Note that looking at article-gender and not editor-gender gives 15.6% female figure [1], which is similar to the ~16% other in the literature. If article-gender is a proxy for editor-gender, that is useful because it is easier to calculate article-gender.
[1] http://arxiv.org/pdf/1502.03086v1.pdf Make a great day, Max Klein ‽ http://notconfusing.com/ On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 9:44 AM, Aaron Halfaker <aaron.halfa...@gmail.com> wrote: > 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 that a lot of data we have is outdated, and that 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 > >
_______________________________________________ Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
