wip
This commit is contained in:
@@ -127,32 +127,34 @@ Although gaining reputation takes time and effort, users can take certain advant
|
|||||||
% reputation
|
% reputation
|
||||||
% DONE On the personality traits of stackoverflow users \cite{bazelli2013personality} analyzing personality traits, top reputated users are more extroverted than less reputated users
|
% DONE On the personality traits of stackoverflow users \cite{bazelli2013personality} analyzing personality traits, top reputated users are more extroverted than less reputated users
|
||||||
% DONE Building reputation in stackoverflow: an empirical investigation. \cite{bosu2013building} gaming the reputation system of SO, answering question with tags with lower expertise density, answering promptly, first one to answer, activity during off peak hours, contributing to diverse areas
|
% DONE Building reputation in stackoverflow: an empirical investigation. \cite{bosu2013building} gaming the reputation system of SO, answering question with tags with lower expertise density, answering promptly, first one to answer, activity during off peak hours, contributing to diverse areas
|
||||||
|
% DONE Analysis of the reputation system and user contributions on a question answering website: Stackoverflow \cite{movshovitz2013analysis} about the reputation system, high reputation indicates primary source of answers and high quality, most questions asked by low reputation users but high reputation users post most questions on avg compared to low reputation users, effective finding of spam users and other extreme behaviors via graph analysis, predicting which users become influential longterm contributors, experts can be reliably identified based on the participation in the first few months after registration
|
||||||
% DONEAnalysis of the reputation system and user contributions on a question answering website: Stackoverflow \cite{movshovitz2013analysis} about the reputation system, high reputation indicates primary source of answers and high quality, most questions asked by low reputation users but high reputation users post most questions on avg compared to low reputation users, effective finding of spam users and other extreme behaviors via graph analysis, predicting which users become influential longterm contributors, experts can be reliably identified based on the participation in the first few months after registration
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
% DONE Design Lessons from the Fastest Q&A Site in the West \cite{mamykina2011design} understanding SO success, 1) productive competition (gamification reputation), 2) founders were already experts on site the created (ensured success early on, founders involved in community not external), 3) meta page for discussion and voting on features (same mechanics as on SO page)
|
% DONE Design Lessons from the Fastest Q&A Site in the West \cite{mamykina2011design} understanding SO success, 1) productive competition (gamification reputation), 2) founders were already experts on site the created (ensured success early on, founders involved in community not external), 3) meta page for discussion and voting on features (same mechanics as on SO page)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Complementary to reputatation system StackOverflow also employs a badge system \cite{stackoverflowbadges} to stimulate contributions by users \cite{cavusoglu2015can}. Badges are visible in questions and answers as well as the profile page of the user and can by earned by performing certain actions. Badges are often seen as a steering mechanism by reasearchers \cite{yanovsky2019one, kusmierczyk2018causal, anderson2013steering}. Although users want to achieve badges and are therefore steered to perform certain actions, steering also occurs in the reputation system. However, badges allow a wider variety goals, for instance, asking and answering questions, voting on questions and answers, or writing higher quality answers. %TODO maybe write something better
|
Complementary to reputatation system StackOverflow also employs a badge system \cite{stackoverflowbadges} to stimulate contributions by users \cite{cavusoglu2015can}. The goal of badges is to keep users engaged with the community \cite{li2012quantifying}. Therefore, badges are often used in a gameification setting where users contribute to the community and are rewarded for their behavior if it alines with the requirements of the badges. Badges are visible in questions and answers as well as the profile page of the user and can by earned by performing certain actions. Badges are often seen as a steering mechanism by reasearchers \cite{yanovsky2019one, kusmierczyk2018causal, anderson2013steering}. Although users want to achieve badges and are therefore steered to perform certain actions, steering also occurs in the reputation system. However, badges allow a wider variety goals, for instance, asking and answering questions, voting on questions and answers, or writing higher quality answers. %TODO maybe write something better
|
||||||
Badges also work as a motivator for users \cite{anderson2013steering}. Users often put in non-trivial amounts of work and effort to achieve badges and so badges become powerful incentives. However, not all users are equal and therefore do not persue badges in the same way \cite{yanovsky2019one}. Contrary to \cite{anderson2013steering}, \citeauthor{yanovsky2019one} \etal \cite{yanovsky2019one} found that users do not neccessarily increase their activity prior to achieving a badge followed by an immediate decrease in contribution thereafter but users behave differently based on their type of contribution. The authors found users can be categorized into 3 groups: Firstly, some users are not affected at all by the badge system and still contribute a lot to the community. Secondly, users increase their activity to before gaining a badge and keep their level of contribution afterwards. Finally, users increase their activity before achieving a badge and return to their previous level of engagement thereafter.
|
Badges also work as a motivator for users \cite{anderson2013steering}. Users often put in non-trivial amounts of work and effort to achieve badges and so badges become powerful incentives. However, not all users are equal and therefore do not persue badges in the same way \cite{yanovsky2019one}. Contrary to \cite{anderson2013steering}, \citeauthor{yanovsky2019one} \etal \cite{yanovsky2019one} found that users do not neccessarily increase their activity prior to achieving a badge followed by an immediate decrease in contribution thereafter but users behave differently based on their type of contribution. The authors found users can be categorized into 3 groups: Firstly, some users are not affected at all by the badge system and still contribute a lot to the community. Secondly, users increase their activity to before gaining a badge and keep their level of contribution afterwards. Finally, users increase their activity before achieving a badge and return to their previous level of engagement thereafter.
|
||||||
|
Different badges also create status classes \cite{immorlica2015social}. The rarer a badge can be earned by users the more unique it is in the community and therefore the badge symbolizes some sort of status. Often rare badges are hard to achieve and take significant effort. For some users, depending on their type, this can be huge motivator.
|
||||||
|
\citeauthor{kusmierczyk2018causal} \etal found first-time badges play an important role in steering users \cite{kusmierczyk2018causal}. The steering effect only takes place if the benefit to the user is greater than the effort the user has to put into to obtain the badge. If the effot is greater the user will likely not persue the badge and therefore the steering effect will not occur.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
% badge
|
% badge
|
||||||
% DONE One Size Does Not Fit All: Badge Behavior in Q\&A Sites \cite{yanovsky2019one} # all abount badges, steering users, motivation; previous paper say that contribution increases before badge obtaining and decrases afterwards, but they find it depends on type of user: 1) users are not affected by badge system but still contribute much, 2) contribution increase ans stays the same after badge achievement 3) return to previous levels
|
% DONE One Size Does Not Fit All: Badge Behavior in Q\&A Sites \cite{yanovsky2019one} # all abount badges, steering users, motivation; previous paper say that contribution increases before badge obtaining and decrases afterwards, but they find it depends on type of user: 1) users are not affected by badge system but still contribute much, 2) contribution increase ans stays the same after badge achievement 3) return to previous levels
|
||||||
% DONE Can gamification motivate voluntary contributions? The case of StackOverflow Q&A community \cite{cavusoglu2015can} stimulting users to contribute via badges
|
% DONE Can gamification motivate voluntary contributions? The case of StackOverflow Q&A community \cite{cavusoglu2015can} stimulting users to contribute via badges
|
||||||
% SOCIAL STATUS AND BADGE DESIGN \cite{immorlica2015social} about badges and how they create status classes, badges for every user and individual badges
|
% DONE SOCIAL STATUS AND BADGE DESIGN \cite{immorlica2015social} about badges and how they create status classes, badges for every user and individual badges
|
||||||
% Quantifying the impact of badges on user engagement in online Q&A communities \cite{li2012quantifying} maintain consistent engagement, gamification via badges
|
% DONE Quantifying the impact of badges on user engagement in online Q&A communities \cite{li2012quantifying} maintain consistent engagement, gamification via badges
|
||||||
% On the Causal Effect of Badges \cite{kusmierczyk2018causal} # all abount badges, steering users, motivation, first-time badges, first time badges steer user behavior if benefit greater then effort, otherwise no effect
|
% DONE On the Causal Effect of Badges \cite{kusmierczyk2018causal} # all abount badges, steering users, motivation, first-time badges, first time badges steer user behavior if benefit greater then effort, otherwise no effect
|
||||||
% Quizz: Targeted Crowdsourcing with a Billion (Potential) Users \cite{ipeirotis2014quizz} many online comunities bysed on volutarty of users not paid workers
|
% Quizz: Targeted Crowdsourcing with a Billion (Potential) Users \cite{ipeirotis2014quizz} many online comunities bysed on volutarty of users not paid workers
|
||||||
% DONE Steering user behavior with badges \cite{anderson2013steering} # all abount badges, steering users, motivation, user may put in non trivial amounts of work to achieve badges -> powerful incentives, badges used in multiple ways (steer users to ask/answer more questions, voting, etc.)
