Drop in amount of wiki research?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
8 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Drop in amount of wiki research?

Federico Leva (Nemo)
The data needs cleaning (and every small edit or redirect helps), but
multiple sources agree on a trend similar to this, from 2011 to 2014
(partial): 943, 778, 489, 250.
http://wikipapers.referata.com/wiki/2011
http://wikipapers.referata.com/wiki/2012
http://wikipapers.referata.com/wiki/2013
http://wikipapers.referata.com/wiki/2014

What's going on?

Nemo

_______________________________________________
Wiki-research-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Drop in amount of wiki research?

Jane Darnell
Without digging into the details, my first guess would be that more non-English research is being conducted as the size of non-English Wikipedias increase. Those conducting such research are less likely to publish English summaries of their work, making them less "findable" and thus less likely to be linked from the pages you specify.

On Sun, Nov 9, 2014 at 11:39 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo) <[hidden email]> wrote:
The data needs cleaning (and every small edit or redirect helps), but multiple sources agree on a trend similar to this, from 2011 to 2014 (partial): 943, 778, 489, 250.
http://wikipapers.referata.com/wiki/2011
http://wikipapers.referata.com/wiki/2012
http://wikipapers.referata.com/wiki/2013
http://wikipapers.referata.com/wiki/2014

What's going on?

Nemo

_______________________________________________
Wiki-research-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l


_______________________________________________
Wiki-research-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Drop in amount of wiki research?

Federico Leva (Nemo)
Jane Darnell, 09/11/2014 12:05:
> Those conducting such research are less likely to publish English
> summaries of their work,

Interesting suggestion, but how does this matter/how would this bias
operate? Most WikiPapers contributors aren't English native speakers.
What databases, archives or other resources are English-specific?

In my last import there were 132 non-English publications vs. 4424
English publications.

> making them less "findable" and thus less
> likely to be linked from the pages you specify.

How to find them, then? Until we find them, we won't know they're
missing. :-) If I look at some "neutral" resource like
http://www.dart-europe.eu/basic-results.php?kw[]=wiki&f=n I see we're
probably missing some, but not many and certainly not 2 thirds. We have
a number of todos http://wikipapers.referata.com/wiki/WikiPapers:TODO 
but perhaps we need to look into some institutional meta-repository.

Nemo

_______________________________________________
Wiki-research-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Drop in amount of wiki research?

Jane Darnell
Sorry, like you I have no idea how to find "unfindable" papers written in foreign languages. Yet another factor may be a growing reluctance among students and/or their professors to release papers to a wider audience. I don't think many research students are convinced that the publication of their paper could be beneficial for their employment prospects in the short- or long term, especially when we as a community tend to slam any and all research in the typical pedantic wiki way.

On Sun, Nov 9, 2014 at 12:26 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) <[hidden email]> wrote:
Jane Darnell, 09/11/2014 12:05:
Those conducting such research are less likely to publish English
summaries of their work,

Interesting suggestion, but how does this matter/how would this bias operate? Most WikiPapers contributors aren't English native speakers. What databases, archives or other resources are English-specific?

In my last import there were 132 non-English publications vs. 4424 English publications.

making them less "findable" and thus less
likely to be linked from the pages you specify.

How to find them, then? Until we find them, we won't know they're missing. :-) If I look at some "neutral" resource like http://www.dart-europe.eu/basic-results.php?kw[]=wiki&f=n I see we're probably missing some, but not many and certainly not 2 thirds. We have a number of todos http://wikipapers.referata.com/wiki/WikiPapers:TODO but perhaps we need to look into some institutional meta-repository.

Nemo

_______________________________________________
Wiki-research-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l


_______________________________________________
Wiki-research-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Drop in amount of wiki research?

Kerry Raymond
In reply to this post by Federico Leva (Nemo)
This sort of thing happens all the time in the research world.

Someone publishes a paper about some new topic, in this case Wikipedia.
Everyone else says "hey, maybe I can apply my usual research techniques that
I use to study frog mating to Wikipedia instead, hmm, how about the ways
editors find collaborators to work on articles?". A rash of papers then
follows where people apply their usual research interests to Wikipedia in
some way.

But once you've got a few papers on any particular aspect, the low-hanging
fruit dries up. "Hmm, I've already written papers studying women and
Wikipedia, gay women and Wikipedia, mothers and Wikipedia, post-menopausal
women and Wikipedia, and I'm running out of ideas, pregnant women and
Wikipedia, maybe?"

