I'm using the APS Wikipedia project this semester. 
http://www.psychologicalscience.org/index.php/members/aps-wikipedia-initiative
Students have just selected the article they will work on so they have not done 
serious editing yet.  I do not personally have any experience with Wikipedia.  
So far it is really fun to see how much greater the stakes are for the students 
that everything is publicly discussed, debated, edited and examined. The 
project already matters in a whole different way that a typical research paper. 
I also reminded them today that I can see everything they do (how many words 
they are writing, what they have added or deleted, how long they have spent on 
the portal, when they are working, etc.)

An encyclopedia is fundamentally different from other sources to which scholars 
contribute. The author of the Chronicle piece wanted to correct information 
based on his unique knowledge (and later book) that contradicted a great deal 
of existing knowledge. It makes sense to me that an encyclopedia would be 
reluctant to change the entry based on just one source (when all the other 
available source say something else). As other noted you also duke this out on 
the talk pages before editing actual information.

As to sources I also noted (with some surprise) the preference Wikipedia seems 
to place on secondary over primary secondary sources. Since there are so few 
books published in psychology (at least on the topics my students have chosen) 
I think I'll explain it to my students that (for us) it means that a review 
article or a meta-analysis is better than a single empirical article. We'll see 
if the Wiki police agree.

Marie

Marie Helweg-Larsen, Ph.D.
Associate Professor l Department of Psychology
Kaufman 168 l Dickinson College
Phone 717.245.1562 l Fax 717.245.1971
Office Hours: Mondays and Tuesdays 2:00-3:30
http://users.dickinson.edu/~helwegm/index.html


-----Original Message-----
From: Rick Froman [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2012 12:07 PM
To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)
Subject: RE: [tips] A cautionary tale on Wikipedia

I agree that the privileging of secondary sources over primary sources by 
Wikipedia is, in many cases, just ridiculous. Look at how the myths about 
psychology have been passed down in intro psych texts because everyone quoted 
each other instead of going back to the primary source. So, according to 
Wikipedia, the incorrect secondary source is all you need to know. Note how 
this policy also privileges pop psych which is normally published in the format 
of widely available books over scientific psychology which is largely published 
in peer-reviewed journals. 

This really gives me pause about having my students participate in the APS 
Wikipedia project. Maybe sciences like Psychology need to start their own 
publicly available wikis that will privilege primary sources above secondary 
ones. You shouldn't have to be an expert or a scientist to participate, just 
someone who is interested in bringing the best available evidence to bear on 
the question. And certainly such a science wiki is much more likely to tolerate 
theoretical differences and realize that some of these questions will be very 
sticky and are not yet at a place where there is a clean resolution.

Rick

Dr. Rick Froman, Chair
Division of Humanities and Social Sciences Professor of Psychology Box 3055 
John Brown University
2000 W. University Siloam Springs, AR  72761 [email protected]
(479)524-7295
http://bit.ly/DrFroman 

-----Original Message-----

Marc Carter  wrote:

But I teach my students don't believe what you read: look at the references and 
go to the original literature.  But this scares me: if the students can't get 
links to some original literature, then what I've been teaching them is 
worthless....

Reckon I'll spend a little more time on the difference between primary and 
secondary sources.


---
You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected].
To unsubscribe click here: 
http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13234.b0e864a6eccfc779c8119f5a4468797f&n=T&l=tips&o=16068
or send a blank email to 
leave-16068-13234.b0e864a6eccfc779c8119f5a44687...@fsulist.frostburg.edu

---
You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected].
To unsubscribe click here: 
http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=16077
or send a blank email to 
leave-16077-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu

Reply via email to