|
% DONE Steering user behavior with badges \cite{anderson2013steering} # all abount badges, steering users, motivation, user may put in non trivial amounts of work to achieve badges -> powerful incentives, badges used in multiple ways (steer users to ask/answer more questions, voting, etc.)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Quality is often concern in online communities. Platform moderators and admins want to keep a certain level of quality or even raise it. However, higher quality posts take more time and effort than lower quality posts. In the case of CQA platforms this is an even bigger problem as higher quality posts fight against fast responses. Despite that, StackOverflow also has a problem with low quality and effort questions and subsequent unwelcoming answers and comments \cite{silge2019welcome}. StackOverflow has grown into large community and larger communities are harder to control. \citeauthor{lin2017better} \etal investigated how growth affects a community. They looked at Reddit communities that where added to the default set of subscribed communities of every new user (defaulting) which resulted in a huge influx of new users to the communties as a result. The authors found that contrary to expectations, the quality stays largely the same. The vote score dips shortly after defaulting but quickly recovers or even raises to higher levels than before. The complaints of low-quality content did not increase and the language used in the community stayed the same. However, the community clustered around fewer posts than before defaulting.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
% quality
|
% quality
|
||||||
% Predicting the perceived quality of online mathematics contributions from users' reputations \cite{tausczik2011predicting} about mathoverflow and quality
|
% Predicting the perceived quality of online mathematics contributions from users' reputations \cite{tausczik2011predicting} about mathoverflow and quality
|
||||||
% Predictors of Answer Quality in Online Q&A Sites cite{harper2008predictors} 1) shows that fee or expert sites are better than open qa sites (greater fee better answers), 2) big communty sites like Yahoo! Answers outperform sites which depend on experts (e.g. library refernce services) (higher answer diversity and responsiveness)
|
% Predictors of Answer Quality in Online Q&A Sites cite{harper2008predictors} 1) shows that fee or expert sites are better than open qa sites (greater fee better answers), 2) big communty sites like Yahoo! Answers outperform sites which depend on experts (e.g. library refernce services) (higher answer diversity and responsiveness)
|
||||||
% Better When It Was Smaller? Community Content and Behavior After Massive Growth \cite{lin2017better}, defaulting of subreddit, quality remains high, dip in upvotes directly after defaulting but recover quickly and get even higher than before, complaints about low-quality content do not increase, language stays the same, however community clusters among fewer posts than before defaulting
|
% DONE Better When It Was Smaller? Community Content and Behavior After Massive Growth \cite{lin2017better}, defaulting of subreddit, quality remains high, dip in upvotes directly after defaulting but recover quickly and get even higher than before, complaints about low-quality content do not increase, language stays the same, however community clusters among fewer posts than before defaulting
|
||||||
% lowering content quality (Gorbatai 2011) %TODO read and add to list of notizen
|
% lowering content quality (Gorbatai 2011) %TODO read and add to list of notizen
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|||||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user