hi dariusz,

> the current methods are far from perfect. 

in your opinion, in which respect do they need to be improved?

has anyone published on that, or are there any "non-published" links 
available?

best,
Claudia 
[email protected]
Meine GPG-Key-ID: DDD21523
- mehr dazu: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Privacy_Guard

---------- Original Message -----------
From:Dariusz Jemielniak <[email protected]>
To:Research into Wikimedia content and communities <wiki-research-
[email protected]>
Sent:Mon, 16 Feb 2015 14:58:56 +0100
Subject:Re: [Wiki-research-l] a cautious note on gender stats Re: Fwd: 
[Gendergap] Wikipedia readers

> hi there,
> 
> thanks for the quote :) I totally agree with you 
> that a lot of data we have is outdated, and that 
> there are way too many generalizations about 
> Wikipedia relying only on en-wiki. As Aaron and 
> Mako pointed out in their paper (referred to by 
> Jeremy), there needs to be more approaches to our 
> estimations of gender gap, and the current methods 
> are far from perfect. As far as I recall, they did 
> a follow-up on this topic, and maybe a publication 
> coming up?
> 
> best,
> 
> dariusz
> 
> On Sun, Feb 15, 2015 at 11:50 AM,
>  <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> > Hi Jeremy, thank you for this pointer,
> >
> > hi all,
> > can anyone explain to me why data from 2008 are re-used in 
quantitative
> > studies of this kind? (instead of asking new questions, for example, and
> > also
> > changing the framework in which the data were created)
> >
> > another issue seems to be that, while Wikipedia exists in a host of
> > languages,
> > statistical news are rarely accompanied by qualifiers as to which 
language
> > version (community) the data were created in/from.
> > my guess on this issue is that "results" re enWP may be quite different
> > from
> > results re, say, bgWP or hiWP, because genders relate to one another
> > differently and collaborative writing on the web may have a differently
> > gendered status in different communities, etc.
> >
> > the same caveat would be due as to yesterday's "the gender of 
Wikipedia
> > readers" question that this thread started with,
> >
> > best,
> > Claudia
> > [email protected]
> >
> > ---------- Original Message -----------
> > From:Jeremy Foote <[email protected]>
> > To:Research into Wikimedia content and communities <wiki-research-
> > [email protected]>
> > Sent:Sat, 14 Feb 2015 22:12:41 -0600
> > Subject:Re: [Wiki-research-l] a cautious note on gender stats Re: Fwd:
> > [Gendergap] Wikipedia readers
> >
> > > Mako Hill and Aaron Shaw wrote a paper which
> > > combined a 2008 WMF survey with Pew Research to
> > > try to find a less biased estimation of the Wikipedia
> > > gender gap. Their paper is titled "The Wikipedia
> > > Gender Gap Revisited: Characterizing Survey
> > > Response Bias with Propensity Score Estimation",
> > > and is at
> > > http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?
> > id=10.1371/journal.pone.0065782#pone-0065782-t002 .
> > >
> > > It's not a perfect fit for eliminating the bias to
> > > participate in editor surveys, but it's a step
> > > toward a more realistic value for the gender gap
> > > (although it's still pretty bleak - with only 16%
> > > of gobal editors estimated to be female).
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Jeremy
> > >
> > > On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 11:42 AM, Gerard Meijssen
> > <[email protected]
> > > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hoi,
> > > > What year are we living ?
> > > > Thanks,
> > > >      GerardM
> > > >
> > > > On 14 February 2015 at 17:24, <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >>  my2cents re figures on percentages (... in a gender binary 
paradigm),
> > > >> well...
> > > >>
> > > >> I'd suggest to take into account User:Pundit's thoughtful
> > considerations,
> > > >>
> > > >> author of: Jemielniak, Dariusz (2014), Common knowledge? An
> > ethnography
> > > >> of Wikipedia, Stanford University Press, pp. 14-15
> > > >>
> > > >> Dariusz Jemielniak writes:
> > > >> "According to Wikipedia Editors Study, published in 2011, 91 
percent
> > of
> > > >> all Wikipedia editors are male ([reference to a study of 2011] This
> > figure
> > > >> may not be accurate, since it is based on a voluntary online survey
> > > >> advertised to 31,699 registered users and resulting on 5,073 
complete
> > and
> > > >> valid responses [...] it is possible that male editors are more
> > likely to
> > > >> respond than female editors. Similarly, a study of self-declarations
> > of
> > > >> gender showing only 16 percent are female editors (Lam et al. 
