wip

text/2_relwork.tex

@@ -5,7 +5,7 @@
 %read template notes again and adjust 
 %askubuntu analyse, stackexchange.com/sites anschauen was noch analyse
 
-This section first shows what StackExchange is, how it developed since its inception, and, how it works. Next, this section shows previous and related work. %TODO more
+This section first shows what StackExchange is, how it developed since its inception, and how it works. Next, this section shows previous and related work. %TODO more
 
 % first look at how stackexchange works in vackgeound section
 % 
@@ -24,7 +24,7 @@ For each community on StackExchange, a \emph Meta page is offered where members
 
 \begin{figure}
  \includegraphics[scale=0.47]{figures/stackoverflow_example_post}
- \caption{A typically question on StackOverflow. In the top middle section of the page, the question is stated. The question has 4 tags and 3 comments attached to it. Beneath the question, all answers are listed by their score in descending order (only one answer is visible in this screenshot). The accepted answer is marked by a green checkmark. To the left of the question and answers, the score (computed via votes) is indicated.}
+ \caption{A typical question on StackOverflow. In the top middle section of the page, the question is stated. The question has 4 tags and 3 comments attached to it. Beneath the question, all answers are listed by their score in descending order (only one answer is visible in this screenshot). The accepted answer is marked by a green checkmark. To the left of the question and answers, the score (computed via votes) is indicated.}
  \label{soexamplepost}
 \end{figure}
 
@@ -55,9 +55,8 @@ For each community on StackExchange, a \emph Meta page is offered where members
 
 \section{State of the Art}
 
-Since the introduction of Web 2.0 and the subsequential spawning of platforms for social interaction, researchers started investigating the emerging online communities. The Social Sciences focus on the interactions of users on various platforms. Community knowledge platforms are of special interest, for instance, StackExchange \cite{}, Quora \cite{}, Reddit \cite{lin2017better, chandrasekharan2017you}, Yahoo! Answers \cite{bian2008finding}, and Wikipedia \cite{yazdanian2019eliciting}. %TODO add refs %TODO The Social Science urgh
+Since the introduction of Web 2.0 and the subsequential spawning of platforms for social interaction, researchers started investigating the emerging online communities. Research strongly focuses on the interactions of users on various platforms. Community knowledge platforms are of special interest, for instance, StackExchange/StackOverflow \cite{slag2015one, ford2018we, bazelli2013personality, movshovitz2013analysis, bosu2013building, yanovsky2019one, kusmierczyk2018causal, anderson2013steering, immorlica2015social, tausczik2011predicting}, Quora \cite{wang2013wisdom}, Reddit \cite{lin2017better, chandrasekharan2017you}, Yahoo! Answers \cite{bian2008finding}, and Wikipedia \cite{yazdanian2019eliciting}.
-%TODO more text here
+These platforms allow communication over large distances and facilitate fast and easy knowledge exchange and aquisition by connecting thousands or even millions of users and create valuable repositories of knowledge in the process. Users create, edit, and consume little pieces of information and collectively build a community and knowledge repository. However, not every piece of information is factual \cite{wang2013wisdom, bian2008finding} and platforms often employ some kind of moderation to keep up the value of the platform and to ensure a certain standard within the community.
-These platforms allow communication over large distances and facilitate fast and easy knowledge exchange and aquisition. They connect thousands or even millions of users and create valuable repositories of knowledge. However, not every piece of information is factual \cite{bian2008finding} and platforms often employ some kind of moderation to keep up the value of the platform.
 %allow communitcation over large distances
 %fast and easy knowledge exchange
 %many answers to invaluable \cite{bian2008finding}
@@ -82,8 +81,9 @@ In their book on ''Building successful online communities: Evidence-based social
 % - encouraging contribution: online communities need contributions by users (not lurking), content is foundation of community, contributions by users follows power law (usally, also confirmed in my results)
 % - regualting behavior: maintain a funtioning community, prevent troll, inappropiate behavior, limit damage if it occurs, ease of entry & exit -> high turnover
 
-%TODO write how intertwined
+
-All these criteria are heavily intertwined. So for the purpose of this thesis, these criteria can be grouped into two main categories: 1) onboarding of new users, 2) keeping users engaged, contributing, and well behaved. 
+All these criteria are heavily intertwined. Attracting new users often depends on the welcomingness and support of users that are already on the platform. 
+Keeping users commited to the platform depends on the engagement with the community and how well the system design supports this. For the purpose of this thesis, the criteria layed out by \citeauthor{kraut2012building} can be grouped into two main categories: 1) onboarding of new users, 2) keeping users engaged, contributing, and well behaved.
 
