Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Testing Coleman's Social-Norm Enforcement Mechanism : Evidence from Wikipedia
> Media Forums > News Worth Discussing
Newsfeed
Testing Coleman's Social-Norm Enforcement Mechanism : Evidence from Wikipedia

QUOTE

Executive Summary

Harvard Business School professor Mikolaj Jan Piskorski and doctoral candidate Andreea Gorbatai look to the editing process on Wikipedia to test and validate the well-accepted (but little-verified) theory of sociologist James Coleman that social norm violations decline as network density increases. Support for Coleman's mechanism would alert us to the importance of punishments for norm violations and rewards for such punishments, and thus help us to design social systems in which norms are observed.
Key concepts include:
  • Coleman argued that high-density networks provide an opportunity structure within which third parties can compensate norm enforcers for the expense of chastising norm violators. Such payments encourage actors to punish those who violate norms, which in turn reduce the incidence of norm violation.
  • Despite ubiquitous citations of Coleman's explanation, little empirical work has tested it convincingly.
  • The researchers identified the improper use of the revert command by Wikipedia contributors-by which users can quickly knock out text they don't agree with and revert it back to a prior state-as a norm violation.
  • The research found substantial support for the theory, suggesting that increasing network density to elicit norm compliance is justified.
  • On Wikipedia, norm violations, punishments for such violations, and rewards for those who punish violators are all highly visible. Replicating these conditions in the design of a social system is critical; otherwise, norm violations will remain undetected and therefore unpunished.
Jon Awbrey
QUOTE(Newsfeed @ Thu 20th January 2011, 8:59am) *

Testing Coleman's Social-Norm Enforcement Mechanism: Evidence from Wikipedia

Working Knowledge
Harvard Business School professor Mikolaj Jan Piskorski and doctoral candidate Andreea Gorbatai look to the editing process on Wikipedia to test and …


QUOTE

What are the actual norms, as opposed to the advertised norms?

That is the question.

(Thank you for sharing your comments. We'll be posting selected responses as they arrive most weekdays.)

Kelly Martin
The study here did not investigate Wikipedia's declared norms or how it claims to enforce them; rather, it applied existing social concepts of norms to discover a norm within Wikipedia's community and practices (specifically, that "the undo button should not be used except to remove vandalism or other malformed edits"), a mechanism by which violations of that norm are punished (by reverting the undo), and examined the degree to which social embedding impacts the probability that an editor would be prone to violate that norm, and to be punished for doing so. Interesting piece, even more so because it specifically does not accept for taken any of Wikipedia's claims about itself, but instead objectively examined what actually takes place within Wikipedia.

From the standpoint of Wikipedia, the study found, inter alia, that reverting editors who make nonvandalism contributions tends to make them want to stop editing, that editors with strong social networks are less likely to be reverted. These are all things we already knew, of course, but it's interesting to see it validated by what appears to be at least somewhat legitimate statistical method.

Primarily this study is an attempt to validate a sociological theory. The theory is not specific to Wikipedia; rather, the researchers merely used Wikipedia as a data source for validation. This study offers no commentary on Wikipedia's social worth, which is refreshing after reading endless "studies" that seek to prove that Wikipedia is somehow good or noble or whatever.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.