Note that Lam et al. came to the same 16.1% figure through completely different methods in 2011. http://files.grouplens.org/papers/wp-gender-wikisym2011.pdf
On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 8:48 AM, Dariusz Jemielniak <dar...@alk.edu.pl> wrote: > hi, > > > On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 3:43 PM, <koltzenb...@w4w.net> wrote: > >> >> > the current methods are far from perfect. >> >> in your opinion, in which respect do they need to be improved? >> > > the thing is, with Internet research we often have to rely on anonymous > declarations. It would be nice to e.g. cross-reference with data from > social networks, but it is not possible to introduce ethically without user > consent, and without the consent the problem of opt-in selective bias is > still real. What we can do (and do) is triangulation of methods. > > > >> has anyone published on that, or are there any "non-published" links >> available? >> > > I think the most interesting approach to the problem is covered by Mako > and Aaron: > http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0065782 > > best, > > dj > > > >> >> best, >> Claudia >> koltzenb...@w4w.net >> Meine GPG-Key-ID: DDD21523 >> - mehr dazu: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Privacy_Guard >> >> ---------- Original Message ----------- >> From:Dariusz Jemielniak <dar...@alk.edu.pl> >> To:Research into Wikimedia content and communities <wiki-research- >> l...@lists.wikimedia.org> >> Sent:Mon, 16 Feb 2015 14:58:56 +0100 >> Subject:Re: [Wiki-research-l] a cautious note on gender stats Re: Fwd: >> [Gendergap] Wikipedia readers >> >> > hi there, >> > >> > thanks for the quote :) I totally agree with you >> > that a lot of data we have is outdated, and that >> > there are way too many generalizations about >> > Wikipedia relying only on en-wiki. As Aaron and >> > Mako pointed out in their paper (referred to by >> > Jeremy), there needs to be more approaches to our >> > estimations of gender gap, and the current methods >> > are far from perfect. As far as I recall, they did >> > a follow-up on this topic, and maybe a publication >> > coming up? >> > >> > best, >> > >> > dariusz >> > >> > On Sun, Feb 15, 2015 at 11:50 AM, >> > <koltzenb...@w4w.net> wrote: >> > >> > > Hi Jeremy, thank you for this pointer, >> > > >> > > hi all, >> > > can anyone explain to me why data from 2008 are re-used in >> quantitative >> > > studies of this kind? (instead of asking new questions, for example, >> and >> > > also >> > > changing the framework in which the data were created) >> > > >> > > another issue seems to be that, while Wikipedia exists in a host of >> > > languages, >> > > statistical news are rarely accompanied by qualifiers as to which >> language >> > > version (community) the data were created in/from. >> > > my guess on this issue is that "results" re enWP may be quite >> different >> > > from >> > > results re, say, bgWP or hiWP, because genders relate to one another >> > > differently and collaborative writing on the web may have a >> differently >> > > gendered status in different communities, etc. >> > > >> > > the same caveat would be due as to yesterday's "the gender of >> Wikipedia >> > > readers" question that this thread started with, >> > > >> > > best, >> > > Claudia >> > > koltzenb...@w4w.net >> > > >> > > ---------- Original Message ----------- >> > > From:Jeremy Foote <jdfoo...@gmail.com> >> > > To:Research into Wikimedia content and communities <wiki-research- >> > > l...@lists.wikimedia.org> >> > > Sent:Sat, 14 Feb 2015 22:12:41 -0600 >> > > Subject:Re: [Wiki-research-l] a cautious note on gender stats Re: Fwd: >> > > [Gendergap] Wikipedia readers >> > > >> > > > 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 >> > > <gerard.meijs...@gmail.com >> > > > > wrote: >> > > > >> > > > > Hoi, >> > > > > What year are we living ? >> > > > > Thanks, >> > > > > GerardM >> > > > > >> > > > > On 14 February 2015 at 17:24, <koltzenb...@w4w.net> 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 <jane...@gmail.com> >> > > > >> To:Research into Wikimedia content and communities <wiki- >> research- >> > > > >> 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 <jane...@gmail.com> >> > > > >> > 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 >> > > > >> > <y...@wikimedia.org> 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 >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > ------- End of Original Message ------- >> > > >> > > _______________________________________________ >> > > Wiki-research-l mailing list >> > > Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org >> > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l >> > > >> > >> > -- >> > >> > __________________________ >> > prof. dr hab. Dariusz Jemielniak >> > kierownik katedry Zarządzania Międzynarodowego >> > i centrum badawczego CROW >> > Akademia Leona Koźmińskiego >> > http://www.crow.alk.edu.pl >> > >> > członek Akademii Młodych Uczonych Polskiej >> > Akademii Nauk członek Komitetu Polityki Naukowej MNiSW >> > >> > Wyszła pierwsza na świecie etnografia Wikipedii >> > "Common Knowledge? An Ethnography of Wikipedia" >> > (2014, Stanford University Press) mojego autorstwa >> > http://www.sup.org/book.cgi?id=24010 >> > >> > Recenzje >> > Forbes: http://www.forbes.com/fdc/welcome_mjx.shtml >> > Pacific Standard: >> > http://www.psmag.com/navigation/books-and- >> > culture/killed-wikipedia-93777/ Motherboard: >> > http://motherboard.vice.com/read/an-ethnography-of- >> > wikipedia The Wikipedian: >> > http://thewikipedian.net/2014/10/10/dariusz- >> > jemielniak-common-knowledge >> ------- End of Original Message ------- >> > > > > -- > > __________________________ > prof. dr hab. Dariusz Jemielniak > kierownik katedry Zarządzania Międzynarodowego > i centrum badawczego CROW > Akademia Leona Koźmińskiego > http://www.crow.alk.edu.pl > > członek Akademii Młodych Uczonych Polskiej Akademii Nauk > członek Komitetu Polityki Naukowej MNiSW > > Wyszła pierwsza na świecie etnografia Wikipedii "Common Knowledge? An > Ethnography of Wikipedia" (2014, Stanford University Press) mojego > autorstwa http://www.sup.org/book.cgi?id=24010 > > Recenzje > Forbes: http://www.forbes.com/fdc/welcome_mjx.shtml > Pacific Standard: > http://www.psmag.com/navigation/books-and-culture/killed-wikipedia-93777/ > Motherboard: http://motherboard.vice.com/read/an-ethnography-of-wikipedia > The Wikipedian: > http://thewikipedian.net/2014/10/10/dariusz-jemielniak-common-knowledge > > _______________________________________________ > 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
