Harnessing the wisdom of crowds in wikipedia: quality through coordination

By Aniket Kittur, Robert E. Kraut. 2008

808 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Communication, Computer Science Applications, Information Systems, Natural Language Processing

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Communication

In Computer Science Applications

In Information Systems

In Natural Language Processing

Citations in the corpus

All That’s ‘Human’ Is Not Gold: Evaluating Human Evaluation of Generated Text (2021, background): “…may be more successful on Amazon Mechanical Turk, such as long-term evaluations with qualified evaluators who have gone through an extended training (like those in Kittur and Kraut, 2008; Zellers et al., 2019a) or third-party evaluator quality tools (e.g., Positly, used by Brown et al., 2020).”
Dynamics of Content Quality in Collaborative Knowledge Production (2017, methodology): “Wikipedia, for example, has been subject of extensive study: as one of the prominent CKPS, content quality and methods to assess it have been a central focus of investigation starting a decade ago (Dondio 2007; Kittur et al .”
Wikipedians are born, not made: a study of power editors on Wikipedia (2009, background): “Kittur, Almeida, and Ortega all found that contributions have increased dramatically [19, 20, 2, 27].”
Dimensions of leadership and social influence in online communities (2010, methodology): “Wikipedia relies on a small group of editors to do the majority of work (Kittur & Kraut, 2008).”
The Rhetoric and Reality of Anthropomorphism in Artificial Intelligence (2019, background): “Despite the resurgence of interest in aggregated decision-making due to web-enabled mass communication (Kittur and Kraut 2008), the basic concept at work here is in fact quite old.”
A Survey of Crowdsourcing Systems (2011, neutral): “Kittur and Kraut [43] showed that adding”
Finding social roles in Wikipedia (2011, methodology): “Further, the distribution of work and activity levels across editors of a specific article can impact its quality [17].”
Conversations Gone Awry: Detecting Early Signs of Conversational Failure (2018, methodology): “…beyond pre-deﬁned politeness strategies by using an unsupervised method to discover additional rhetorical prompts used to initiate different types of conversations that may be speciﬁc to online collaborative settings, such as coordinating work (Kittur and Kraut, 2008) or conducting factual checks.”
Identifying Semantic Edit Intentions from Revisions in Wikipedia (2017, methodology): “Prior work also used edit types and intentions to better understand the process of collaborative writing, such as article quality improvement (Kittur and Kraut, 2008).”
The Cognitive Atlas: Toward a Knowledge Foundation for Cognitive Neuroscience (2011, background): “However, the process through which such high-quality collaborative knowledge building happens is by no means a given, requiring the evolution of community norms, explicit rules, technological features, and significant effort spent on coordination and conflict resolution (Kittur and Kraut, 2008).”
What's in a @name? How Name Value Biases Judgment of Microblog Authors (2011, background): “(Kittur and Kraut 2008) showed that the initial edits of Wikipedia pages set the tone of the article and subsequent edits do not deviate much from that tone.”
CrowdForge: crowdsourcing complex work (2011, background): “…are examples of collaborative writing on the Internet, notably Wikipedia, previous work has shown that the success of harnessing a large group of contributors is often dependent on a small core of leaders that do a large proportion of the work and organize the contributions of others [15][16].”
Introduction to the Special Issue with Best Papers from BPM 2008 Workshops (2010, neutral): “Furthermore, appropriate coordination mechanisms between the editors have to be chosen [6].”
TurKit: human computation algorithms on mechanical turk (2010, background): “A variety of platforms for human computation have been developed and studied: Games with a Purpose [1], Wikipedia [5] [12], and MTurk [10] [11] [16] [19] [20].”
Gravity Spy: integrating advanced LIGO detector characterization, machine learning, and citizen science (2016, background): “the ability to see patterns and spot discrepancies) [39, 40, 41, 42].”
The Shoemaker's Children: Using Wikis for Information Systems Teaching, Research, and Publication (2009, background): “Studies have demonstrated the generally reliable nature of community-generated knowledge and have generally shown that the larger the community generating the knowledge, the more accurate and complete that knowledge is likely to be (Ball 2007; Kittur and Kraut 2008; Wilkinson and Huberman 2007).”