Augmented Social Cognition Research Group
Risks in using Wikipedia?
"In our research on Wikipedia, we have been using a broad framework published as an one-page article in CACM (Communication of the ACM) in 2005 by Denning et al. on the perceived risks in using Wikipedia contents. The question before researchers is how to mitigate these risks while enabling a vibrant social community who wants to get together to build a encyclopedia and help each other obtain knowledge. As Denning's article mentions: "But will this process actually yield a reliable, authoritative reference encompassing the entire range of human knowledge?"
Full Version: Augmented Social Cognition
QUOTE
Wikipedia cannot attain the status of a true encyclopedia without more formal content-inclusion and expert review procedures.
This condition is unlikely to arise within the peculiar governance model established over the years by the entrenched Wikipedia culture.
Credentialed reviewers who are subject-matter experts in their field are routinely marginalized and excluded under complex and erratic guidelines that disfavor authoritative scholars.
The primary means of disempowerment is the RfC (Request for Comment), a bizarre regulatory process that would be better characterized as a Pythonesque RfSI (Request for Spammish Inquisition), wherein the chief weapons are Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt (FUD).
Scholarly editors who naively deign to edit Wikipedia might not expect to become ensnared in a Spammish Inquisition, but experience with the site quickly proves otherwise.
Corrigendium. The title of this thread should be corrected to read "Augmented Social Cognition".
Augmented Social Cognition Research Group
Risks in using Wikipedia?
"In our research on Wikipedia, we have been using a broad framework published as an one-page article in CACM (Communication of the ACM) in 2005 by Denning et al. on the perceived risks in using Wikipedia contents. The question before researchers is how to mitigate these risks while enabling a vibrant social community who wants to get together to build a encyclopedia and help each other obtain knowledge. As Denning's article mentions: "But will this process actually yield a reliable, authoritative reference encompassing the entire range of human knowledge?"
There are a couple of responses from Ed Chi to the comments by Moulton and Awbrey.
Jonny
QUOTE(Newsfood @ Fri 18th January 2008, 3:28am) 
Augmented Social Cognition Research Group
Risks in using Wikipedia?
"In our research on Wikipedia, we have been using a broad framework published as an one-page article in CACM (Communication of the ACM) in 2005 by Denning et al. on the perceived risks in using Wikipedia contents. The question before researchers is how to mitigate these risks while enabling a vibrant social community who wants to get together to build a encyclopedia and help each other obtain knowledge. As Denning's article mentions: "But will this process actually yield a reliable, authoritative reference encompassing the entire range of human knowledge?"
There are a couple of responses from Ed Chi to the comments by Moulton and Awbrey.
Jonny
QUOTE(Ed H Chi)
Indeed, we have read and been puzzled by what some have called an "expertise-bias" in Wikipedia, in that, some Wikipedians appears to shun experts in various domain areas. There is almost a distrust of knowledgeable folks. I can only remember this kind of distrust happening in history during the Cultural Revolution in China. I've found this rather disturbing. Why did this happen?
Ed makes the same Cultural Revolution comparison as me last week, though rather more authentically and without my crude attempt at satire.
COGNITION !!!
∴ ∑ …
Jonny
∴ ∑ …
Jonny
That was my first clue that these threads were being created manually, rather than by a fully automated robot.
QUOTE(Jon Awbrey @ 24 Jan 24 2008 @ 5:50 UTC-8)
«Why did this happen?»
There are several streams of research that may help to give a clue to the answer.
In logic and philosophy, there is the study of the "inquiry" process, as carried on in the pragmatic tradition of Peirce, James, Dewey, and Mead. From a cognitive standpoint, inquiry encompasses everything from concept formation and hypothesis generation to critical reflection on practice. Inquiry begins with what Peirce called the "irritation of doubt" and it proceeds until it succeeds in a state of belief or certainty — or until it is waylaid by any number of blocks, caltrops, or short-circuits.
