Toxic comments are associated with reduced activity of volunteer editors on Wikipedia

Author:

Smirnov Ivan1ORCID,Oprea Camelia2,Strohmaier Markus345

Affiliation:

1. Graduate Research School, University of Technology Sydney , 15 Broadway , Sydney 2007, Australia

2. Department of Computer Science, RWTH Aachen University , Ahornstrasse 55 , Aachen 52074, Germany

3. Business School, University of Mannheim , L 15 1–6 , Mannheim 68161, Germany

4. GESIS—Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences , Unter Sachsenhausen 6–8 , Köln 50667, Germany

5. Complexity Science Hub Vienna , Josefstaedter Strasse 39 , Vienna 1080, Austria

Abstract

Abstract Wikipedia is one of the most successful collaborative projects in history. It is the largest encyclopedia ever created, with millions of users worldwide relying on it as the first source of information as well as for fact-checking and in-depth research. As Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of its volunteer editors, its success might be particularly affected by toxic speech. In this paper, we analyze all 57 million comments made on user talk pages of 8.5 million editors across the six most active language editions of Wikipedia to study the potential impact of toxicity on editors’ behavior. We find that toxic comments are consistently associated with reduced activity of editors, equivalent to 0.5–2 active days per user in the short term. This translates to multiple human-years of lost productivity, considering the number of active contributors to Wikipedia. The effects of toxic comments are potentially even greater in the long term, as they are associated with a significantly increased risk of editors leaving the project altogether. Using an agent-based model, we demonstrate that toxicity attacks on Wikipedia have the potential to impede the progress of the entire project. Our results underscore the importance of mitigating toxic speech on collaborative platforms such as Wikipedia to ensure their continued success.

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Reference72 articles.

1. Should You Believe Wikipedia?

2. Wikipedia as a data source for political scientists: accuracy and completeness of coverage;Brown;PS: Political Sci Politics,2011

3. Scope, completeness, and accuracy of drug information in Wikipedia;Clauson;Ann Pharmacother,2008

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3