On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 1:31 PM, Michael Restivo <marestivo@gmail.com> wrote:
Wikipedia Signpost had a discussion of this question, including data on English Wikipedians' gender by edits: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2011-02-14/News_and_notesTheir graph shows the male:female ratio:But their plot omits editors who do not disclose their gender. I plotted these data:Regards,MichaelOn Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 1:09 PM, Maximilian Klein <isalix@gmail.com> wrote:Note that looking at article-gender and not editor-gender gives 15.6% female figure [1], which is similar to the ~16% other in the literature. If article-gender is a proxy for editor-gender, that is useful because it is easier to calculate article-gender.
[1] http://arxiv.org/pdf/1502.03086v1.pdfOn Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 9:44 AM, Aaron Halfaker <aaron.halfaker@gmail.com> wrote:Note that Lam et al. came to the same 16.1% figure through completely different methods in 2011.On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 8:48 AM, Dariusz Jemielniak <darekj@alk.edu.pl> wrote:hi,On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 3:43 PM, <koltzenburg@w4w.net> wrote:
> the current methods are far from perfect.
in your opinion, in which respect do they need to be improved?the thing is, with Internet research we often have to rely on anonymous declarations. It would be nice to e.g. cross-reference with data from social networks, but it is not possible to introduce ethically without user consent, and without the consent the problem of opt-in selective bias is still real. What we can do (and do) is triangulation of methods.
has anyone published on that, or are there any "non-published" links
available?I think the most interesting approach to the problem is covered by Mako and Aaron:best,dj
best,
Claudia
koltzenburg@w4w.net
Meine GPG-Key-ID: DDD21523
- mehr dazu: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Privacy_Guard
---------- Original Message -----------
From:Dariusz Jemielniak <darekj@alk.edu.pl>
To:Research into Wikimedia content and communities <wiki-research-
l@lists.wikimedia.org>
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 that a lot of data we have is outdated, and that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,
> <koltzenburg@w4w.net> 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
> > koltzenburg@w4w.net
> >
> > ---------- Original Message -----------
> > From:Jeremy Foote <jdfoote1@gmail.com>
> > To:Research into Wikimedia content and communities <wiki-research-
> > l@lists.wikimedia.org>
> > 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
> > <gerard.meijssen@gmail.com
> > > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hoi,
> > > > What year are we living ?
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > GerardM
> > > >
> > > > On 14 February 2015 at 17:24, <koltzenburg@w4w.net> 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
> > > >> koltzenburg@w4w.net
> > > >> My GPG-Key-ID: DDD21523
> > > >>
> > > >> ---------- Original Message -----------
> > > >> From:Jane Darnell <jane023@gmail.com>
> > > >> To:Research into Wikimedia content and communities <wiki-
research-
> > > >> l@lists.wikimedia.org>
> > > >> 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 <jane023@gmail.com>
> > > >> > 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." < gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org>
> > > >> >
> > > >> > 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
> > > >> > <yana@wikimedia.org> wrote:
> > > >> >
> > > >> > > Hi all,
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > What are some good studies of the gender of Wikipedia
readers?
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Thanks,
> > > >> > > Yana
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > _______________________________________________
> > > >> > > Gendergap mailing list
> > > >> > > Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > >> > > 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
> > > >> Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Wiki-research-l mailing list
> > > > Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
> > > >
> > > >
> > ------- End of Original Message -------
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wiki-research-l mailing list
> > Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > 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 -------
--
__________________________
prof. dr hab. Dariusz Jemielniak
kierownik katedry Zarządzania Międzynarodowego
i centrum badawczego CROW
Akademia Leona Koźmińskiego
http://www.crow.alk.edu.plczłonek Akademii Młodych Uczonych Polskiej Akademii Naukczłonek Komitetu Polityki Naukowej MNiSWWyszła pierwsza na świecie etnografia Wikipedii "Common Knowledge? An Ethnography of Wikipedia" (2014, Stanford University Press) mojego autorstwa http://www.sup.org/book.cgi?id=24010Recenzje
_______________________________________________
Wiki-research-l mailing list
Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
_______________________________________________
Wiki-research-l mailing list
Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
_______________________________________________
Wiki-research-l mailing list
Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
