Skip to content

Guest post: Why don’t more scientists contribute to Wikipedia?

25 Feb, 2011

Wikipedia logoThe Wikimedia Research Committee is trying to find out why scientists, academics and other experts don’t contribute to Wikipedia. Dario Taraborelli outlines the situation.

“Wikipedia is not an acceptable citation, even though it may lead one to a citable source. […] I tell my students that Wikipedia is a fine place to search for a paper topic or begin the research process, but it absolutely cannot serve subsequent stages of research.”

Neil L. Waters (Why you cant cite Wikipedia in my class)

“What I wonder is why professors don’t curate [pages on] Wikipedia and add course materials and open access sections of textbooks, much of which they post online anyways.”

David Lipman (Amy Maxmen, Science networking gets serious)

Last month, Wikipedia celebrated its 10th anniversary, which saw considerable coverage in mainstream media. A Chronicle article observed that, today, the project does not represent “the bottom layer of authority, nor the top, but in fact the highest layer without formal vetting” and, as such, it can serve as “an ideal bridge between the validated and unvalidated Web”.

An increasing number of university students use Wikipedia for “pre-research”, as part of their course assignments or research projects. Yet many among academics, scientists and experts turn their noses up at the thought of contributing to Wikipedia, despite a growing number of calls from the scientific community to join the project. The Association for Psychological Science launched an initiative to get the scientific psychology community involved in improving the quality of articles in their field, while biomedical experts recently called upon their peers to help make public health information in Wikipedia rigorous and complete.

These initiatives remain sporadic and most academics – despite goodwill to contribute – still perceive major barriers to participation, which typically include a general lack of time to contribute, but also barriers of a technical, social and cultural nature. These encompass the lack of incentives from the perspective of a professional career, the poor recognition of one’s expertise within Wikipedia, the widespread perception of Wikipedia as a non-authoritative source. In combination with the apparent anomaly of collaborative – and often anonymous –  authorship and the resulting fluidity of Wikipedia articles, these factors create an environment that significantly differs from the ones experts are accustomed to.

Now, the Wikimedia Research Committee has launched a survey to understand why scientists, academics and other experts do (or do not) contribute to Wikipedia, and whether individual motivation aligns with shared perceptions of Wikipedia within different communities of experts. The survey is anonymous and takes about 20 minutes to complete. Whether you are an active Wikipedia contributor or not, you can take the survey and help Wikipedia think of ways around barriers to expert participation.

Dario Taraborelli

Dario Taraborelli is a senior research analyst at the Wikimedia Foundation.

Image credit: Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.
7 Comments leave one →
  1. 8 Mar, 2011 6:05 pm

    “If you have any scientific publications, how many of them are freely available on the Web?” I could not answer that question properly. None of my regular publications is freely available, yet you can read my entire dissertation: 760 pages published with Rodopi in Amsterdam on Google Books – if you are clever even the pages Google Books say to have omitted. My work is effectively available, theoretically it is not.

    • 8 Mar, 2011 6:07 pm

      oops just realised you are just hosting the questionarie not organising it. Should not have noted that little thing here.

      • 8 Mar, 2011 6:15 pm

        We appreciate your comments anyway Olaf! I’d be interested in hearing other peoples thoughts on the matter. Do participate in the Wikimedia survey as well, of course, but there’s no reason we can’t have a discussion here too.


  1. Tweets that mention Guest post: Why don’t more scientists contribute to Wikipedia? « Wellcome Trust Blog --
  2. Friday SNPets | The OpenHelix Blog
  3. Wikipedia is quite engaging | Trading Knowledge
  4. Being a scientist in the age of Wikipedia « Wellcome Trust Blog

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: