Amplifying the impact of open access: Wikipedia and the diffusion of science

Teplitskiy, Misha; Lu, Grace; Duede, Eamon

doi:10.1002/asi.23687

Cited by 93 publications

(97 citation statements)

References 36 publications

(81 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Consequently, Wikipedia is a fundamental gateway to scientific results and enables the public understanding of science [33,34,38,51,61]. The chance of a scientific reference being cited on Wikipedia varies with the impact factor of the publication venue and its open-access availability [58]. Being cited on Wikipedia can thus be considered an indicator of impact [27].…”

Section: Science In Wikipediamentioning

confidence: 99%

Quantifying Engagement with Citations on Wikipedia

Piccardi

Реди

Colavizza

et al. 2020

Proceedings of the Web Conference 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Wikipedia is one of the most visited sites on the Web and a common source of information for many users. As an encyclopedia, Wikipedia was not conceived as a source of original information, but as a gateway to secondary sources: according to Wikipedia's guidelines, facts must be backed up by reliable sources that reflect the full spectrum of views on the topic. Although citations lie at the heart of Wikipedia, little is known about how users interact with them. To close this gap, we built client-side instrumentation for logging all interactions with links leading from English Wikipedia articles to cited references during one month, and conducted the first analysis of readers' interactions with citations. We find that overall engagement with citations is low: about one in 300 page views results in a reference click (0.29% overall; 0.56% on desktop; 0.13% on mobile). Matched observational studies of the factors associated with reference clicking reveal that clicks occur more frequently on shorter pages and on pages of lower quality, suggesting that references are consulted more commonly when Wikipedia itself does not contain the information sought by the user. Moreover, we observe that recent content, open access sources, and references about life events (births, deaths, marriages, etc.) are particularly popular. Taken together, our findings deepen our understanding of Wikipedia's role in a global information economy where reliability is ever less certain, and source attribution ever more vital.

show abstract

Section: Science In Wikipediamentioning

confidence: 99%

Quantifying Engagement with Citations on Wikipedia

Piccardi

Реди

Colavizza

et al. 2020

Proceedings of the Web Conference 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Open-access journal articles may even be downloaded and cited more than other articles (Björk & Solomon, 2012;Teplitskiy, Lu, & Duede, 2016; but see Davis, 2011).…”

Section: Practicing Open Science: For Authors and Reviewersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Open Science: What, Why, and How

Spellman¹,

Gilbert²,

Corker³

2017

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Open science is a collection of actions designed to make scientific processes more transparent and results more accessible. Its goal is to build a more replicable and robust science; it does so using new technologies, altering incentives, and changing attitudes. The current movement toward open science was spurred, in part, by a recent series of unfortunate events within psychology and other sciences. These events include the large number of studies that have failed to replicate and the prevalence of common research and publication procedures that could explain why. Many journals and funding agencies now encourage, require, or reward some open science practices, including pre-registration, providing full materials, posting data, distinguishing between exploratory and confirmatory analyses, and running replication studies. Individuals can practice and promote open science in their many roles as researchers, authors, reviewers, editors, teachers, and members of hiring, tenure, promotion, and awards committees. A plethora of resources are available to help scientists, and science, achieve these goals. Keywords: data sharing, file drawer problem, open access, open science, preregistration, questionable research practices, replication crisis, reproducibility, scientific integrityThanks to Brent Donnellan (big thanks!), Daniël Lakens, Calvin Lai, Courtney Soderberg, and Simine Vazire OPEN SCIENCE 3 Open Science When we (the authors) look back a couple of years, to the earliest outline of this chapter, the open science movement within psychology seemed to be in its infancy. Plenty of people were pointing to problems in psychology research, collecting archival data to support the claims, and suggesting how science could be improved. Now it seems that the open science movement has reached adolescence. Things are happening-and they are happening quickly. New professional organizations are being formed to uncover and facilitate ways to improve science, often through new technology, and some old organizations are adopting new procedures to remedy problems created by past practices, often involving revising journal policies. Researchers are changing the way they teach, practice, and convey science. And scientific information (and opinions) are traveling fast. In blogs, tweets, Facebook groups, op eds, science journalism, circulation of preprints, post-print comments, video talks, and so on, more people are engaged in communicating science, and hoping to improve science, than ever before. Thus, any new technology, new procedure, new website, or new controversy we describe is likely to be superseded (or solved) even by the time this chapter is published. But the core values of open science should remain. The "Open Science" MovementScience is about evidence: observing, measuring, collecting, and analyzing evidence. And it is about evidence that can be shared across observers and, typically, although not necessarily exactly (Merton, 1973;Popper, 1959), replicated later. Science is about testing hypotheses, using inductiv...

show abstract

“…Moreover, numerous studies have analyzed how Wikipedia articles cite scholarly publications because contributors are strongly recommended to do so by the encyclopedia itself. Studies have focused on the analysis of reference and citation patterns in specific areas of knowledge [8], on exploring Wikipedia's value as a source when evaluating scientific activity [9], or on Wikipedia's role as a platform that promotes open access research [10].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Science through Wikipedia: A novel representation of open knowledge through co-citation networks

Arroyo-Machado¹,

Torres‐Salinas²,

Herrera‐Viedma³

et al. 2020

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study provides an overview of science from the Wikipedia perspective. A methodology has been established for the analysis of how Wikipedia editors regard science through their references to scientific papers. The method of co-citation has been adapted to this context in order to generate Pathfinder networks (PFNET) that highlight the most relevant scientific journals and categories, and their interactions in order to find out how scientific literature is consumed through this open encyclopaedia. In addition to this, their obsolescence has been studied through Price index. A total of 1 433 457 references available at Altmetric.com have been initially taken into account. After pre-processing and linking them to the data from Elsevier's CiteScore Metrics the sample was reduced to 847 512 references made by 193 802 Wikipedia articles to 598 746 scientific articles belonging to 14 149 journals indexed in Scopus. As highlighted results we found a significative presence of "Medicine" and "Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology" papers and that the most important journals are multidisciplinary in nature, suggesting also that high-impact factor journals were more likely to be cited. Furthermore, only 13.44% of Wikipedia citations are to Open Access journals.

show abstract

Amplifying the impact of open access: Wikipedia and the diffusion of science

Cited by 93 publications

References 36 publications

Quantifying Engagement with Citations on Wikipedia

Quantifying Engagement with Citations on Wikipedia

Open Science: What, Why, and How

Science through Wikipedia: A novel representation of open knowledge through co-citation networks

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About