An official website of the United States government
By definition, people are reticent or even unwilling to talk about taboo subjects. Because subjects like sexuality, health, and violence are taboo in most cultures, important information on each of these subjects can be difficult to obtain. Are peer produced knowledge bases like Wikipedia a promising approach for providing people with information on taboo subjects? With its reliance on volunteers who might also be averse to taboo, can the peer production model produce high-quality information on taboo subjects? In this paper, we seek to understand the role of taboo in knowledge bases produced by volunteers. We do so by developing a novel computational approach to identify taboo subjects and by using this method to identify a set of articles on taboo subjects in English Wikipedia. We find that articles on taboo subjects are more popular than non-taboo articles and that they are frequently vandalized. Despite frequent vandalism attacks, we also find that taboo articles are higher quality than non-taboo articles. We hypothesize that stigmatizing societal attitudes will lead contributors to taboo subjects to seek to be less identifiable. Although our results are consistent with this proposal in several ways, we surprisingly find that contributors make themselves more identifiable in others.
more »
« less
This content will become publicly available on November 7, 2025
Life Histories of Taboo Knowledge Artifacts
Communicating about some vital topics---such as sexuality and health---is treated as taboo and subjected to censorship. How can we construct knowledge about these topics? Wikipedia is home to numerous high-quality knowledge artifacts about taboo topics like sexual organs and human reproduction. How did these artifacts come into being? How is their existence sustained? This mixed-methods comparative project builds on previous work on taboo topics in Wikipedia and draws from qualitative and quantitative approaches. We follow a sequential complementary design, developing a narrative articulation of the life of taboo articles, comparing them to nontaboo articles, and examining some of their quantifiable traits. We find that taboo knowledge artifacts develop through multiple successful collaboration styles and, unsurprisingly, that taboo subjects are the sites of conflict. We identify and describe six themes in the development of taboo knowledge artifacts. These artifacts needresilient leadershipandengaged organizationsto thrive under conditions oflimited identifiabilityanddisjointed sensemaking, while contributors simultaneously engage inemergent governanceandimagining public audiences. Our observations have important implications for supporting public knowledge work on controversial subjects such as taboos and more generally.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1703049
- PAR ID:
- 10612900
- Publisher / Repository:
- ACM
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction
- Volume:
- 8
- Issue:
- CSCW2
- ISSN:
- 2573-0142
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 1 to 32
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Bias and polarization are not just about placing misinformation on the Web but also involve concerted efforts to change how we navigate it. One of the strongest points of Wikipedia is to allows readers to easily navigate a topic, through its hyperlinks structure. Thus, it is crucial to ensure a user to have the same probability of being exposed to knowledge that expresses different viewpoints concerning the given topic. In this work, we investigate whether the topology and polarization of a topic-induced-graph (e.g. U.S. Politics induced network) has an impact on users' navigation paths making them biased toward one of the possible topic perspectives. Modeling users behaviour and exploiting Wikipedia clickstreams, we analyze users exposure to different leaning during their sessions, thus the chance of being trapped within a knowledge bubble presenting a unique viewpoint about the topic, and differences among users that start their navigation from articles representing different perspectives.more » « less
-
Thinking about knowledge and knowing (i.e., epistemic cognition) is an important part of student learning and has implications for how they apply their knowledge in future courses, careers, and other aspects of their lives. Three classes of models have emerged from research on epistemic cognition: developmental models, dimensional models, and resources models. These models can be distinguished by how value is assigned to particular epistemic ideas (hierarchy), how consistent epistemic ideas are across time and/or context (stability), and the degree to which people are consciously aware of their own epistemic ideas (explicitness). To determine the extent to which these models inform research on epistemic cognition in chemistry education specifically, we reviewed 54 articles on undergraduate chemistry students’ epistemologies. First, we sought to describe the articles in terms of the courses and unit of study sampled, the methods and study designs implemented, and the means of data collection utilized. We found that most studies focused on the epistemic cognition of individual students enrolled in introductory chemistry courses. The majority were qualitative and employed exploratory or quasi-experimental designs, but a variety of data collection methods were represented. We then coded each article for how it treated epistemic cognition in terms of hierarchy, stability, and explicitness. The overwhelming majority of articles performed a hierarchical analysis of students’ epistemic ideas. An equal number of articles treated epistemic cognition as stableversusunstable across time and/or context. Likewise, about half of the studies asked students directly about their epistemic cognition while approximately half of the studies inferred it from students’ responses, course observations, or written artifacts. These codes were then used to infer the models of epistemic cognition underlying these studies. Eighteen studies were mostly consistent with a developmental or dimensional model, ten were mostly aligned with a resources model, and twenty-six did not provide enough information to reasonably infer a model. We advocate for considering how models of epistemic cognition—and their assumptions about hierarchy, stability, and explicitness—influence the design of studies on students’ epistemic cognition and the conclusions that can be reasonably drawn from them.more » « less
-
The collective intelligence of online communities often depends on implicit forms of coordination, given the fluidity of membership and the lack of traditional hierarchies and associated incentive structures. This coordination drives knowledge production. Studying temporal dynamics may help elucidate how coordination happens. Specifically, the rate of interaction with an artifact such as a Wikipedia page can function as a signal that affects future interactions. Many activities can be characterized as bursty, meaning activity is not evenly spread or random, but is instead concentrated. This study analyzes 3,260 Wikipedia articles and shows that the coordination pattern in the Wikipedia community is mostly bursty. More importantly, the extent of burstiness affects article quality. This work highlights the important role temporal dynamics can play in the coordination process in online communities, and how it can affect the quality of knowledge production.more » « less
-
Efforts to cultivate scientific literacy in the public are often aimed at enabling people to make more informed decisions — both in their own lives (e.g., personal health, sustainable practices, &c.) and in the public sphere. Implicit in such efforts is the cultivation of some measure oftrustof science. To what extent does science reporting in mainstream newspapers contribute to these goals? Is what is reported likely to improve the public's understanding of science as a process for generating reliable knowledge? What are its likely effects on public trust of science? In this paper, we describe a content analysis of 163 instances of science reporting in three prominent newspapers from three years in the last decade. The dominant focus, we found, was on particular outcomes of cutting-edge science; it was comparatively rare for articles to attend to the methodology or the social–institutional processes by which particular results come about. At best, we argue that this represents a missed opportunity.more » « less
