skip to main content
10.1145/2482991.2482999acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication Pagesc-n-tConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Work-to-rule: the emergence of algorithmic governance in Wikipedia

Published:29 June 2013Publication History

ABSTRACT

Research has shown the importance of a functioning governance system for the success of peer production communities. It particularly highlights the role of human coordination and communication within the governance regime. In this article, we extend this line of research by differentiating two categories of governance mechanisms. The first category is based primarily on communication, in which social norms emerge that are often formalized by written rules and guidelines. The second category refers to the technical infrastructure that enables users to access artifacts, and that allows the community to communicate and coordinate their collective actions to create those artifacts. We collected qualitative and quantitative data from Wikipedia in order to show how a community's consensus gradually converts social mechanisms into algorithmic mechanisms. In detail, we analyze algorithmic governance mechanisms in two embedded cases: the software extension "flagged revisions" and the bot "xqbot". Our insights point towards a growing relevance of algorithmic governance in the realm of governing large-scale peer production communities. This extends previous research, in which algorithmic governance is almost absent. Further research is needed to unfold, understand, and also modify existing interdependencies between social and algorithmic governance mechanisms.

References

  1. Y. Benkler. The Wealth of Networks: How Social Production Transforms Markets and Freedom. Yale University Press, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. I. Beschastnikh, T. Kriplean, and D. W. McDonald. Wikipedian self-governance in action: Motivating the policy lens. In International Conference on Weblogs and Social Media, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. M. Burke and R. Kraut. Mopping up: modeling wikipedia promotion decisions. In Proceedings of the 2008 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work, CSCW '08, pages 27--36, New York, NY, USA, 2008. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. B. Butler, E. Joyce, and J. Pike. Don't look now, but we've created a bureaucracy: the nature and roles of policies and rules in wikipedia. In Proceeding of the twenty-sixth annual SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems, CHI '08, pages 1101--1110, New York, NY, USA, 2008. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. C. R. B. de Souza and D. F. Redmiles. An empirical study of software developers' management of dependencies and changes. In Proceedings of the 30th international conference on Software engineering, ICSE '08, pages 241--250, New York, NY, USA, 2008. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. A. Forte and A. Bruckman. Scaling consensus: Increasing decentralization in wikipedia governance. In Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, page 157, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. R. S. Geiger. The social roles of bots and assisted editing programs. In Proceedings of the 5th International Symposium on Wikis and Open Collaboration, WikiSym '09, pages 30:1--30:2, New York, NY, USA, 2009. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. R. S. Geiger. The lives of bots. In G. Lovink and N. Tkacz, editors, CRITICAL POINT OF VIEW: A Wikipedia Reader, pages 78--93, Amsterdam, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. R. S. Geiger and D. Ribes. The work of sustaining order in wikipedia: the banning of a vandal. In Proceedings of the 2010 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work, CSCW '10, pages 117--126, New York, NY, USA, 2010. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. R. E. Grinter. Recomposition: Coordinating a web of softwaredependencies. Comput. Supported Coop. Work, 12:297--327, July 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. A. Halfaker, R. S. Geiger, J. Morgan, and J. Riedl. The rise and decline of an open collaboration system: How wikipedia's reaction to sudden popularity is causing its decline. American Behavioral Scientist, in-press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. A. Halfaker and J. Riedl. Bots and cyborgs: Wikipedia's immune system. Computer, 45(3):79--82, Mar. 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. C. Jensen and W. Scacchi. Governance in open source software development projects: A comparative multi-level analysis. In P. Ågerfalk, C. Boldyreff, J. González-Barahona, G. Madey, and J. Noll, editors, Open Source Software: New Horizons, volume 319 of IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology, pages 130--142. Springer, Boston, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. A. Kittur, B. Pendleton, and R. E. Kraut. Herding the cats: the influence of groups in coordinating peer production. In Proceedings of the 5th International Symposium on Wikis and Open Collaboration, WikiSym '09, pages 7:1--7:9, New York, NY, USA, 2009. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. A. Kittur, B. Suh, B. A. Pendleton, and E. H. Chi. He says, she says: conflict and coordination in wikipedia. In CHI '07: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems, pages 453--462, New York, NY, USA, 2007. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. P. Laat. Governance of open source software: state of the art. Journal of Management and Governance, 11(2):165--177, May 2007.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. L. Lessig. Code and other Laws of Cyberspace. Basic Books, New York, 2000. