So fix it, Cheers, Peter -----Original Message----- From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of James Salsman Sent: Tuesday, 19 September 2017 2:53 AM To: Wikimedia Mailing List Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Research Showcase Wednesday, September 20, 2017 at 11:30 AM (PST) 18:30 UTC
Wow, first there was solid evidence that tourism is causally influenced by Wikipedia, and now science. The English Wikipedia's Economics article still says "Tax cuts [boost] aggregate demand." Isn't it time that potentially harmful biases in economics articles are tempered as carefully as those in medical articles? On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 1:53 AM, Sarah R <srodl...@wikimedia.org> wrote: > > The next Research Showcase will be live-streamed this Wednesday, > September 20, 2017 at 11:30 AM (PST) 18:30 UTC. > > YouTube stream: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VR5JwqyVGSk > > As usual, you can join the conversation on IRC at #wikimedia-research. > And, you can watch our past research showcases here > <https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Research/Showcase#September_2017>. > >... > > Science is Shaped by Wikipedia: Evidence from a Randomized Control > Trial By Neil C. Thompson and Douglas Hanley > > As the largest encyclopedia in the world, it is not surprising that > Wikipedia reflects the state of scientific knowledge. However, > Wikipedia is also one of the most accessed websites in the world, > including by scientists, which suggests that it also has the potential > to shape science. This paper shows that it does. Incorporating ideas > into a Wikipedia article leads to those ideas being used more in the > scientific literature. This paper documents this in two ways: > correlationally across thousands of articles in Wikipedia and causally > through a randomized experiment where we added new scientific content > to Wikipedia. We find that fully a third of the correlational > relationship is causal, implying that Wikipedia has a strong shaping > effect on science. Our findings speak not only to the influence of > Wikipedia, but more broadly to the influence of repositories of > scientific knowledge. The results suggest that increased provision of > information in accessible repositories is a very cost-effective way to > advance science. We also find that such gains are equity-improving, > disproportionately benefitting those without _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
