Visual analysis of controversy in user-generated encyclopedias

From WikiLit
Jump to: navigation, search
Publication (help)
Visual analysis of controversy in user-generated encyclopedias
Authors: Ulrik Brandes, Jürgen Lerner [edit item]
Citation: Information Visualization  : . 2008.
Publication type: Journal article
Peer-reviewed: Yes
Database(s):
DOI: 10.1057/palgrave.ivs.9500171.
Google Scholar cites: Citations
Link(s): Paper link
Added by Wikilit team: Added on initial load
Search
Article: Google Scholar BASE PubMed
Other scholarly wikis: AcaWiki Brede Wiki WikiPapers
Web search: Bing Google Yahoo!Google PDF
Other:
Services
Format: BibTeX
Visual analysis of controversy in user-generated encyclopedias is a publication by Ulrik Brandes, Jürgen Lerner.


[edit] Abstract

Wikipedia is a large and rapidly growing Web-based collaborative authoring environment, where anyone on the Internet can create, modify, and delete pages about encyclopedic topics. A remarkable property of some Wikipedia pages is that they are written by up to thousands of authors who may have contradicting opinions. In this paper we show that a visual analysis of the “who revises whom”- network gives deep insight into controversies. We propose a set of analysis and visualization techniques that reveal the dominant authors of a page, the roles they play, and the alters they confront. Thereby we provide tools to understand howWikipedia authors collaborate in the presence of controversy.

[edit] Research questions

""We propose a set of analysis and visualization techniques that reveal the dominant authors of a page, the roles they play, and the alters they confront. Thereby we provide tools to understand how Wikipedia authors collaborate in the presence of controversy.""

Research details

Topics: Participation trends [edit item]
Domains: Computer science [edit item]
Theory type: Design and action [edit item]
Wikipedia coverage: Main topic [edit item]
Theories: ""We used a variant of spectral graph clustering heuristics proposed, e. g., in [10, 16]. These spectral heuristics are efficient, received much empirical and theoretical support (see [10, 16] and references therein), and also performed quite well in the examples that we considered."" [edit item]
Research design: Other [edit item]
Data source: Wikipedia pages [edit item]
Collected data time dimension: Longitudinal [edit item]
Unit of analysis: Edit, User [edit item]
Wikipedia data extraction: Dump [edit item]
Wikipedia page type: Article [edit item]
Wikipedia language: English [edit item]

[edit] Conclusion

""The main contribution of our work lies in the proposed techniques for visual analysis of the revision network. Our drawings easily reveal the authors that are the most involved in controversy (taking the number of edits as a measure for user involvement would be insuf?cient as the example of Yafnot in Sect. 5.1 shows). Furthermore, our network visualizations show who confronts whom and who plays which role. Another contribution is that we identi?ed some recurrent patterns of confrontation in the examples we considered: both Fig. 6 and Fig. 9 show a high asymmetry in the sense that users on one side of the con?ict play the role of revisors and users on the other side are revised. However, the interpretation of the revisor vs. revised pattern can be quite different. In Fig. 6 it seems to be caused by differences in opinion and in Fig. 9 by vandalism.""

[edit] Comments


Further notes[edit]

Facts about "Visual analysis of controversy in user-generated encyclopedias"RDF feed
AbstractWikipedia is a large and rapidly growing WWikipedia is a large and rapidly growing Web-based collaborative

authoring environment, where anyone on the Internet can create, modify, and delete pages about encyclopedic topics. A remarkable property of some Wikipedia pages is that they are written by up to thousands of authors who may have contradicting opinions. In this paper we show that a visual analysis of the “who revises whom”- network gives deep insight into controversies. We propose a set of analysis and visualization techniques that reveal the dominant authors of a page, the roles they play, and the alters they confront. Thereby we provide tools to understand howWikipedia authors collaborate in the presence of controversy.ollaborate

in the presence of controversy.
Added by wikilit teamAdded on initial load +
Collected data time dimensionLongitudinal +
Conclusion"The main contribution of our work lies in"The main contribution of our work lies in the proposed techniques for visual analysis of the revision network. Our drawings easily reveal the authors that are the most involved in controversy (taking the number of edits as a measure for user involvement would be insuf?cient as the example of Yafnot in Sect. 5.1 shows). Furthermore, our network visualizations show who confronts whom and who plays which role. Another contribution is that we identi?ed some recurrent patterns of confrontation in the examples we considered: both Fig. 6 and Fig. 9 show a high asymmetry in the sense that users on one side of the con?ict play the role of revisors and users on the other side are revised. However, the interpretation of the revisor vs. revised pattern can be quite different. In Fig. 6 it seems to be caused by differences in opinion and in Fig. 9 by vandalism."es in opinion and in Fig. 9 by vandalism."
Data sourceWikipedia pages +
Doi10.1057/palgrave.ivs.9500171 +
Google scholar urlhttp://scholar.google.com/scholar?ie=UTF-8&q=%22Visual%2Banalysis%2Bof%2Bcontroversy%2Bin%2Buser-generated%2Bencyclopedias%22 +
Has authorUlrik Brandes + and Jürgen Lerner +
Has domainComputer science +
Has topicParticipation trends +
Peer reviewedYes +
Publication typeJournal article +
Published inInformation Visualization +
Research designOther +
Research questions"We propose a set of analysis and visualiz"We propose a set of analysis and visualization techniques that reveal the dominant authors of a page, the roles they play, and the alters they confront. Thereby we provide tools to understand how Wikipedia authors collaborate in the presence of controversy."llaborate in the presence of controversy."
Revid11,032 +
Theories"We used a variant of spectral graph clust"We used a variant of spectral graph clustering heuristics proposed, e. g., in [10, 16]. These spectral heuristics are efficient, received much empirical and theoretical support (see [10, 16] and references therein), and also performed quite well in the examples that we considered." well in the examples that we considered."
Theory typeDesign and action +
TitleVisual analysis of controversy in user-generated encyclopedias
Unit of analysisEdit + and User +
Urlhttp://ivi.sagepub.com/content/7/1/34 +
Wikipedia coverageMain topic +
Wikipedia data extractionDump +
Wikipedia languageEnglish +
Wikipedia page typeArticle +
Year2008 +