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. M. Markus. The governance of free/open source software projects: monolithic, multidimensional, or configurational? Journal of Management and Governance, 11:151--163, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. E. W. Morrison. Newcomer information seeking: Exploring types, modes, sources, and outcomes. The Academy of Management Journal, 36(3):pp. 557--589, 1993.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. S. Niederer and J. van Dijck. Wisdom of the crowd or technicity of content? wikipedia as a sociotechnical system. New Media & Society, 12(8):1368--1387, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. S. O'Mahony and F. Ferraro. The emergence of governance in an open source community. Academy of Management Journal, 50(5):1079--1106, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. E. Ostrom. Collective action and the evolution of social norms. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 14(3):137--158, 2000.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. K. Panciera, A. Halfaker, and L. Terveen. Wikipedians are born, not made: a study of power editors on wikipedia. In Proceedings of the ACM 2009 international conference on Supporting group work, GROUP '09, pages 51--60, New York, NY, USA, 2009. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. A. Schroeder and C. Wagner. Governance of open content creation: A conceptualization and analysis of control and guiding mechanisms in the open content domain. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol., 63(10):1947--1959, Oct. 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. S. K. Shah. Motivation, governance, and the viability of hybrid forms in open source software development. Management Science, 52(7):1000--1014, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. C. Steiner. Automate this: How Algorithms came to rule our world. Portfolio, 2012.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. B. Suh, G. Convertino, E. H. Chi, and P. Pirolli. The singularity is not near: slowing growth of wikipedia. In Proceedings of the 5th International Symposium on Wikis and Open Collaboration, WikiSym '09, pages 8:1--8:10, New York, NY, USA, 2009. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. M. L. Tushman. Work characteristics and subunit communication structure: A contingency analysis. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24(1):pp. 82--98, 1979.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  29. F. B. Viégas, M. Wattenberg, and M. M. McKeon. The hidden order of wikipedia. In Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on Online communities and social computing, OCSC'07, pages 445--454, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2007. Springer-Verlag. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. Wikipedia. Wikipedia:meinungsbilder/weiterführung der gesichteten versionen. http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Meinungsbilder/Weiterf%C3%BChrung_der_gesichteten_Versionen, September 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Wikipedia. Discussion on administrator re-election votes (in german). http://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_Diskussion:Adminwiederwahl&oldid=73644489#abgelaufene_Stimmen, April 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Wikipedia. Discussion on obsolete votes (in german). http://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_Diskussion:Adminwiederwahl&oldid=74215389#Obsolete_Voten, May 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Wikipedia. Request for deleting obsolete votes from re-election pages (in german). http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Bots/Anfragen/Archiv/2010-1#Entfernen_von_abgelaufenen_Stimmen_auf_Wiederwahlseiten, April 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Wikipedia. Wikipedia:flagged revisions/sighted versions. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Flagged_revisions/Sighted_versions&oldid=524673795, November 2012.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a democracy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not, January 2013.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Wikipedia. Wikipedia:pc2012. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:PC2012, January 2013.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Wikipedia. Wikipedia:policies and guidelines. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Policies_and_guidelines, January 2013.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. Wikipedia. Wikipedia:polling is not a substitute for discussion. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Polling_is_not_a_substitute_for_discussion, January 2013.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. O. E. Williamson. Strategy research: governance and competence perspectives. Strategic Management Journal, 20(12):1087--1108, 1999.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Work-to-rule: the emergence of algorithmic governance in Wikipedia

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in
        • Published in

          cover image ACM Other conferences
          C&T '13: Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Communities and Technologies
          June 2013
          165 pages
          ISBN:9781450321044
          DOI:10.1145/2482991

          Copyright © 2013 ACM

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 29 June 2013

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article

          Acceptance Rates

          C&T '13 Paper Acceptance Rate17of58submissions,29%Overall Acceptance Rate80of183submissions,44%

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader