June 8th, 2016 | RESEARCH
Online knowledge production sites do not rely on isolated experts but on collaborative processes, on the wisdom of the group or “crowd”. Some authors have argued that it is possible to combine traditional or credentialled expertise with collective production; others believe that traditional expertise's focus on correctness has been superseded by the affordances of digital networking, such as re-use and verifiability. This paper examines the costs of two kinds of “crowdsourced” encyclopedic projects: Citizendium, based on the work of credentialled and identified experts, faces a recruitment deficit; in contrast Wikipedia has proved wildly popular, but anti-credentialism and anonymity result in uncertainty, irresponsibility, the development of cliques and the growing importance of pseudo-legal competencies for conflict resolution. Finally the paper reflects on the wider social implications of focusing on what experts are rather than on what they are for.
Document
(no document provided)
Team Members
Mathieu O'Neil, Author, Université Paris SorbonneCitation
Identifier Type: ISSN
Identifier: 1824-2049
Publication: Journal of Science Communication
Volume: 9
Number: 1
Related URLs
Tags
Audience: General Public | Scientists
Discipline: Computing and information science | General STEM | Nature of science
Resource Type: Mass Media Article | Reference Materials
Environment Type: Citizen Science Programs | Media and Technology | Public Programs | Websites | Mobile Apps | Online Media