Hi Kiril! Thanks for all the patient and thoughtful clarifications and elaborations :) I left a couple of comments inline, below.
Good luck with your project! As you can tell, we are a curious and thoughtful group here on wikiresearch-l. If you have methodological questions in the future, please don't hesitate to ask them here. On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 11:43 AM Kiril Simeonovski < kiril.simeonov...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Jonathan, > > You have correctly deduced from the description that there will not be any > interaction with editors and all the data for the research will be drawn > from the publicly available edit histories. The most confusing part that > gives impression of intervening is perhaps the "experiment", which > conceptually differs in the social sciences from its more common meaning in > a laboratory environment. That said, this research is not going to consume > editor's time for surveys nor it is going to convert Wikipedia to a > laboratory or ask people to change their behaviour. > > I came here with the announcement after creating the proposal on Meta and > following the guidelines regarding research projects with the goal of > getting some useful input from other researchers subscribed to the mailing > list and learning how to administratively proceed with the proposal on Meta > (What should be done next on Meta? Will there be an appointed WMF > researcher to contact regarding this research?). > Putting your research proposal on Meta is best practice for all research projects related to Wikimedia. It is not a required step, but it's useful for increasing awareness of your project among the broader Wikimedia communities (researchers and everyone else). There is nothing else you need to do at this point, although we appreciate it if you would keep your project page up to date as you perform your research. When you're done, we always appreciate it if you link to any preprints, demos, code repos, slide decks, etc from that page as well. Your project won't automatically be assigned a WMF contact. The Wikimedia Foundation itself does not officially monitor or screen new research projects that are published on Meta, or review them for support. However, if you believe your research furthers the goals of the Wikimedia Movement, you might consider applying for a grant (example <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:Project/Misinformation_And_Its_Discontents:_Narrative_Recommendations_on_Wikipedia%27s_Vulnerabilities_and_Resilience>). Individual WMF teams (including my team, Research) do occasionally partner with external researchers <https://research.wikimedia.org/collaborators.html> and those partnerships can include access to non-public data (under a Non-Disclosure Agreement). Some partnerships do involve funding, but this is not common. All partnerships are at the discretion of the team manager. In the case of my team, that manager is Leila Zia, Head of Research. Quick question: when you say "the guidelines regarding research projects" above, what document are you referring to? There are a lot of these pages in the Research namespace and they are not always up to date, unfortunately. > My request for help from research community regarding this research will be > mostly technical (e.g. smart random sampling of editors, existing tools for > research purposes, etc.) > We can definitely help you with these questions! You can also post questions related to data access and data infrastructure to the analytics mailing list <https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/analytics>. > > Best, > Kiril > > On Tue 25. Feb 2020 at 17:06, Jonathan Morgan <jmor...@wikimedia.org> > wrote: > > > Taking a quick step back from all the very enthusiastic questioning of > the > > researcher's motives... > > > > Kiril, > > > > Regarding your methods, Your proposal states > > < > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Modelling_Behaviour_in_a_Peer_Production_Economy_upon_Evidence_from_Wikipedia > > > > > that for this study "The editors will be sampled from the pool of > > contributors to all language editions over Wikipedia's entire history and > > will be classified into groups based on their longevity on the project." > > But it says little more than that. > > > > When I read this description, it does not sound to me like you will > > necessarily be contacting editors for this study, or intervening in any > way > > into Wikipedia. Stuart and Pine's questions seem to assume that you will > be > > in some way recruiting editors as participants, asking them to change > their > > behavior, asking them questions, etc. > > > > *Will you be performing any of the above activities?* If not, the > questions > > asked so far may be beside the point. Anyone is free to perform analysis > on > > publicly available and free-licensed data. > > > > If you do plan to intervene in Wikipedia in some way, or work with > editors > > as research participants or co-researchers, and you would like the > members > > of this mailing list to provide you with feedback or other support, > please > > describe the support or feedback you would like to receive in more > detail. > > > > If your study is non-interventionist but you still want feedback, we can > > provide that too. Perhaps you can be more clear about the kind of > feedback > > you want; that will keep the conversation going in an interesting and > > productive direction that everyone on the list can benefit from. > > > > Finally, we the members of this list (whether volunteers or WMF staff) > are > > not peer reviewers, do not speak for the Wikipedia community, and are not > > empowered to approve or deny research requests. > > > > Best, > > Jonathan > > > > On Mon, Feb 24, 2020 at 11:23 PM Kiril Simeonovski < > > kiril.simeonov...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Hi Stuart, > > > > > > Thank you for your thoughts so far. I really like how the discussion is > > > progressing. > > > > > > The methodology will, of course, yield other results about editor > > dynamics > > > and growth paths. Paid editing and sock puppetry as systemic risk > factors > > > could be included in the model exogenously but it might be possible to > > > endogenise them in any future research. At this stage, the most > important > > > thing is to lay the grounds for developing a sensible model that can be > > > later upgraded with new assumptions. > > > > > > As for the editing experience, I've been around since 2008 (this is my > > edit > > > log < > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:CentralAuth/Kiril_Simeonovski > > > > > > > ). > > > > > > Best, > > > Kiril > > > > > > On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 12:37 AM Stuart A. Yeates <syea...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hi Kiril > > > > > > > > Let's just say that history has taught us to be risk-averse to > > > > drive-by researchers. > > > > > > > > Can you point us to other research output using this methodology? Do > > > > you (or any of your team) have significant editing experience? Are > you > > > > familiar with the firestorm that is paid editing and sock puppetry?? > > > > > > > > cheers > > > > stuart > > > > > > > > -- > > > > ...let us be heard from red core to black sky > > > > > > > > On Tue, 25 Feb 2020 at 10:43, Kiril Simeonovski > > > > <kiril.simeonov...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Hi Pine, > > > > > > > > > > The findings from the research will be articulated to draw clear > > > > > conclusions about what causes utility and disutility from > > > participation, > > > > > and how this is perceived by different editors. For instance, it is > > > > natural > > > > > to assume that editors come to contribute by adding content that > will > > > > > remain visible, while blocks and reverted edits are risk factors > that > > > > drive > > > > > them away, although different editors have different levels of risk > > > > > aversion. Similarly to any other research, the benefit for the > > > community > > > > > and individual editors is going to be indirect but yet not > > > insignificant > > > > to > > > > > be accepted in the future process of decision-making (if the > research > > > > > demonstrates the existence of high level of risk aversion towards > > > > > something, then it automatically signals that doing that thing is > > > harmful > > > > > for the environment). > > > > > > > > > > I know that it's impossible to predict the extent to which this > > > research > > > > > would make impact because the body of literature is very poor on > > > > > volunteer-driven environments in a dynamic setting but it's > > definitely > > > > > worth to start off something that might attract the attention of > > > > > researchers in this direction. At the end, the research is not > meant > > to > > > > > carve rules in stone that any single editor should respect but > rather > > > to > > > > > suggest something that individuals and communities might find > useful > > > (the > > > > > means of doing this will definitely not turn Wikipedia into a > > > laboratory > > > > or > > > > > put someone's privacy in danger). > > > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > > Kiril > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 24, 2020 at 9:43 PM Pine W <wiki.p...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Kiril, > > > > > > > > > > > > Thank you for sharing your proposal. > > > > > > > > > > > > I am concerned about the possibility of Wikipedia being used as a > > > > > > laboratory for experiments that consume volunteers' time and/or > > > > > > personal data, and don't benefit Wikipedia or its participants. > > Does > > > > > > your research benefit the community, and if so, how? It sounds > like > > > > > > your research intends to develop a model of decision trees for > > > > > > individual Wikipedians, and at first read I don't understand how > > the > > > > > > individual research subjects or the community would benefit. > > > > > > > > > > > > Sorry if this sounds defensive, but I hope that you understand > why > > > I'm > > > > > > asking. > > > > > > > > > > > > Pine > > > > > > ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine ) > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 24, 2020 at 6:00 PM Kiril Simeonovski > > > > > > <kiril.simeonov...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am currently working on a research concerned with modelling > > user > > > > > > > behaviour on Wikipedia. The idea is to design a field > experiment > > > > over a > > > > > > > random sample of Wikipedians in order to examine their risk > > > > preferences > > > > > > and > > > > > > > define (dis)utilities that will be used in a > utility-maximisation > > > > model. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have already submitted an abstract that got accepted for the > > > > > > > biennial Foundations > > > > > > > of Utility and Risk Conference 2020 < > > > https://www.furconference.org/> > > > > > > and my > > > > > > > future plans include presentation of the concept at other > > research > > > > > > > conferences (including Wikimania 2020). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You can visit the project page > > > > > > > < > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Modelling_Behaviour_in_a_Peer_Production_Economy_upon_Evidence_from_Wikipedia > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of this research on Meta. Your questions and comments are > welcome > > > at > > > > any > > > > > > > time. Thank you! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > > Kiril > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > > 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 > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > 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 > > > > > > > > > -- > > Jonathan T. Morgan > > Senior Design Researcher > > Wikimedia Foundation > > User:Jmorgan (WMF) <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Jmorgan_(WMF)> > > (Uses He/Him) > > > > *Please note that I do not expect a response from you on evenings or > > weekends* > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > -- Jonathan T. Morgan Senior Design Researcher Wikimedia Foundation User:Jmorgan (WMF) <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Jmorgan_(WMF)> (Uses He/Him) *Please note that I do not expect a response from you on evenings or weekends* _______________________________________________ Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
