{{RQ|1|How does asking anonymous editors to register affect their behavior?}}: Added Moiz's hypothesis and trimmed the hypothesis statements. "anonymous editor" will need to be formally defined in '''methods''''.
← Older revision
Revision as of 02:41, 16 May 2014
Line 49:
Line 49:
=== {{RQ|1|How does asking anonymous editors to register affect their behavior?}} ===
=== {{RQ|1|How does asking anonymous editors to register affect their behavior?}} ===
−
''
Assumption
:'' We suspect that the prominence of guider-based UI cues, as well as a rationale designed to align with users' concerns, will increase the rate at which anonymous editors decide to register an account. All calls to register on Wikipedia are passive for anonymous editors, in the form of static links to account creation in the site navigation and in the edit form. We suspect that these passive "create account" links (in the personal toolbar or in static MediaWiki messages mid-edit) are relatively hidden to a new users' eyes. We've observed that tooltip-based [[mw:guided tours|guided tours]] increases completion rates within a funnel.<ref>[[m:Research:Onboarding new Wikipedians/OB3|Our third A/B test]] of the
onboarding
process tested an experience with guiders vs. one without</ref>
+
''
Rationale
:'' We suspect that the prominence of guider-based UI cues, as well as a rationale designed to align with users' concerns, will increase the rate at which anonymous editors decide to register an account. All calls to register on Wikipedia are passive for anonymous editors, in the form of static links to account creation in the site navigation and in the edit form. We suspect that these passive "create account" links (in the personal toolbar or in static MediaWiki messages mid-edit) are relatively hidden to a new users' eyes. We've observed that tooltip-based [[mw:guided tours|guided tours]] increases completion rates within a funnel.<ref>[[m:Research:Onboarding new Wikipedians/OB3|Our third A/B test]] of the
Onboarding
process tested an experience with guiders vs. one without</ref>
{{Hyp|1|More anonymous editors in the experimental conditions will register accounts.}}
{{Hyp|1|More anonymous editors in the experimental conditions will register accounts.}}
−
''
Assumption
:''
People
are
motivated
by contribute to
the
outcomes
of
groups
with
whom
they
identify<ref
name="karau00elusive">Karau,
S.
J.,
Markus, M. J., & Williams, K. D.
(
2000). On the elusive search for motivation gains in groups
:
Insights
from
the
collective
effort model. Zeitschrift fur Sozialpsychologie, 31(4
)
, 179-190.</ref>
.
Encouraging anonymous editors to obtain a persistent identity within the group of Wikipedians could motivate these users to make more contributions.
+
''
Rationale
:''
Further,
we
suspect
that
the
'''pre-edit'''
CTA
will
encourage
more
users
to
register
there
accounts
because
(
TODO
:
Moiz
expands
on
rationale
here
).
−
{{Hyp|2|
AOf editors who start
anonymous
,
those
in the
experimental
conditions will
be
more
[[R:editor
productivity|productive]]
.}}
+
{{Hyp|2|
Mode
anonymous
editors
in the
pre-edit
conditions will
register
accounts than in the
post-edit
condition
.}}
−
''
Assumption
:''
Anonymous
editors
who
see
the
'''pre-edit'''
CTA
may
not
understand that
they
can
still
make
edits
anonymously
.
These
users
may
become
intimidated
and
decide
not
to
make
the
edits
they
had
planned
''or''
register
an
account
.
Further
,
those
anonymous editors
who
understand
the
'''pre-edit'''
CTA
and take
the
time
to
register
an
account
will
have less time
to make
edits
.
+
''
Rationale
:''
People
are
motivated
by contribute to
the
outcomes
of
groups
with
whom
they
identify<ref
name="karau00elusive">Karau,
S.
J., Markus,
M
.
J.,
&
Williams,
K.
D.
(2000).
On
the
elusive
search
for
motivation
gains
in
groups:
Insights
from
the
collective
effort model
.
Zeitschrift fur
Sozialpsychologie
,
31(4), 179-190.</ref>. Encouraging
anonymous editors
to
obtain
a
persistent
identity
within
the
group
of
Wikipedians
could
motivate
these
users
to make
more contributions
.
−
{{Hyp|3|
A smaller proportion of anonymous
editors in the
pre-edit
experimental
condition
will
continue editing (logged in
or
logged
out)
.}}
+
{{Hyp|3|
Anonymous
editors in the experimental
conditions
will
be
more
[[R:editor
productivity|productive]]
.}}
−
''
Assumption
:''
On English Wikipedia at least, anonymous
editors
are
reverted
more than twice as often as registered users.<ref>[https://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/EditsRevertsEN.htm Wikipedia Statistics
-
Edit
and
Revert
Trends: English]</ref> We suspect
that
this
is
due
in part to the lack of a persistent identity associated with anonymous
edits
.
Behavioral economic research suggests that obtaining a persistent identity (e.g
.
registering
an account) within an open community could lead
users
toward
increased
feelings
of
accountability<ref
name="resnick01social">Resnick,
P.
(2001). The social cost of cheap pseudonyms. Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, 10(2), 173-199.</ref>. As editors consider their future reputation, they may think more carefully about how
the edits they
make
reflect
on
them
and we suspect that this will lead
anonymous editors
to
act
less
[[:en:WP:Disruption|disruptively]]. Further, registered editors may apply
greater
(
and
potentially
excessive)
scrutiny
to
anonymous
editors.
They
may
be
more inclined
to
improve
an
edit rather than revert it if
they
perceive the original editor as part of the community
.
+
''
Rationale
:''
Anonymous
editors
who
see
the
'''pre
-
edit'''
CTA
may
not
understand
that
they
can
still
make
edits
anonymously
.
These
users
may
become
intimidated
and
decide
not
to
make
the edits they
had
planned.
Further,
those
anonymous editors
who
understand
the
'''pre-edit'''
CTA
and
take
the
time
to
register
an
account
will
have
less
time
to
complete
the
edits
they
started
.
−
{{Hyp|4|
Anonymous
editors in the experimental
conditions
will
be reverted and blocked less
often
.}}
+
{{Hyp|4|
A smaller proportion anonymous
editors in the
pre-edit
experimental
condition
will
complete
edits
.}}
+
+
+
''Rationale:'' On English Wikipedia at least, anonymous editors are reverted more than twice as often as registered users.<ref>[https://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/EditsRevertsEN.htm Wikipedia Statistics - Edit and Revert Trends: English]</ref> We suspect that this is due in part to the lack of a persistent identity associated with anonymous edits. Behavioral economic research suggests that obtaining a persistent identity (e.g. registering an account) within an open community could lead users toward increased feelings of accountability<ref name="resnick01social">Resnick, P. (2001). The social cost of cheap pseudonyms. Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, 10(2), 173-199.</ref>. As editors consider their future reputation, they may think more carefully about how the edits they make reflect on them and we suspect that this will lead anonymous editors to act less [[:en:WP:Disruption|disruptively]]. Further, registered editors may apply greater (and potentially excessive) scrutiny to anonymous editors. Wikipedians may be more inclined to improve an edit rather than revert it if they perceive the original editor to be a part of the community.
+
+
{{Hyp|5|Anonymous editors in the experimental conditions will be reverted and blocked less often.}}
==={{RQ|2|How do newly registered anonymous editors take advantage of registered-only features?}}===
==={{RQ|2|How do newly registered anonymous editors take advantage of registered-only features?}}===