I am doing a PhD on online civic participation project
(e-participation). Within my research, I have carried out a user
survey, where I asked how many people ever edited/created a page on a
Wiki. Now I would like to compare the results with the overall rate of
wiki editing/creation on country level.
I've found some country-level statistics on Wikipedia Statistics (e.g.
3,000 editors of Wikipedia articles in Italy) but data for UK and
France are not available since Wikipedia provides statistics by
languages, not by countries. I'm thus looking for statistics on UK and
France (but am also interested in alternative ways of measuring wiki
editing/creation in Sweden and Italy).
I would be grateful for any tips!
Sunny regards, Alina
European University Institute
"Our mission is to help scientists be more productive by teaching them
basic computing skills. Our approach combines short, intensive workshops
with self-paced online instruction. The benefits are more reliable
results and higher productivity: a day a week is common, and a ten-fold
improvement isn’t rare."
If you are writing tools to interact with Wikimedia data and software
for your research, and you aren't a very experienced programmer, these
videos and workshops can help you.
Engineering Community Manager
For those interested in "high tempo" editions in Wikipedia or editors
behaviour in breaking news articles, I've found an interesting work by
Beside the understanding of how sources are dealed, it's related to the
open source plaform Swiftriver (
http://ushahidi.com/index.php/products/swiftriver-platform) and the
on information collection, visualization and interactive mapping.
In her owns word:
Almost a year ago, I was hired by Ushahidi <http://ushahidi.com/> to work
as an ethnographic researcher on a project to understand how Wikipedians
managed sources during breaking news events. Ushahidi cares a great deal
about this kind of work because of a new project called
seeks to collect and enable the collaborative curation of streams of data
from the real time web about a particular issue or event. If another
happened, for example, would there be a way for us to filter out the
irrelevant, the misinformation and build a stream of relevant, meaningful
and accurate content about what was happening for those who needed it? And
on Wikipedia’s side, could the same tools be used to help editors curate a
stream of relevant sources as a team rather than individuals?
Tomás Saorín / Profesor asociado / Facultad de Comunicación y
Universidad de Murcia / 868 88 82 32 / tsp(a)um.es
Tomás Saorín, Ph.D. / Dep. of Information and Documentation / Faculty of
Communication and Documentation / University of Murcia
Anyone involved in the debate over open access to research?
If so, there's a useful case study in today's news, it may have been
previously reported too.
Fifteen-year-old high school student Jack Andraka likes to kayak and watch
the US television show Glee. And when time permits, he also likes to do
advanced research in one of the most respected cancer laboratories in the
world. Jack Andraka has created a pancreatic cancer test that is 168 times
faster and considerably cheaper than the gold standard in the field. He has
applied for a patent for his test and is now carrying out further research
at Johns Hopkins University in the US city of Baltimore. And he did it by
The Maryland native, who won $75,000 at the Intel International Science and
Engineering Fair in May for his creation, *cites search engines and free
online science papers as the tools that allowed him to create the test.*
The BBC's Matt Danzico sat down with the teenager, who said the idea came
to him when he was "chilling out in biology class".
Please find below the 3rd call for participation for CSCW 2013, covering
several venues that are super cool yet less work than a paper.
CSCW 2013 publicity co-chairs
The 16th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and
Social Computing (CSCW 2013) will be held February 23-27 in San Antonio,
Texas, USA. CSCW is the premier venue for research in the design and use
of technologies that affect groups, organizations, communities, and
Summer is coming to an end, and CSCW deadlines for several venues are
* Interactive posters
* Doctoral colloquium
* Student volunteers
Details of these venues and important dates follow.
Amy Bruckman, Georgia Tech
Scott Counts, Microsoft Research
Workshops provide an opportunity to discuss and explore emerging areas
of CSCW research with a group of like-minded researchers and
practitioners from industry and academia. We have accepted an exciting
slate of workshops for this year's conference:
W1: The 13th International Workshop on Collaborative Editing Systems
W2: Trust in Virtual Teams: Theory and Tools
W3: Beyond Formality: Informal Communication in Health Practices
W4: CrowdCamp 2013: Rapidly Iterating Crowd Ideas
W5: Better safe than sorry: Collaboration in Safety-Critical Environments
W6: Social Capital and Entrepreneurship in CSCW
W7: Workshop on Social Media Question Asking
W8: Collaborative Information Seeking: Consolidating the Past,
Creating the Future
W9: Measuring Networked Social Privacy: Qualitative & Quantitative
W10: CSCW and education: Viewing education as a site of work practice
More information, including deadlines for position papers and other
workshop-related submissions, will be posted by the organizers at the
link above as it becomes available.
