Experimental study of informal rewards in peer production
|Experimental study of informal rewards in peer production|
|Authors:||Michael Restivo, Arnout van de Rijt|
|Citation:||PLoS ONE 7 (3): e34358. 2012|
|Database(s):||Google Scholar cites PubMed (PMID/22479610)|
|Web:||Bing Google Yahoo! — Google PDF|
|Article:||BASE Google Scholar PubMed|
|Restricted:||DTU Digital Library|
|Format:||BibTeX Template from PMID|
|Extract:||Talairach coordinates from linked PDF: CSV-formated wiki-formated|
Experimental study of informal rewards in peer production: An experiment where Wikipedia editors were given informal awards ("barnstars") to see how it affected their productivity.
|Subject group #1 (help)|
|Subjects/♂/♀:||200 / /|
|Approval:||Committees on Research Involving Human Subjects at the State University of New York at Stony Brook|
Group 1 of 200 wikipedia writers were included in the study.
The study on the human subjects was approved by the Committees on Research Involving Human Subjects at the State University of New York at Stony Brook.
The subjects was chosen among the 1% most productive Wikipedia contributors, eliminating high-volume editors who "had previously received a barnstar or had elevated administrative privileges in the community".
The subjects did not get prior informed consent as it was judged that the study "presented only minimal risks to subjects"
Barnstars were awarded to half of the subjects and the subjects editing behavior were monitored for 90 days after the "treatment".
- Median productivity decreased for both groups, but more so for the group which was not awarded barnstars.
- "Subjects in the experimental condition were significantly more likely to receive additional rewards from other contributors"