Hi WereSpielChequers, Kerry, Aaron and all,
____WereSpielChequers wrote:
"the community is more abrasive towards women"
this may be stats expert discourse, but let me show you how the question
itself has a gendered slant.
imagine what would happen - also in your research design - if it read: "the
community is less abrasive towards men" - how does this compare to the
first question re who are "the community"?
and again, re phasing ten years in 2011 and four years on, which language
version(s) are hypotheses based on?
____Kerry wrote:
"But I would agree that if an organisation sets a target (25% women in this
particular case) and then does not put in place a means of measuring the
progress against that target, one has to question the point of establishing a
target."
I think one has to question the point of not putting in place a means of
measuring the progress...
and also ask why, if the issue is a high priority (allegedly, one might add, in
speeches at meetings, in interviews with the press...) this organisation does
not fund any top level research... - or does it?
____Aaron wrote:
"higher quality survey data"
well, and how does one recognize low quality and how come it is so low?
and "quality" by whose epistemological aims and standards?
"causes and mechanisms that drive the gender gap (and related
participation gaps)"
which "related participation gaps" do you have in mind here?
where would these gaps be situated in terms of areas of participation?
and, again, in which language version(s)?
best,
Claudia
---------- Original Message -----------
From:aaron shaw <aaronshaw(a)northwestern.edu>
To:Research into Wikimedia content and communities <wiki-research-
l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Sent:Mon, 16 Feb 2015 20:50:17 -0800
Subject:Re: [Wiki-research-l] a cautious note on gender stats Re: Fwd:
[Gendergap] Wikipedia readers
Hi all!
Thanks, Jeremy & Dariusz for following up.
On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 5:58 AM, Dariusz
Jemielniak <darekj(a)alk.edu.pl> wrote:
As far as I recall, they did a follow-up on this
topic, and maybe a
publication coming up?
Sadly, no follow ups at the moment.
If we want to have a more precise sense of the
demographics of participants the biggest need in
this space is simply higher quality survey data.
My paper with Mako has a lot of detail about why
the 2008 editor survey (and all subsequent editor
surveys, to my knowledge) has some profound limitations.
The identification and estimation of the effects
of particular causes and mechanisms that drive the
gender gap (and related participation gaps)
presents an even tougher challenge for
researchers and is an area of active inquiry.
all the best,
Aaron
------- End of Original Message -------