Paper: pdf
Slides: pdf
Halfaker, A., Keyes, O., & Taraborelli, D. (2013). Making Peripheral Participation Legitimate: Reader engagement experiments in Wikipedia CSCW ACM, New York, NY, USA, (pp. 849--860) DOI=10.1145/2441776.2441872.
@inproceedings{halfaker13making, author = {Aaron Halfaker and Oliver Keyes and Dario Taraborelli}, title = {Making Peripheral Participation Legitimate: Reader engagement experiments in {W}ikipedia}, booktitle = {Proceedings of the 16th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing}, series = {CSCW '13}, year = {2013}, location = {San Antonio, TX}, pages = {849--860}, numpages = {12}, doi = {10.1145/2441776.2441872}, publisher = {ACM}, address = {New York, NY, USA} }

Making peripheral participation legitimate: Reader engagement experiments in Wikipedia

Open collaboration communities thrive when participation is plentiful. Recent research has shown that the English Wikipedia community has constructed a vast and accurate information resource primarily through the monumental effort of a relatively small number of active, volunteer editors. Beyond Wikipedia's active editor community is a substantially larger pool of potential participants: readers. In this paper we describe a set of field experiments using the Article Feedback Tool, a system designed to elicit lightweight contributions from Wikipedia's readers. Through the lens of social learning theory and comparisons to related work in open bug tracking software, we evaluate the costs and benefits of the expanded participation model and show both qualitatively and quantitatively that peripheral contributors add value to an open collaboration community as long as the cost of identifying low quality contributions remains low.


Key Findings (tl:dr)


Coming soon...


  1. Antin, J., and Cheshire, C. Readers are not free-riders: reading as a form of participation on wikipedia. In CSCW '10, ACM (New York, NY, USA, 2010), 127—130.
  2. Beenen, G., Ling, K., Wang, X., Chang, K., Frankowski, D., Resnick, P., and Kraut, R. E. Using social psychology to motivate contributions to online communities. In CSCW '04, ACM (New York, NY, USA, 2004), 212—221.
  3. Bettenburg, N., Just, S., Schr ╠łoter, A., Weiss, C., Premraj, R., and Zimmermann, T. What makes a good bug report? In SIGSOFT '08, ACM (New York, NY, USA, 2008), 308—318.
  4. Bryant, S. L., Forte, A., and Bruckman, A. Becoming wikipedian: Transformation of participation in a collaborative online encyclopedia. In GROUP '05, ACM (New York, NY, USA, 2005), 1—10.
  5. Butler, B., Sproull, L., Kiesler, S., and Kraut, R. E. Community effort in online groups: Who does the work and why? Human-Computer Interaction Institute (2007), 90.
  6. Cosley, D., Frankowski, D., Terveen, L., and Riedl, J. Suggestbot: using intelligent task routing to help people find work in wikipedia. In Proceedings of the 12th international conference on Intelligent user interfaces, IUI '07, ACM (New York, NY, USA, 2007), 32—41.
  7. Ducheneaut, N. Socialization in an open source software community: A socio-technical analysis. In CSCW '05, ACM (New York, NY, USA, 2005), 323—368.
  8. Geiger, R. S., and Ribes, D. The work of sustaining order in Wikipedia: The banning of a vandal. In CSCW '10, ACM (New York, NY, USA, 2010), 117—126.
  9. Halfaker, A., Geiger, S., Jonathan, M., and Riedl, J. The rise and decline of an open collaboration system: How Wikipedia's reaction to sudden popularity is causing its decline. American Behavioral Scientist 57(5) 664-688, (2013).
  10. Halfaker, A., Kittur, A., Kraut, R., and Riedl, J. A jury of your peers: Quality, Experience and Ownership in Wikipedia. In WikiSym '09, ACM (New York, NY, USA, 2009), 1—10.
  11. Halfaker, A., Kittur, A., and Riedl, J. Don't bite the newbies: How reverts affect the quantity and quality of Wikipedia work. In WikiSym '11, ACM (2011),163—172.
  12. Katz. Luring the lurkers., Dec 1998.
  13. Ko, A. J., and Chilana, P. K. How power users help and hinder open bug reporting. In CHI '10, ACM (New York, NY, USA, 2010), 1665—1674.
  14. Lampe, C., and Resnick, P. Slash(dot) and burn: distributed moderation in a large online conversation space. In CHI '04, ACM (New York, NY, USA, 2004), 543—550.
  15. Lave, J., and Wenger, E. Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge University Press, 1991.
  16. Nonnecke, B., and Preece, J. Why lurkers lurk. In Americas Conference on Information Systems (2001).
  17. Nonnecke, B., and Preece, J. Silent participants: Getting to know lurkers better. From usenet to CoWebs (2003),110—132.
  18. Preece, J., and Shneiderman, B. The reader-to-leader framework: Motivating technology-mediated social participation. AIS Trans HCI 1 1, 1 (2009), 13—32.
  19. Priedhorsky, R., Chen, J., Lam, S., Panciera, K., Terveen, L., and Riedl, J. Creating, destroying, and restoring value in Wikipedia. In GROUP'07 (Sanibel Island, FLorida, USA, 2007).
  20. Rashid, A. M., Ling, K., Tassone, R. D., Resnick, P., Kraut, R., and Riedl, J. Motivating participation by displaying the value of contribution. In CHI'06, ACM (New York, NY, USA, 2006), 955—958.
  21. Suh, B., Convertino, G., Chi, E. H., and Pirolli, P. The singularity is not near: Slowing growth of Wikipedia. In WikiSym '09, ACM (New York, NY, USA, 2009), 1—10.
  22. Taraborelli, D., and Roth, C. Viable Web communities: Two case studies. In Viability and Resilience of Complex Systems, G. Deffuant and N. Gilbert, Eds. Springer, 2011, 75—105.23. Tartelton, G. The politics of platforms. New Media & Society 12, 3 (2010), 347—364.
  23. Von Krogh, G., Spaeth, S., and Lakhani, K. Community, joining, and specialization in open source software innovation: a case study. Research Policy 32, 7 (2003), 1217—1241.
  24. Wash, R., and Lampe, C. The power of the ask in social media. In CSCW '12, ACM (New York, NY, USA, 2012), 1187—1190.
  25. Wikimedia. Editor trends study., March 2011.
  26. Wilkinson, D. Strong regularities in online peer production. In Ecommerce '08, ACM (2008), 302—309.