So people move on to the next new thing, "hmm, how can I apply frog mating
to the war in Iraq? maybe something in relation to the recruitment of
foreign fighters, that's topical!".

After the initial flush of enthusiasm for anything new, the long term
researchers have to dig deeper and harder for a new publishable result. In a
world where the phrase "smallest unit of publishable research" has entered
our language, Wikipedia may have become a barren well, left to those who
genuinely care about the topic. In this regard, I note Aaron's recent
comment about it being the time to tackle the "hard problems". Hard problems
tend to need lots of work, often produce marginal results (they are usually
highly complex so working on any aspect in isolation often produces marginal
improvement), but if you crack them, you might get a Nobel prize. Or you
might not. That's not too appealing to the researchers trying to bulk up
their publication list for that elusive next job, tenure or promotion.

I think we may just be seeing a natural cycle (or unnatural, depending on
how you view these things).

Kerry



_______________________________________________
Wiki-research-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Drop in amount of wiki research?

Piotr Konieczny-2
In reply to this post by Federico Leva (Nemo)
How complete is wikipapers referata site? Could it be the case of lack
of updates/maintenance/editor activity resulting in missing data?

--

Piotr Konieczny, PhD
http://hanyang.academia.edu/PiotrKonieczny
http://scholar.google.com/citations?user=gdV8_AEAAAAJ
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Piotrus

On 11/9/2014 19:39, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote:

> The data needs cleaning (and every small edit or redirect helps), but
> multiple sources agree on a trend similar to this, from 2011 to 2014
> (partial): 943, 778, 489, 250.
> http://wikipapers.referata.com/wiki/2011
> http://wikipapers.referata.com/wiki/2012
> http://wikipapers.referata.com/wiki/2013
> http://wikipapers.referata.com/wiki/2014
>
> What's going on?
>
> Nemo
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wiki-research-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l


_______________________________________________
Wiki-research-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Drop in amount of wiki research?

Federico Leva (Nemo)
Piotr Konieczny, 14/11/2014 09:24:
> How complete is wikipapers referata site?

Rather complete. There are some duplicates but we definitely have the
majority of the publications (perhaps 90 %?) known to most sources.

> Could it be the case of lack
> of updates/maintenance/editor activity resulting in missing data?

I doubt it. It's possible however that there are biases in coverage, as
Jane speculates. If you have some sources for numbers of publications in
a certain language/topic/country/year, we may compare to those of
WikiPapers and see how big the gap is.

Kerry, maybe it's just about things getting tough as you say. But I'm
careful about such conclusions, just as I'm not convinced that the
"everything easy has already been written" theory can explain the fall
of new users after the peak in 2006/2007, across all Wikimedia projects
however (un)developed.
Much rather easy research would be possible, but we're not seeing it.

Nemo

_______________________________________________
Wiki-research-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Drop in amount of wiki research?

Aaron Halfaker-2
Personally, I have seen no qualitative decrease in high quality studies of Wikimedia projects.  It seems to me that a whole new class of studies about Wikidata are just gaining traction and that the ACM conferences I frequent have a renewed interest in Wikipedia as an instance of a mature open production system. 

With that in mind, I can certainly believe that the rate of low impact studies has experienced substantial decline.  It seems clear that Wikipedia -- as a research subject -- is no longer a subject that is interesting by default.  

-Aaron

On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 4:01 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo) <[hidden email]> wrote:
Piotr Konieczny, 14/11/2014 09:24:
How complete is wikipapers referata site?

Rather complete. There are some duplicates but we definitely have the majority of the publications (perhaps 90 %?) known to most sources.

Could it be the case of lack
of updates/maintenance/editor activity resulting in missing data?

I doubt it. It's possible however that there are biases in coverage, as Jane speculates. If you have some sources for numbers of publications in a certain language/topic/country/year, we may compare to those of WikiPapers and see how big the gap is.

Kerry, maybe it's just about things getting tough as you say. But I'm careful about such conclusions, just as I'm not convinced that the "everything easy has already been written" theory can explain the fall of new users after the peak in 2006/2007, across all Wikimedia projects however (un)developed.
Much rather easy research would be possible, but we're not seeing it.


Nemo

_______________________________________________
Wiki-research-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l


_______________________________________________
Wiki-research-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l