 \subsection{Onboarding of new users}
 The onboarding process is a permanent challenge for online communities and differs from one platform to another. \citeauthor{slag2015one} investigated why many users on StackOverflow only post once after their registration \cite{slag2015one}. They found that 47\% of all users on StackOverflow posted only once and called them one-day-flies. They suggest that code example quality is lower than that of more involved users, which often leads to answers and comments to first improve the question and code instead of answering the stated question. This likely discourages new users from using the site further. Negative feedback instead of constructive feedback is another cause for discontinuation of usage. The StackOverflow staff also conducted their own research on negative feedback of the community \cite{silge2019welcome}. They investigated the comment sections of questions by recruiting their staff members to rate a set of comments and they found more than 7\% of the reviewed comments are unwelcoming.
@@ -95,11 +95,11 @@ One-day-flies may partially be a result of lurking. Lurking is consuming content
 % DONE Non-public and public online community participation: Needs, attitudes and behavior \cite{nonnecke2006non} about lurking, many programmers do that probably, not even registering, lurking not a bad behavior but observing, lurkers are more introverted, passive behavior, less optimistic and positive than posters, prviously lurking was thought of free riding, not contributing, taking not giving to comunity, important for getting to know a community, better integration when joining
 
 
-The StackOverflow team acknowledged the one-time-contributors trend \cite{silge2019welcome, hanlon2018stack} and took efforts to make the site more welcoming to new users \cite{friend2018rolling}. They lied out various reasons: Firstly, they have sent mixed messages whether the site is an expert site or for everyone. Secondly, they gave too little guidance to new users which resulted in the unwelcoming behavior of more integrated users towards the new users. New users do not know all the rules and nuances of communication of the communities. An example is that ''Please`` and ''Thank you`` is not well received on the site as they are deemed unnecessary. Also the quality, clearness and language quality of the questions of new users is lower than more experienced users which leads to unwelcoming or even toxic answers and comments. Moreover, users who gained moderation tool access could close questions with predefined reasons which are often not meaningful enough for the poster of the question \cite{hanlon2013war}. Thirdly, marginalized groups, for instance, women and people of color \cite{hanlon2018stack, stackoversurvey2019, ford2016paradise}, are more likely to drop out of the community due to unwelcoming behavior from other users \cite{hanlon2018stack}. They feel the site is an elitist and hostile place. 
+The StackOverflow team acknowledged the one-time-contributors trend \cite{hanlon2018stack, silge2019welcome} and took efforts to make the site more welcoming to new users \cite{friend2018rolling}. They lied out various reasons: Firstly, they have sent mixed messages whether the site is an expert site or for everyone. Secondly, they gave too little guidance to new users which resulted in poor questions from new users and in the unwelcoming behavior of more integrated users towards the new users. New users do not know all the rules and nuances of communication of the communities. An example is that ''Please`` and ''Thank you`` is not well received on the site as they are deemed unnecessary. Also the quality, clearness and language quality of the questions of new users is lower than more experienced users which leads to unwelcoming or even toxic answers and comments. Moreover, users who gained moderation tool access could close questions with predefined reasons which often are not meaningful enough for the poster of the question \cite{hanlon2013war}. Thirdly, marginalized groups, for instance, women and people of color \cite{hanlon2018stack, stackoversurvey2019, ford2016paradise}, are more likely to drop out of the community due to unwelcoming behavior from other users \cite{hanlon2018stack}. They feel the site is an elitist and hostile place. 
-The team suggested several steps to mitigate these problems. Some of these steps include appealing to the users to be more welcoming and forgiving towards new users \cite{spolsky2012kicking, hanlon2018stack, silge2019welcome}, other steps are geared towards changes to the platform itself: The \emph{Be nice policy} (code of conduct) was updated with feedback from the community \cite{jaydles2014the}. This includes: new users should not be judged for not knowing all things. Furthermore, the closing reasons were updated to be more meaningful to the poster, and questions that are closed are shown as ''on hold`` instead of ''closed`` for the first 5 days \cite{hanlon2013war}. Furthermore, the team investigates how the comment sections can be improved to lessen the unwelcomeness and hostility and keep the civility up. 
+The team suggested several steps to mitigate these problems. Some of these steps include appealing to the users to be more welcoming and forgiving towards new users \cite{hanlon2018stack, silge2019welcome, spolsky2012kicking}, other steps are geared towards changes to the platform itself: The \emph{Be nice policy} (code of conduct) was updated with feedback from the community \cite{jaydles2014the}. This includes: new users should not be judged for not knowing all things. Furthermore, the closing reasons were updated to be more meaningful to the poster, and questions that are closed are shown as ''on hold`` instead of ''closed`` for the first 5 days \cite{hanlon2013war}. Furthermore, the team investigates how the comment sections can be improved to lessen the unwelcomeness and hostility and keep the civility up. 
 
