what and how users read: transforming reading behavior into valuable feedback for the wikipedia...
DESCRIPTION
Most of the attention in previous research on the Wikipedia community has been devoted to the study of its production side: editors and their motivations, activity and roles. However, the value of the encyclopedia is also given by the millions of people who access it every day. In this work we focus on the - until now understudied - usage side of Wikipedia, investigating readers’ preference and behaviour as a precious source of information that can provide useful feedback to the editors’ community. More information here: https://wikimania2014.wikimedia.org/wiki/Submissions/Who_reads_what_and_how:_Transforming_reading_behavior_into_valuable_feedback_for_the_Wikipedia_communityTRANSCRIPT
What and how users read:Transforming reading preferences and behavior into
valuable feedback for the Wikipedia communityWikimania 2014 | August 8, 2014 | Track: Wikimedia Inspiration
Claudia Müller-Birn & Janette Lehmann!
photo credit: marissa, CC BY 2.0
We know YOU!
2photo credit: philosophygeek CC BY-SA 2.0
3
Included research papers: 477 Criteria of inclusion: Often cited Included years: 2003 - 2012 Number of groups: 6 Sources: English-language databases, peer-reviewed journal articles, doctoral theses Vi
sual
izat
ion
is b
ased
on
(Oko
li et
al.,
201
2)
4
Included research papers: 477 Criteria of inclusion: Often cited Included years: 2003 - 2012 Number of groups: 6 Sources: English-language databases, peer-reviewed journal articles, doctoral theses Vi
sual
izat
ion
is b
ased
on
(Oko
li et
al.,
201
2)
‣ Second-class members of an online community (Preece et al. 2004)
‣ “Lurkers” or “free-riders” (e.g., Nonnecke, 2000, Nonnecke, 2004)
‣ More resource-taking than value-adding (Kollock, 1990)
‣ Only valuable when they become active contributors (Preece et al. 2004)
5photo credit:
claudia müller-birn, CC BY 2.0
Why might it be useful to know your readers better?!
6
Why might it be useful to know your readers better?!
7
As a user, I have a better reading experience, so I return more often, and eventually become a contributor.
As an editor, I can use reading time as an additional measure for article quality.
As an author, I feel that my work is more valuable when an increasing number of readers access “my” articles.
As an interface designer, I can adapt the article presentation by considering the exploration reading pattern.
…
Let’s make the first step!
8photo credit: DonToofee CC BY-SA 2.0
9
(1) We studied people’s reading preferences, i.e. what they read.
!
!
Reading preferences
10
Biography
Entertainment
List
Tech
History
Misc
Health
Leisure
Sport
Places
Adult
Culture/Belief
0 0.125 0.25 0.375 0.5
2.6%2.6%2.8%3%3.2%3.4%3.8%4.4%5%
7.6%17.4%
44.2%
11
(1) Does an article’s popularity change over time?
!
!
people’s reading preferences
Three patterns of readers’ interests
12
2011-09 2011-12 2012-03 2012-06 2012-09
One directionProportion of users
0
0.0020
Constant interest!!‣Regularly accessed articles, sometimes
only for fact finding ‣Examples: Albert Einstein, Facebook, IMDB
Peak interest!!‣Death of people, game and movie releases ‣Examples: Whitney Houston, The Hunger
Games, 2012 Phenomenon
Increasing/decreasing interest!!‣ Items that became popular/loose popularity
during our observation period ‣Examples: One direction, Instagram
13
14
(1) Does an article’s popularity change over time?
!
(2) Do readers interests relate to editors preferences?
✔
people’s reading preferences
15
Preference matrix
16
17
(1) We studied people’s reading preferences, i.e. what they read.
!
(2) We analyzed people’s reading behaviors, i.e. how they read.
✔
Example of a reading session on Wikipedia
18
0.5min 1.8min 2min
Session statisticsarticle views: 3session articles: 5reading time: 4.3min
session starts
session ends
time
Two exemplary reading patterns
19
Focus Exploration
!!
Article Views ~ ↑↑
Reading Time ↑ ~
Session Articles ↓↓ ↑↑~ on average ↓ little below average ↑ little above average ↓↓ well below average ↑↑ far above average
-1.0
0.5
-0.5
0.0
1.0
-1.0
0.5
-0.5
0.0
1.0
Explicit feedback with the AFT
20
Implicit feedback with reading behavior
Readers give
suggestions
Readers read
articles
Editors make
improvements
Graphic created by Fabrice Florin, CC BY-SA 3.0
Wrapping up‣ Data on readers are already available, but their
potential has not being fully exploited ‣ Reading behavior provides an alternative way to think
about readers but an application is not available yet
21photo credit: marissa, CC BY 2.0
!Many thanks to the co-authors of our research paper:
David Laniado, Mounia Lalmas, Andreas Kaltenbrunner !
For more information: http://janette-lehmann.de/docs/pub2014_ht.pdf
Thank you.
22These slides are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 2.0 Generic license.
Check out the review by Piotr on Wikimedia Research Newsletter (vol 4, issue 7, July 2014)
References
‣ C. Okoli, M. Mehdi, M. Mesgari, F. Å. Nielsen, and A. Lanamäki. The People’s Encyclopedia Under the Gaze of the Sages: A Systematic Review of Scholarly Research on Wikipedia. http://ssrn.com/abstract=2021326, 2012.
‣ J. Preece, B. Nonnecke, and D. Andrews. The top five reasons for lurking: improving community experiences for everyone. Comp. in Human Behavior, 20(2), 2004.
‣ B. Nonnecke and J. Preece. Lurker demographics: counting the silent. In Proc. CHI (2000). ‣ B. Nonnecke, J. Preece and D. Andrews. What lurkers and posters think of each other. In Proc. HICSS
(2004). ‣ P. Kollock. The economies of online cooperation: Gifts and public goods in cyberspace. In Communities
in Cyberspace, pages 220–239. Routledge, 1990.
23These slides are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 2.0 Generic license.