2011)
> > may be
> > > >> distorted, since more females may choose not to reveal their 
gender in
> > a
> > > >> community perceived as male dominated."
> > > >>
> > > >> additionally, asserting status and flaunting seniority (also 
described
> > > >> by Jemielniak at the end of the paragraph previous to the one 
quoted
> > above)
> > > >> is generally perceived to be a commonly employed trick to resist 
any
> > > >> changes;
> > > >>
> > > >> and, last but not least, one might argue that the group perceived 
as
> > > >> "in power" might feel to find strongly unbalanced outcomes most
> > rewarding,
> > > >> and hence might tend to publish them as widely as possible and 
not
> > least
> > > >> quote from them persistently, too...
> > > >>
> > > >> any rebuttals from stats experts here?
> > > >>
> > > >> best,
> > > >> Claudia
> > > >> [email protected]
> > > >> My GPG-Key-ID: DDD21523
> > > >>
> > > >> ---------- Original Message -----------
> > > >> From:Jane Darnell <[email protected]>
> > > >> To:Research into Wikimedia content and communities <wiki-
research-
> > > >> [email protected]>
> > > >> Sent:Sat, 14 Feb 2015 10:49:29 +0100
> > > >> Subject:[Wiki-research-l] Fwd: [Gendergap] Wikipedia readers
> > > >>
> > > >> > Forwarding here in case anyone has information
> > > >> > that could benefit Yana
> > > >> > ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> > > >> > From: Jane Darnell <[email protected]>
> > > >> > Date: Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 9:44 AM
> > > >> > Subject: Re: [Gendergap] Wikipedia readers
> > > >> > To: "Addressing gender equity and exploring ways
> > > >> > to increase the participation of women within
> > > >> > Wikimedia projects." < [email protected]>
> > > >> >
> > > >> > In 2013 the Dutch Wikimedia chapter hired an
> > > >> > external party to conduct a survey and the results
> > > >> > (translated to English) are here:
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > 
https://nl.wikimedia.org/wiki/Bestand:Motivaction_report_translation_v02.pd
> > > >> f
> > > >> >
> > > >> > The study was split into two parts; one on the
> > > >> > contributors and one on the "users", aka readers.
> > > >> > Users were 50/50 male female (page 51),
> > > >> >  contributors were 88% male, 6% female, and 6%
> > > >> > would not say (page 26)
> > > >> >
> > > >> > On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 8:11 AM, Yana Welinder
> > > >> > <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > >> >
> > > >> > > Hi all,
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > What are some good studies of the gender of Wikipedia 
readers?
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Thanks,
> > > >> > > Yana
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > _______________________________________________
> > > >> > > Gendergap mailing list
> > > >> > > [email protected]
> > > >> > > To manage your subscription preferences, including
> > unsubscribing,
> > > >> please
> > > >> > > visit:
> > > >> > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
> > > >> > >
> > > >> ------- End of Original Message -------
> > > >>
> > > >> _______________________________________________
> > > >> Wiki-research-l mailing list
> > > >> [email protected]
> > > >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Wiki-research-l mailing list
> > > > [email protected]
> > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
> > > >
> > > >
> > ------- End of Original Message -------
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wiki-research-l mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
> >
> 
> --
> 
> __________________________
> prof. dr hab. Dariusz Jemielniak
> kierownik katedry Zarządzania Międzynarodowego
> i centrum badawczego CROW
> Akademia Leona Koźmińskiego
> http://www.crow.alk.edu.pl
> 
> członek Akademii Młodych Uczonych Polskiej 
> Akademii Nauk członek Komitetu Polityki Naukowej MNiSW
> 
> Wyszła pierwsza na świecie etnografia Wikipedii 
> "Common Knowledge? An Ethnography of Wikipedia" 
> (2014, Stanford University Press) mojego autorstwa 
> http://www.sup.org/book.cgi?id=24010
> 
> Recenzje
> Forbes: http://www.forbes.com/fdc/welcome_mjx.shtml
> Pacific Standard:
> http://www.psmag.com/navigation/books-and-
> culture/killed-wikipedia-93777/ Motherboard: 
> http://motherboard.vice.com/read/an-ethnography-of-
> wikipedia The Wikipedian: 
> http://thewikipedian.net/2014/10/10/dariusz-
> jemielniak-common-knowledge
------- End of Original Message -------

_______________________________________________
Wiki-research-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l

Reply via email to