 The StackOverflow team partnered with \citeauthor{ford2018we} and implemented the Mentorship Research Project \cite{ford2018we, hanlon2017mentorship}. The project lasted one month and aimed to help newcomers improve their first questions before they are posted publicly. The program went as follows: When a user is about to post a question the user is asked whether they want their question to be reviewed by a mentor. If they confirmed they are forward to a help room with a mentor who is an experienced user. The question is then reviewed and the mentor suggests some changes if applicable. These changes may include narrowing the question for more precise answers, adding a code example or adjusting code, or removing of \emph Please and \emph{Thank you} from the question. After the review and editing, the question is posted by publicly the user. The authors found that mentored questions are received significantly better by the community than non-mentored questions. The questions also received higher scores and were less likely to be off-topic and poor in quality. Furthermore, newcomers are more comfortable when their question is reviewed by a mentor.
-For this project 4 mentors were hand selected and therefore does not scale very well as the number of mentors is very limited but it gave the authors an idea on how to pursue their goal of increasing the welcomingness of StackExchange. The project is followed up by a \emph{Ask a question wizard} to help new users as well as more experienced users improve the structure, quality, and clearness of their questions \cite{friend2018rolling}. 
+For this project four mentors were hand selected and therefore the project would not scale very well as the number of mentors is very limited but it gave the authors an idea on how to pursue their goal of increasing the welcomingness on StackExchange. The project is followed up by a \emph{Ask a question wizard} to help new users as well as more experienced users improve the structure, quality, and clearness of their questions \cite{friend2018rolling}. 
 
 
 % DONE One-day flies on StackOverflow \cite{slag2015one}, 1 contribution during whole registration, only user with 6 month of registration
@@ -118,8 +118,8 @@ For this project 4 mentors were hand selected and therefore does not scale very
 
 
 
-Unwelcomeness is a large problem on StackExchange \cite{friend2018rolling, hanlon2018stack, ford2016paradise}. %TODO maybe more refs
+Unwelcomeness is a large problem on StackExchange \cite{hanlon2018stack, friend2018rolling, ford2016paradise}.
-Although unwelcomeness affects all new users, users from marginalized groups suffer significantly more \cite{vasilescu2014gender, hanlon2018stack}. \citeauthor{ford2016paradise} investigated barriers users face when contributing to StackOverflow. The authors identified 14 barriers in total hindering newcomers to contribute and five barriers were rated significantly more problematic for women than men.
+Although unwelcomeness affects all new users, users from marginalized groups suffer significantly more \cite{hanlon2018stack, vasilescu2014gender}. \citeauthor{ford2016paradise} investigated barriers users face when contributing to StackOverflow. The authors identified 14 barriers in total hindering newcomers to contribute and five barriers were rated significantly more problematic for women than men.
 On StackOverflow only 5.8\% (2015 \cite{stackoversurvey2015}, 7.9\% 2019 \cite{stackoversurvey2019}) of active users identify as women. \citeauthor{david2008community} found similar results of 5\% women in their work on \emph{Community-based production of open-source software} \cite{david2008community}. These numbers are comparatively small to the number of degrees in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) \cite{clark2005women} where 20\% are achieved by women \cite{hill2010so}. Despite the difference, the percentage of women on StackOverflow has increased in recent years.
 
 %discrimitation
@@ -136,7 +136,7 @@ On StackOverflow only 5.8\% (2015 \cite{stackoversurvey2015}, 7.9\% 2019 \cite{s
 \subsection{Keeping users engaged, contributing and well behaved}
 
 Reputation plays a important role on StackExchange and indicates the credibility of a user as well as a primary source of answers of high quality \cite{movshovitz2013analysis}. Although the largest chunk of all questions is posted by low-reputated users, high-reputated users post more questions on average. To earn a high reputation a user has to invest a lot of effort and time into the community, for instance, asking good questions or providing useful answers to questions of others. Reputation is earned when a question or answer is upvoted by other users, or if an answer is accepted as the solution to a question by the question creator. \citeauthor{mamykina2011design} found that the reputation system of StackOverflow encourages users to compete productively \cite{mamykina2011design}. But not every user participates equally, and participation depends on the personality of the user \cite{bazelli2013personality}. \citeauthor{bazelli2013personality} showed that the top-reputated users on StackOverflow are more extroverted compared to users with less reputation. \citeauthor{movshovitz2013analysis} found that by analyzing the StackOverflow community network, experts can be reliably identified by their contribution within the first few months after their registeration. Graph analysis also allowed the authors to find spamming users or users with other extreme behavior. 
-Although gaining reputation takes time and effort, users can take certain advantages to gain reputation faster by gaming the system \cite{bosu2013building}. \citeauthor{bosu2013building} analyzed the reputation system and found five strategies to increase the reputation in a fast way: Firstly, answering questions with tags that have a small expertise density. This reduces competitiveness against other users and increases the chance of upvotes and answer acceptance. Secondly, questions should be answered promptly. The question asker will most likely accept the first arriving answer that solves the question. This is also supported by \cite{anderson2012discovering}. Thirdly, answering first also gives the user an advantage over other answerers. Fourthly, activity during off-peak hours reduces the competition from other users. Finally, contributing to the diverse areas will also help in developing a higher reputation.
+Although gaining reputation takes time and effort, users can take certain advantages to gain reputation faster by gaming the system \cite{bosu2013building}. \citeauthor{bosu2013building} analyzed the reputation system and found five strategies to increase the reputation in a fast way: Firstly, answering questions with tags that have a small expertise density. This reduces competitiveness against other users and increases the chance of upvotes and answer acceptance. Secondly, questions should be answered promptly. The question asker will most likely accept the first arriving answer that solves the question. This is also supported by \cite{anderson2012discovering}. Thirdly, answering first also gives the user an advantage over other answerers. Fourthly, activity during off-peak hours reduces the competition from other users. Finally, contributing to diverse areas will also help in developing a higher reputation.
 
 % DONE Discovering Value from Community Activity on Focused Question Answering Sites: A Case Study of Stack Overflow \cite{anderson2012discovering} accepted answer strongly depends on when answers arrive, considered not only the question and accepted answer but the set of answers to a question
 
@@ -148,8 +148,8 @@ Although gaining reputation takes time and effort, users can take certain advant
 
 
 Complementary to the reputation 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 gamification setting where users contribute to the community and are rewarded for their behavior if it alignes with the requirements of the badges. Badges are visible in questions and answers as well as the profile page of the user and can be earned by performing certain actions. Badges are often seen as a steering mechanism by researchers \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 of goals, for instance, asking and answering questions, voting on questions and answers, or writing higher quality answers.
-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 pursue badges in the same way \cite{yanovsky2019one}. Contrary to \cite{anderson2013steering}, \citeauthor{yanovsky2019one} \cite{yanovsky2019one} found that users do not necessarily 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 too before gaining a badge and keep their level of contribution afterward. 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 pursue badges in the same way \cite{yanovsky2019one}. Contrary to \cite{anderson2013steering}, \citeauthor{yanovsky2019one} \cite{yanovsky2019one} found that users do not necessarily 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 three 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 too before gaining a badge and keep their level of contribution afterward. 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 harder 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 a huge motivator. 
+Different badges also create status classes \cite{immorlica2015social}. The harder a badge can be earned by users, the more unique it is within 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 a huge motivator. 
 \citeauthor{kusmierczyk2018causal} 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 effort is greater the user will likely not pursue the badge and therefore the steering effect will not occur. 
 