Sadly, all too sadly, the blocks are the way of Wikipedia as we see it today.
To be continued …
January 24, 2008 PST 5:50 AM
It's also an instance of Totem and Taboo. Political power is used to marginalize upstart points of view which make those in power feel uncomfortable. Socrates and Galileo were subjected to this treatment. Likewise Darwin. While it's disturbing to see it in Wikipedia, it's not all that uncommon in social networking sites. Those in power generally prefer to silence or marginalize their critics.
QUOTE(Moulton @ Thu 24th January 2008, 1:15pm)
That was my first clue that these threads were being created manually, rather than by a fully automated robot.
The NewsRinse Feeder can't seem to pick up on the blogs we want, or at least, when it does, it produces endless streams of useless blogger stuff. Which is why they've been fed manually through the Newsfood account until we can get it refined. On another thread, I asked for people to look for good blog posts themselves. Until improvements on all counts, you'll have to put up with me (or anyone else who wants to do it instead) spending some of my free time loading them manually for the site, warts and all.
Augmented Social Cognition Defined
Definition:
Not to start any bi-coastal war of the gnoses, but «social cognition» as defined above sounds very similar to the concept of «organizational learning» as defined elsewhere.
Incidentally, I had been having trouble reading this blog — old eyes and old machine make the DonnyDarko page style pretty dim indeed. But I just discovered a button on the Firefox browser that shuts off the page style — all without having to change my preferences globally — so now it's a breeze.
Jonny
QUOTE(Ed H. Chi @ 08 May 2007 @ 8:57 PM)
Definition:
- Cognition: the ability to remember, think, and reason; the faculty of knowing.
- Social Cognition: the ability of a group to remember, think, and reason; the construction of knowledge structures by a group. (not quite the same as in the branch of psychology that studies the cognitive processes involved in social interaction, though included)
- Augmented Social Cognition: Supported by systems, the enhancement of the ability of a group to remember, think, and reason; the system-supported construction of knowledge structures by a group.
Not to start any bi-coastal war of the gnoses, but «social cognition» as defined above sounds very similar to the concept of «organizational learning» as defined elsewhere.
Incidentally, I had been having trouble reading this blog — old eyes and old machine make the DonnyDarko page style pretty dim indeed. But I just discovered a button on the Firefox browser that shuts off the page style — all without having to change my preferences globally — so now it's a breeze.
Jonny
Both Augmented Social Cognition and Organizational Learning overlap my own research on Cognition, Affect, and Learning.
QUOTE(Moulton @ Thu 24th January 2008, 9:48am)
Both Augmented Social Cognition and Organizational Learning overlap my own research on Cognition, Affect, and Learning.
Sweet!
But you're a letter short of a really bitchin' acronym — let's get to work on a paper e-titled:
¤ Cognition, Affect, Bureaucracy, And Learning ¤
— CABAL —
— CABAL —
Jonny
Alas, that would be an oxymoron, since my work focuses on functional system models.
QUOTE(Moulton @ Thu 24th January 2008, 10:28am)
Alas, that would be an oxymoron, since my work focuses on functional system models.
Owww, wudn't it be luverly if doctors 'ad nuttin' but 'ealthy people to do thair doctorin' on!
Jonny
QUOTE(Kato @ Wed 23rd January 2008, 10:29pm)
QUOTE(Ed H Chi)
Indeed, we have read and been puzzled by what some have called an "expertise-bias" in Wikipedia, in that, some Wikipedians appears to shun experts in various domain areas. There is almost a distrust of knowledgeable folks. I can only remember this kind of distrust happening in history during the Cultural Revolution in China. I've found this rather disturbing. Why did this happen?
Ed makes the same Cultural Revolution comparison as me last week, though rather more authentically and without my crude attempt at satire.
Puts me to mind of The Great Leap Forward and all those backyard smelting operations. Steel production...anyone can do it. Original Cult of the Amateur.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.