of women within Wikimedia projects." <
gender...@lists.wikimedia.org>


In 2013 the Dutch Wikimedia chapter hired an external party to conduct a
survey and the results (translated to English) are here:
https://nl.wikimedia.org/wiki/Bestand:Motivaction_report_translation_v02.pdf

The study was split into two parts; one on the contributors and one on the
"users", aka readers. Users were 50/50 male female (page 51), contributors
were 88% male, 6% female, and 6% would not say (page 26)

On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 8:11 AM, Yana Welinder  wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> What are some good studies of the gender of Wikipedia readers?
>
> Thanks,
> Yana
>
>
> ___
> Gendergap mailing list
> gender...@lists.wikimedia.org
> To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please
> visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>
___
Wiki-research-l mailing list
Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l