 
@@ -164,7 +164,7 @@ Different badges also create status classes \cite{immorlica2015social}. The hard
 % 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 a 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 a large community and larger communities are harder to control. \citeauthor{lin2017better} investigated how growth affects a community. They looked at Reddit communities that were added to the default set of subscribed communities of every new user (defaulting) which resulted in a huge influx of new users to these communities 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 is often a 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 a large community and larger communities are harder to control. \citeauthor{lin2017better} investigated how growth affects a community. They looked at Reddit communities that were added to the default set of subscribed communities of every new user (defaulting) which lead to a huge influx of new users to these communities 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. 
 \citeauthor{tausczik2011predicting} found reputation is linked to the perceived quality of posts in multiple ways \cite{tausczik2011predicting}. They suggest reputation could be used as an indicator of quality. 
 Quality also depends on the type of platform. \cite{lin2017better} showed that expert sites who charge fees, for instance, library reference services, have higher quality answers compared to free sites. Also, the higher the fee the higher the quality of the answers. However, free community sites outperform expert sites in terms of answer density and responsiveness.
 

text/3_method.tex

@@ -1,9 +1,9 @@
-\chapter{Methodology}
+\chapter{Method}
 
-StackExchange introduced a \emph{new contributor} indicator to all communities on $21^{st}$ of August in 2018 at 9 pm UTC \cite{post2018come}. This step is one of many to make the platform and its members more welcoming towards new users. This indicator is shown the potential answerers in the answer text box of a question flagged as from a new contributor as shown in figure \ref{newcontributor}. The indicator is added to a question if the question is the first contribution of a user or if the first contribution (question or answer) of the user was less than 7 days ago \cite{sonic2018what}. The indicator is then shown for 7 days from the creation date of the question. Note that the user can be registered for a long time and then post their first question and it is counted as a question from a new contributor. Also, if a user decides to delete all their contributions from the site and then creates a new question this question will have the \emph{new contributor} indicator attached. The sole deciding factor for the indicator is the date and time of the first contribution and the 7 days window afterward. 
+StackExchange introduced a \emph{new contributor} indicator to all communities on $21^{st}$ of August in 2018 at 9 pm UTC \cite{post2018come}. This step is one of many StackExchange took to make the platform and its members more welcoming towards new users. This indicator is shown the potential answerers in the answer text box of a question flagged as from a new contributor as shown in figure \ref{newcontributor}. The indicator is added to a question if the question is the first contribution of a user or if the first contribution (question or answer) of the user was less than 7 days ago \cite{sonic2018what}. The indicator is then shown for 7 days from the creation date of the question. Note that the user can be registered for a long time and then post their first question and it is counted as a question from a new contributor. Also, if a user decides to delete all their contributions from the site and then creates a new question this question will have the \emph{new contributor} indicator attached. The sole deciding factor for the indicator is the date and time of the first non-deleted contribution and the 7-day window afterward. 
 
 \begin{figure}
- \includegraphics[scale=0.47]{figures/new_contributor} %TODO wrong image
+ \centering\includegraphics[scale=0.47]{figures/new_contributor}
  \caption{The answer box a potential answerers sees when viewing a question from a new contributor. \copyright{Tim Post, 2018, \url{https://meta.stackexchange.com/users/50049/tim-post}} in \cite{post2018come}}
  \label{newcontributor}
 \end{figure}
@@ -13,6 +13,7 @@ StackExchange introduced a \emph{new contributor} indicator to all communities o
 % https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/314472/what-are-the-exact-criteria-for-the-new-contributor-indicator-to-be-shown \cite{sonic2018what} ; change date = 2018-08-21T21:04:49.177
 % new user indicator visible for 1 week ...
 
+%TODO more vader explanation
 To measure the effectiveness of the change we chose Vader, a sentiment analysis tool designed for social media interactions \cite{hutto2014vader}. Vader uses a lexicon of words with attached sentiment values and rules related to grammar and syntax to determine a sentiment value between -1 and 1 to a given piece of text. The sentiment range is divided into 3 classes: negative (-1 to -0.05), neutral (-0.05 to 0.05), and positive (0.05 to 1). The outer edges of the value space are rarely reached as the text would have to be negative or positive to the extremes which is very unlikely. 
 
