Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.
Copyright 2011 Digital Enterprise Research Institute. All rights reserved.
Digital Enterprise Research Institute www.deri....
Ph.D. student
o Information Management on
the Web
o Open collaboration systems
o Multidisciplinary,
mixed methods
@jschnei...
Open Collaboration Systems
o Wikipedia
o OpenStreetMap
o Project Gutenberg – Distributed Proofreaders
o Apache projects, M...
How do we learn the “talk”?
Online “talk” for decisions
What’s an Open Collaboration System?
“An online environment that
(1) supports the collective production of an artifact
(2)...
What’s an Open Collaboration System?
“An online environment that
(1) supports the collective production of an artifact
(2)...
What’s an Open Collaboration System?
“An online environment that
(1) supports the collective production of an artifact
(2)...
OBSERVATIONS
“Group” collaborating
Make explicit things
get done.
Support Newcomers
by Making Rules Explicit
o Investigate Wikipedia discussions
o Provide semantic support
o Evaluate the i...
Deletion threatens Wikipedia
o 1 in 4 new Wikipedia articles is deleted – within
minutes or hours
o Demotivating!
• 1 in 3...
Article creators
o Misunderstand policy
• “I do understand that articles on wikipedia need to be
sourced… it is due to hav...
Novices’ arguments
o Structurally different to experts’ arguments
o More problematic arguments from novices
• Personal pre...
Articulate criteria
4 Factors cover
• 91% of
comments
• 70% of
discussions
Factor Example (used to justify
`keep')
Notabil...
Add semantic structure
Implementation based on Jodi Schneider and Krystian Samp
“Alternative Interfaces for Deletion Discu...
84% prefer our system
“Information is structured and I can quickly get an
overview of the key arguments.”
“The ability to ...
Thanks!
o Questions?
o Comments?
o jschneider@pobox.com
o @jschneider
Acknowledgements
o Thanks to collaborators!
• Krystian Samp
• Maciej Dabrowski
o Overall Ph.D. funding, Science Foundation...
image credit: Alexandre Passant
Goals
! "#$%&' ( )*+, (
- #./0", #1234)5%#$ 61%7 $( 8&( 9: %/ %1
- ( .4%1#$)
; , "1"%14)< )
=#$' ( 4
>1?' ".+
Find and Ver...
Talking is (virtual) work -supporting online argumentation--2013-09-18 Malta virtual work
Talking is (virtual) work -supporting online argumentation--2013-09-18 Malta virtual work
Talking is (virtual) work -supporting online argumentation--2013-09-18 Malta virtual work
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Talking is (virtual) work -supporting online argumentation--2013-09-18 Malta virtual work

3,194 views

Published on

In open collaboration systems, work gets done through talking. We support a particular kind of talk-based work -- deletion discussions in Wikipedia -- by categorizing and summarizing discussions. In a user test, 84% find benefit from this.

This talk about my thesis was given 2013-09-18 in Malta at the Virtual Work training school:
http://dynamicsofvirtualwork.com/malta-training-school/
part of the COST action on Virtual Work
http://cost.eu/domains_actions/isch/Actions/IS1202

Published in: Technology, Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Talking is (virtual) work -supporting online argumentation--2013-09-18 Malta virtual work

