Diese Datenbank enthält über 40.000 Dokumente zu Themen aus den Bereichen Formalerschließung – Inhaltserschließung – Information Retrieval.
© 2015 W. Gödert, TH Köln, Institut für Informationswissenschaft / Powered by litecat, BIS Oldenburg (Stand: 04. Juni 2021)
1Arazy, O. ; Lifshitz-Assaf, H. ; Balila, A.: Neither a Bazaar nor a cathedral : the interplay between structure and agency in Wikipedia's role system.
In: Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 70(2019) no.1, S.3-15.
Abstract: Roles provide a key coordination mechanism in peer-production. Whereas one stream in the literature has focused on the structural responsibilities associated with roles, another has stressed the emergent nature of work. To date, these streams have proceeded largely in parallel. In seeking to enhance our understanding of the tension between structure and agency in peer-production, we investigated the interplay between structural and emergent roles. Our study explored the breadth of structural roles in Wikipedia (English version) and their linkage to various forms of activities. Our analyses show that despite the latitude in selecting their mode of participation, participants' structural and emergent roles are tightly coupled. Our discussion highlights that: (a) participants often stay close to the "production ground floor" despite the assignment into structural roles; and (b) there are typical modifications in activity patterns associated with role-assignment, namely: functional specialization, multispecialization, defunctionalization, changes in communication patterns, management of identity, and role definition. We contribute to theory of coordination and roles, as well as provide some practical implications.
Inhalt: Vgl.: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/asi.24076.
2Arazy, O. ; Gellatly, I. ; Brainin, E. ; Nov, O.: Motivation to share knowledge using wiki technology and the moderating effect of role perceptions.
In: Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 67(2016) no.10, S.2362-2378.
Abstract: One of the key challenges for innovation and technology-mediated knowledge collaboration within organizational settings is motivating contributors to share their knowledge. Drawing upon self-determination theory, we investigate 2 forms of motivation: internally driven (autonomous motivation) and externally driven (controlled motivation). Knowledge sharing could be viewed as a required in-role activity or as discretionary extra-role behavior. In this study, we examine the moderating effect of role perceptions on the relations between each of the two motivational constructs and knowledge sharing, paying particular attention to the affordances of the enabling information technology. An analysis of survey data from a wiki-based organizational encyclopedia in a large, multinational firm reveals that when contributors' motivation is externally driven, they are more likely to share knowledge if this activity is viewed as in-role behavior. However, when contributors' motivation is internally driven, they are more likely to participate in knowledge sharing when this activity is viewed as extra-role behavior. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.
Inhalt: Vgl.: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/asi.23579/full.
3Arazy, O. ; Yeo, L. ; Nov, O.: Stay on the Wikipedia task : when task-related disagreements slip into personal and procedural conflicts.
In: Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 64(2013) no.8, S.1634-1648.
Abstract: In Wikipedia, volunteers collaboratively author encyclopedic entries, and therefore managing conflict is a key factor in group success. Behavioral research describes 3 conflict types: task-related, affective, and process. Affective and process conflicts have been consistently found to impede group performance; however, the effect of task conflict is inconsistent. We propose that these inconclusive results are due to underspecification of the task conflict construct, and focus on the transition phase where task-related disagreements escalate into affective and process conflict. We define these transitional phases as distinct constructs-task-affective and task-process conflict-and develop a theoretical model that explains how the various task-related conflict constructs, together with the composition of the wiki editor group, determine the quality of the collaboratively authored wiki article. Our empirical study of 96 Wikipedia articles involved multiple data-collection methods, including analysis of Wikipedia system logs, manual content analysis of articles' discussion pages, and a comprehensive assessment of articles' quality using the Delphi method. Our results show that when group members' disagreements-originally task related-escalate into personal attacks or hinge on procedure, these disagreements impede group performance. Implications for research and practice are discussed.
4Arazy, O. ; Kopak, R.: On the measurability of information quality.
In: Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 62(2011) no.1, S.89-99.
Abstract: The notion of information quality (IQ) has been investigated extensively in recent years. Much of this research has been aimed at conceptualizing IQ and its underlying dimensions (e.g., accuracy, completeness) and at developing instruments for measuring these quality dimensions. However, less attention has been given to the measurability of IQ. The objective of this study is to explore the extent to which a set of IQ dimensions-accuracy, completeness, objectivity, and representation-lend themselves to reliable measurement. By reliable measurement, we refer to the degree to which independent assessors are able to agree when rating objects on these various dimensions. Our study reveals that multiple assessors tend to agree more on certain dimensions (e.g., accuracy) while finding it more difficult to agree on others (e.g., completeness). We argue that differences in measurability stem from properties inherent to the quality dimension (i.e., the availability of heuristics that make the assessment more tangible) as well as on assessors' reliance on these cues. Implications for theory and practice are discussed.
5Arazy, O. ; Stroulia, E. ; Ruecker, S. ; Arias, C. ; Fiorentino, C. ; Ganev, V. ; Yau, T.: Recognizing contributions in wikis : authorship categories, algorithms, and visualizations.
In: Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 61(2010) no.6, S.1166-1179.
Abstract: Wikis are designed to support collaborative editing, without focusing on individual contribution, such that it is not straightforward to determine who contributed to a specific page. However, as wikis are increasingly adopted in settings such as business, government, and education, where editors are largely driven by career goals, there is a perceived need to modify wikis so that each editor's contributions are clearly presented. In this paper we introduce an approach for assessing the contributions of wiki editors along several authorship categories, as well as a variety of information glyphs for visualizing this information. We report on three types of analysis: (a) assessing the accuracy of the algorithms, (b) estimating the understandability of the visualizations, and (c) exploring wiki editors' perceptions regarding the extent to which such an approach is likely to change their behavior. Our findings demonstrate that our proposed automated techniques can estimate fairly accurately the quantity of editors' contributions across various authorship categories, and that the visualizations we introduced can clearly convey this information to users. Moreover, our user study suggests that such tools are likely to change wiki editors' behavior. We discuss both the potential benefits and risks associated with solutions for estimating and visualizing wiki contributions.