Has anyone replicated the experiment described in http://aisel.aisnet.org/amcis2015/e-Biz/GeneralPresentations/11/ yet?
Replicated it how?
Jonathan
On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 3:06 AM, James Salsman jsalsman@gmail.com wrote:
Has anyone replicated the experiment described in http://aisel.aisnet.org/amcis2015/e-Biz/GeneralPresentations/11/ yet?
Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
I assume they mean whether we use identity disclosure mechanisms. And the answer is, to do so would compromise the anonymity on which many of our submitter's depend.
That is a better question for wikileaks, though perhaps coming at it in not quite the angle you were expecting, or yelp, or google.
On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 10:50 AM, Jonathan Morgan jmorgan@wikimedia.org wrote:
Replicated it how?
Jonathan
On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 3:06 AM, James Salsman jsalsman@gmail.com wrote:
Has anyone replicated the experiment described in http://aisel.aisnet.org/amcis2015/e-Biz/GeneralPresentations/11/ yet?
Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
-- Jonathan T. Morgan Senior Design Researcher Wikimedia Foundation User:Jmorgan (WMF) https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Jmorgan_(WMF)
Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
Jonathan, I am so sorry http://aisel.aisnet.org/amcis2015/e-Biz/GeneralPresentations/11/ is behind a paywall. It wasn't when I first found it, and that version is miles away from me at the moment. It describes a truly fascinating empirical simulation laboratory participation experiment, which shows that anonymous review is more accurate than review with identity disclosure, which is actually very easy to find literally centuries of replication, but it also found that the costs were more similar than conventional wisdom.
I want everyone to see it because of what the specific experiment says about ways to detect bias at the lowest possible cost. I have a feeling that you will quickly think of ways to extend it to study projects' editing.
Can someone who has access to that paper please share the method and results as fair use?
Google the paper's title to see many related papers, including this one http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2011.01551.x/full Not the same as that paper, but orbiting that space...
On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 3:37 PM, James Salsman jsalsman@gmail.com wrote:
Jonathan, I am so sorry http://aisel.aisnet.org/amcis2015/e-Biz/GeneralPresentations/11/ is behind a paywall. It wasn't when I first found it, and that version is miles away from me at the moment. It describes a truly fascinating empirical simulation laboratory participation experiment, which shows that anonymous review is more accurate than review with identity disclosure, which is actually very easy to find literally centuries of replication, but it also found that the costs were more similar than conventional wisdom.
I want everyone to see it because of what the specific experiment says about ways to detect bias at the lowest possible cost. I have a feeling that you will quickly think of ways to extend it to study projects' editing.
Can someone who has access to that paper please share the method and results as fair use?
Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
Thanks, James. That sounds really interesting. I hope to read it.
NOTE TO EVERYONE: if you do have access to this closed-access paper, please do NOT attach a PDF of it to an email you send to this mailing list. Turns out it's a real pain to remove these files from our public list archive (I found that out the hard way recently... :/).
/me shakes fist at the publishing-industrial complex
J
On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 3:37 PM, James Salsman jsalsman@gmail.com wrote:
Jonathan, I am so sorry http://aisel.aisnet.org/amcis2015/e-Biz/GeneralPresentations/11/ is behind a paywall. It wasn't when I first found it, and that version is miles away from me at the moment. It describes a truly fascinating empirical simulation laboratory participation experiment, which shows that anonymous review is more accurate than review with identity disclosure, which is actually very easy to find literally centuries of replication, but it also found that the costs were more similar than conventional wisdom.
I want everyone to see it because of what the specific experiment says about ways to detect bias at the lowest possible cost. I have a feeling that you will quickly think of ways to extend it to study projects' editing.
Can someone who has access to that paper please share the method and results as fair use?
Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org