  1. 1. Copyright 2011 Digital Enterprise Research Institute. All rights reserved. Digital Enterprise Research Institute www.deri.ie Enabling Networked Knowledge Talking is (virtual) work: Supporting online argumentation Jodi Schneider Weds 18th September 2013 1 Dynamics of Virtual Work Training School Valletta, Malta
  2. 2. Ph.D. student o Information Management on the Web o Open collaboration systems o Multidisciplinary, mixed methods @jschneider jodischneider.com
  3. 3. Open Collaboration Systems o Wikipedia o OpenStreetMap o Project Gutenberg – Distributed Proofreaders o Apache projects, Mozilla Firefox, … In these Open Collaboration Systems “people form ties with others & create things together” (Forte and Lampe 2013)
  4. 4. How do we learn the “talk”?
  5. 5. Online “talk” for decisions
  6. 6. What’s an Open Collaboration System? “An online environment that (1) supports the collective production of an artifact (2) through a technologically mediated collaboration platform (3) that presents a low barrier to entry and exit, and (4) supports the emergence of persistent but malleable social structures.” (Forte and Lampe 2013)
  7. 7. What’s an Open Collaboration System? “An online environment that (1) supports the collective production of an artifact (2) through a technologically mediated collaboration platform (3) that presents a low barrier to entry and exit, and (4) supports the emergence of persistent but malleable social structures.” (Forte and Lampe 2013) “Group” collaborating
  8. 8. What’s an Open Collaboration System? “An online environment that (1) supports the collective production of an artifact (2) through a technologically mediated collaboration platform (3) that presents a low barrier to entry and exit, and (4) supports the emergence of persistent but malleable social structures.” (Forte and Lampe 2013) How things get done
  9. 9. OBSERVATIONS “Group” collaborating Make explicit things get done.
  10. 10. Support Newcomers by Making Rules Explicit o Investigate Wikipedia discussions o Provide semantic support o Evaluate the impact on the community
  11. 11. Deletion threatens Wikipedia o 1 in 4 new Wikipedia articles is deleted – within minutes or hours o Demotivating! • 1 in 3 newcomers start by writing a new article • 7X less likely to stay if their article is deleted! o Can we support editor retention?
  12. 12. Article creators o Misunderstand policy • “I do understand that articles on wikipedia need to be sourced… it is due to have two [sources] once [our website goes] live” o Express high levels of emotion • “To be honest it's been a real turn off adding articles to WP and I don't think I will add articles again. So smile and enjoy.” o Learn from discussions • “much as it would break my heart … it is perhaps sensible that the piece is deleted.” Jodi Schneider, Alexandre Passant, and Stefan Decker. “Deletion Discussions in Wikipedia: Decision Factors and Outcomes.” In WikiSym2012.
  13. 13. Novices’ arguments o Structurally different to experts’ arguments o More problematic arguments from novices • Personal preference • Requesting a favor • Analogy to other cases • No harm in keeping an article • Large number of search engine hits Jodi Schneider, Krystian Samp, Alexandre Passant, Stefan Decker. “Arguments about Deletion: How Experience Improves the Acceptability of Arguments in Ad-hoc Online Task Groups”. In CSCW 2013.
  14. 14. Articulate criteria 4 Factors cover • 91% of comments • 70% of discussions Factor Example (used to justify `keep') Notability Anyone covered by another encyclopedic reference is considered notable enough for inclusion in Wikipedia. Sources Basic information about this album at a minimum is certainly verifiable, it's a major label release, and a highly notable band. Maintenance …this article is savable but at its current state, needs a lot of improvement. Bias It is by no means spam (it does not promote the products). Other I'm advocating a blanket "hangon" for all articles on newly- drafted players Jodi Schneider, Alexandre Passant, and Stefan Decker. “Deletion Discussions in Wikipedia: Decision Factors and Outcomes.” In WikiSym2012.
  15. 15. Add semantic structure Implementation based on Jodi Schneider and Krystian Samp “Alternative Interfaces for Deletion Discussions in Wikipedia: Some Proposals Using Decision Factors. [Demo]” In WikiSym2012.
  16. 16. 84% prefer our system “Information is structured and I can quickly get an overview of the key arguments.” “The ability to navigate the comments made it a bit easier to filter my mind set and to come to a conclusion.” “It offers the structure needed to consider each factor separately, thus making the decision easier. Also, the number of comments per factor offers a quick indication of the relevance and the deepness of the decision.”
  17. 17. Thanks! o Questions? o Comments? o jschneider@pobox.com o @jschneider
  18. 18. Acknowledgements o Thanks to collaborators! • Krystian Samp • Maciej Dabrowski o Overall Ph.D. funding, Science Foundation Ireland Grant No. SFI/08/CE/I1380 (Líon-2), advised by Alexandre Passant, John Breslin & Stefan Decker
  19. 19. image credit: Alexandre Passant
  20. 20. Goals ! "#$%&' ( )*+, ( - #./0", #1234)5%#$ 61%7 $( 8&( 9: %/ %1 - ( .4%1#$) ; , "1"%14)< ) =#$' ( 4 >1?' ".+ Find and Verify Evidence High Low Low ! "40%@( .+ Find and Defend a Suitable Hypothesis High Low Low >1A%.: #/%1BC( ( D"1& Acquire or Give Information High Low Low ! ( $"E( .#/%1 Coordinate Goals and Actions High Varies High - ( .4' #4"%1 Persuade Other Party Varies High High F ( &%/ #/%1 Get What You Most Want Low Varies High 9."4/ 0 Verbally Hit Out at Opponent Low High High Walton & Krabbe. D. N. Walton. Commitment in dialogue. State University of New York Press, Albany, 1995.

×