Wikipedia as public scholarship: communicating our impact online

From WikiLit
Jump to: navigation, search
Publication (help)
Wikipedia as public scholarship: communicating our impact online
Authors: Elizabeth K. Rush, Sarah J. Tracy [edit item]
Citation: Journal of Applied Communication Research 11 (5): 773-794. 2010 August.
Publication type: Journal article
Peer-reviewed: Yes
Database(s):
DOI: 10.1080/00909882.2010.490846.
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
Wikipedia as public scholarship: communicating our impact online is a publication by Elizabeth K. Rush, Sarah J. Tracy.


[edit] Abstract

To contribute to the forum asking "Has Communication Research Made a Difference?" this essay examines whether communication scholarship makes a difference (a) to those who search for information online, (b) in the sense that a primary way our research can make a difference is through its accessibility, and (c) by using the criteria of its presence (or absence) on Wikipedia. In this essay, we reason that Wikipedia is a useful benchmark for online accessibility of public scholarship in that it provides immediate, freely available information to today's diverse global public seeking online answers to questions and relief from problems.

[edit] Research questions

"To contribute to the forum asking “Has Communication Research Made a Difference?,” this essay examines whether communication scholarship makes a difference (a) to those who search for information online, (b) in the sense that a primary way our research can make a difference is through its accessibility, and (c) by using the criteria of its presence (or absence) on Wikipedia."

Research details

Topics: Comprehensiveness [edit item]
Domains: Information science, Communications [edit item]
Theory type: Analysis [edit item]
Wikipedia coverage: Main topic [edit item]
Theories: "Undetermined" [edit item]
Research design: Content analysis [edit item]
Data source: Wikipedia pages [edit item]
Collected data time dimension: Cross-sectional [edit item]
Unit of analysis: Website [edit item]
Wikipedia data extraction: Live Wikipedia [edit item]
Wikipedia page type: Article [edit item]
Wikipedia language: English [edit item]

[edit] Conclusion

"Wikipedia provides an immediate, direct, and relatively inexpensive route for communication research to make a difference. However, if Wikipedia is a benchmark, communication research does not make nearly the difference that it could. We are not suggesting that public scholarship is a quick and easy fix, or that missing data on Wikipedia is the individual fault of specific scholars. Indeed, we have personally learned that updating Wikipedia takes time and practice. However, we provide some ideas about how to improve our Wikipedia presence."

[edit] Comments

""we reason that Wikipedia is a useful benchmark for online accessibility of public scholarship in that it provides immediate, freely available information to today's diverse global public seeking online answers to questions and relief from problems." p. 310"


Further notes[edit]

Facts about "Wikipedia as public scholarship: communicating our impact online"RDF feed
AbstractTo contribute to the forum asking "Has ComTo contribute to the forum asking "Has Communication Research Made a Difference?" this essay examines whether communication scholarship makes a difference (a) to those who search for information online, (b) in the sense that a primary way our research can make a difference is through its accessibility, and (c) by using the criteria of its presence (or absence) on Wikipedia. In this essay, we reason that Wikipedia is a useful benchmark for online accessibility of public scholarship in that it provides immediate, freely available information to today's diverse global public seeking online answers to questions and relief from problems.ers to questions and relief from problems.
Added by wikilit teamAdded on initial load +
Collected data time dimensionCross-sectional +
Comments"we reason that Wikipedia is a useful benc"we reason that Wikipedia is a useful benchmark for online accessibility of public scholarship in that it provides immediate, freely available information to today's diverse global public seeking online answers to questions and relief from problems." p. 310uestions and relief from problems." p. 310
ConclusionWikipedia provides an immediate, direct, aWikipedia provides an immediate, direct, and relatively inexpensive route for communication research to make a difference. However, if Wikipedia is a benchmark, communication research does not make nearly the difference that it could. We are not suggesting that public scholarship is a quick and easy fix, or that missing data on Wikipedia is the individual fault of specific scholars. Indeed, we have personally learned that updating Wikipedia takes time and practice. However, we provide some ideas about how to improve our Wikipedia presence.out how to improve our Wikipedia presence.
Data sourceWikipedia pages +
Doi10.1080/00909882.2010.490846 +
Google scholar urlhttp://scholar.google.com/scholar?ie=UTF-8&q=%22Wikipedia%2Bas%2Bpublic%2Bscholarship%3A%2Bcommunicating%2Bour%2Bimpact%2Bonline%22 +
Has authorElizabeth K. Rush + and Sarah J. Tracy +
Has domainInformation science + and Communications +
Has topicComprehensiveness +
Issue5 +
MonthAugust +
Pages773-794 +
Peer reviewedYes +
Publication typeJournal article +
Published inJournal of Applied Communication Research +
Research designContent analysis +
Research questionsTo contribute to the forum asking “Has ComTo contribute to the forum asking “Has Communication Research Made a Difference?,” this essay examines whether communication scholarship makes a difference (a) to those who search for information online, (b) in the sense that a primary way our research can make a difference is through its accessibility, and (c) by using the criteria of its presence (or absence) on Wikipedia.of its presence (or absence) on Wikipedia.
Revid11,096 +
TheoriesUndetermined
Theory typeAnalysis +
TitleWikipedia as public scholarship: communicating our impact online
Unit of analysisWebsite +
Urlhttp://0-www.tandfonline.com.mercury.concordia.ca/doi/full/10.1080/00909882.2010.490846 +
Volume11 +
Wikipedia coverageMain topic +
Wikipedia data extractionLive Wikipedia +
Wikipedia languageEnglish +
Wikipedia page typeArticle +
Year2010 +