 % sentiment calculation via vaderlib, write whole paragraph and explain, also add ref to paper \cite{hutto2014vader}

text/5_results.tex

@@ -0,0 +1,72 @@
+\chapter{Results}
+
+\section{StackOverflow.com}
+\begin{figure}[H]
+% \centering\includegraphics[scale=0.47]{../stackoverflow.com/output/its/average_sentiments-i1.png}
+ \caption{An interrupted time series analysis of the sentiments of answer to questions be new contributors on StackOverflow.com}
+ \label{stackoverflow_its}
+\end{figure}
+
+\section{math.stackexchange.com}
+\begin{figure}[H]
+ \centering\includegraphics[scale=0.47]{../math.stackexchange.com/output/its/average_sentiments-i1.png}
+ \caption{An interrupted time series analysis of the sentiments of answer to questions be new contributors on math.stackexchange.com}
+ \label{math_its}
+\end{figure}
+
+\section{MathOverflow.net}
+\begin{figure}[H]
+ \centering\includegraphics[scale=0.47]{../mathoverflow.net/output/its/average_sentiments-i1.png}
+ \caption{An interrupted time series analysis of the sentiments of answer to questions be new contributors on MathOverflow.com}
+ \label{matho_its}
+\end{figure}
+
+\section{AskUbuntu.com}
+\begin{figure}[H]
+ \centering\includegraphics[scale=0.47]{../askubuntu.com/output/its/average_sentiments-i1.png}
+ \caption{An interrupted time series analysis of the sentiments of answer to questions be new contributors on AskUbuntu.com}
+ \label{ubuntu_its}
+\end{figure}
+
+\section{ServerFault.com}
+\begin{figure}[H]
+ \centering\includegraphics[scale=0.47]{../serverfault.com/output/its/average_sentiments-i1.png}
+ \caption{An interrupted time series analysis of the sentiments of answer to questions be new contributors on ServerFault.com}
+ \label{fault_its}
+\end{figure}
+
+\section{SuperUser.com}
+\begin{figure}[H]
+ \centering\includegraphics[scale=0.47]{../superuser.com/output/its/average_sentiments-i1.png}
+ \caption{An interrupted time series analysis of the sentiments of answer to questions be new contributors on SuperUser.com}
+ \label{super_its}
+\end{figure}
+
+\section{electronics.stackexchange.com}
+\begin{figure}[H]
+ \centering\includegraphics[scale=0.47]{../electronics.stackexchange.com/output/its/average_sentiments-i1.png}
+ \caption{An interrupted time series analysis of the sentiments of answer to questions be new contributors on electronics.stackexchange.com}
+ \label{ele_its}
+\end{figure}
+% pvalues ...
+
+\section{stats.stackexchange.com}
+\begin{figure}[H]
+ \centering\includegraphics[scale=0.47]{../stats.stackexchange.com/output/its/average_sentiments-i1.png}
+ \caption{An interrupted time series analysis of the sentiments of answer to questions be new contributors on stats.stackexchange.com}
+ \label{stats_its}
+\end{figure}
+
+\section{tex.stackexchange.com}
+\begin{figure}[H]
+ \centering\includegraphics[scale=0.47]{../tex.stackexchange.com/output/its/average_sentiments-i1.png}
+ \caption{An interrupted time series analysis of the sentiments of answer to questions be new contributors on tex.stackexchange.com}
+ \label{tex_its}
+\end{figure}
+
+\section{unix.stackexchange.com}
+\begin{figure}[H]
+ \centering\includegraphics[scale=0.47]{../unix.stackexchange.com/output/its/average_sentiments-i1.png}
+ \caption{An interrupted time series analysis of the sentiments of answer to questions be new contributors on unix.stackexchange.com}
+ \label{unix_its}
+\end{figure}

text/6_discussion.tex

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+\chapter{Discussion}

text/7_conclusion.tex

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+\chapter{Conclusion}

text/bib.bib

@@ -411,3 +411,10 @@
   year={2017},
   publisher={Oxford University Press}
 }
+@inproceedings{wang2013wisdom,
+  title={Wisdom in the social crowd: an analysis of quora},
+  author={Wang, Gang and Gill, Konark and Mohanlal, Manish and Zheng, Haitao and Zhao, Ben Y},
+  booktitle={Proceedings of the 22nd international conference on World Wide Web},
+  pages={1341--1352},
+  year={2013}
+}