Jeremy Birnholtz, Northwestern University
Andy Crabtree, University of Nottingham
Deadline: November 2, 2012, 5PM PDT
CSCW 2013 demonstrations present implementations of new CSCW systems and
concepts. The peer-reviewed demonstrations allow conference participants
to view novel and noteworthy CSCW systems in action, discuss the systems
with those who created them, and try them out. Appropriate
demonstrations include applications, technologies, and research
prototypes, and may showcase work that has been or is being published at
CSCW or elsewhere. Demonstrations can also serve to showcase novel
commercial products not previously described in the research literature.
Demonstrations should be interactive and provide attendees a hands-on
experience. The demo forum is not an opportunity for marketing or sales
presentations. Presenters must have been directly involved with the
development of the system and be able to explain the unique and novel
contributions of the system.
Dan Cosley, Cornell University
Travis Kriplean, University of Washington
Deadline: October 23, 2012, 5:00 PM PDT
The CSCW Videos Program provides researchers, designers, and
practitioners with opportunities to present their cutting-edge work in
an interactive fashion in front of an expert audience. Videos are
ideally suited to demonstrate the practical application of research
results and the functionality of CSCW systems, visualize the outcome of
research and development projects, or describe inspiring visions of
future systems that are grounded in today′s reality. The Videos Program
provides a venue to present work that involves dynamic interaction,
ranging from demonstrations of new systems to complex aspects of group
communication and work practice.
Sasa Junuzovic, Microsoft Research
Carman Neustaedter, Simon Fraser University
Deadline: November 2, 2012, 5:00 p.m. PDT
CSCW 2013 will include an interactive poster category for late-breaking
and preliminary results, smaller results not suitable for a full or
short paper, innovative ideas not yet validated through user studies,
early student research, and other research best presented in an
interactive forum. Posters will be presented in a special Poster Session
where researchers will interact directly with conference attendees. The
posters will remain up throughout the remainder of the conference.
Gary Hsieh, Michigan State University
Chen Zhao, Microsoft
Deadline: November 2, 2012
Panels are a great way to generate debate and raise new and interesting
issues at CSCW. With panels we want to provide a forum for discussing
provocative, controversial, innovative, emerging, boundary-spanning and
boundary-breaking issues. While paper sessions provide detailed
discussions of work recently completed, panels provide an opportunity to
explore what is on the horizon -- or what is already here but not
adequately recognized, acknowledged or discussed.
Darren Gergle, Northwestern University
Siân Lindley, Microsoft Research
Deadline: November 2, 2012, 5:00 p.m. PDT
The Doctoral Colloquium is a forum in which Ph.D. students meet and
discuss their work with each other and a panel of experienced CSCW
researchers and practitioners. We welcome applicants from a broad range
of disciplines and approaches that inform CSCW, including anthropology,
sociology, computer science, cognitive science, organizational studies,
and related fields. We are particularly interested in applications from
institutions and groups that have not traditionally been
well-represented at past CSCW conferences.
Doctoral Colloquium Co-Chairs:
Geraldine Fitzpatrick, Vienna University of Technology
David McDonald, University of Washington
Student volunteers are essential to the success of the CSCW conference.
While the volunteer duties are not always glamorous, they do provide a
unique opportunity to interact closely with CSCW contributors,
attendees, and other student volunteers. Volunteering provides a
structured, cordial environment for students in various stages of their
research career to become part of the CSCW community. Students often
report that the 'social networks' they build from these meetings are the
greatest benefit of being a volunteer.
Deadlines will be posted at the above link shortly.
Student Volunteers Co-Chairs
Brian Keegan, Northwestern University
Jenn Marlow, Carnegie Mellon University
danah boyd's embarking on a new project:
"Henry Jenkins, Mimi Ito, and I have embarked on an interesting project
for Polity. Through a series of dialogues, we're hoping to produce a
book that interrogates our different thoughts regarding participatory
culture. The goal is to unpack our differences and agreements and
identify some of the challenges that we see going forward. ....
And here's where we're hoping that some of our fans and critics might be
willing to provoke us to think more deeply.
What questions do you have regarding participatory culture that you
would hope that we would address?
What criticisms of our work would you like to offer for us to
What do you think that we fail to address in our work that you wish
we would consider?...."
If you have suggestions for them, you can post them as comments at:
Engineering Community Manager