Abstract We argue that advances in large language models (LLMs) and generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) will diminish the value of Wikipedia, due to a withdrawal by human content producers, who will withhold their efforts, perceiving less need for their efforts and increased “AI competition.” We believe the greatest threat to Wikipedia stems from the fact that Wikipedia is a user‐generated product, relying on the “selfish altruism” of its human contributors. Contributors who reduce their contribution efforts as AI pervades the platform, will thus leave Wikipedia increasingly dependent on additional AI activity. This, combined with a dynamic where readership creates authorship and readers being disintermediated, will inevitably cause a vicious cycle leading to a staling of the content and diminishing value of this venerable knowledge resource.

Gamification—the use of game elements in non-game contexts—is gaining interest among researchers and practitioners. How gamification enhances user engagement, though, remains unclear, largely due to the lack of a theoretical framework. To narrow the theory gap, this study develops a theoretical model, which draws on cognitive evaluation theory to explain the effects of game dynamics on user engagement, and tests it using data collected from 164 users of a gamified information system. The results reveal that gamification enhances user engagement through the mediation of psychological needs satisfaction (autonomy, competence, and relatedness) between game dynamics and enjoyment. The results suggest that gamification should go beyond merely providing fun and enjoyment; gamification should also generate diverse game dynamics, such as rewards, competition, altruism, and self-expression in a way that helps people to satisfy their psychological needs. The study contributes to a more nuanced understanding of the success of gamification.

Much of the recent research on user contributions to electronic networks has focused on attracting and motivating participations. We, instead, investigate online community defections, their cause, and their impact through an empirical investigation of defections from Wikipedia. Our research uses justice theory to determine the effects of injustice perceptions on contributor defections and draws on fairness heuristic theory to distinguish the relative effects of distributive injustice and procedural injustice. The results show that perceptions of injustice concerning collaboration outcomes (“distributive injustice”) raise contributor dissatisfaction, which in turn leads to defection. Perceptions of injustice concerning the process (“procedural injustice”), by comparison, have a direct impact on defections and exert a stronger influence on dissatisfaction than distributive injustice. Justice emerges as a hygiene factor adding to the level of dissatisfaction among dissatisfied contributors but not among satisfied contributors. The findings contribute to our understanding of collaborative knowledge creation by drawing attention to contributors' post hoc passive emotions and behaviors instead of predominantly investigating their initial prosharing behaviors. The work also has practical implications for community governance because it suggests how to sustain communities in the long term.

The open content creation process has proven itself to be a powerful and influential way of developing text‐based content, as demonstrated by the success of Wikipedia and related sites. Distributed individuals independently edit, revise, or refine content, thereby creating knowledge artifacts of considerable breadth and quality. Our study explores the mechanisms that control and guide the content creation process and develops an understanding of open content governance. The repertory grid method is employed to systematically capture the experiences of individuals involved in the open content creation process and to determine the relative importance of the diverse control and guiding mechanisms. Our findings illustrate the important control and guiding mechanisms and highlight the multifaceted nature of open content governance. A range of governance mechanisms is discussed with regard to the varied levels of formality, the different loci of authority, and the diverse interaction environments involved. Limitations and opportunities for future research are provided.

Abstract This research empirically evaluated the use of mobile information and communication technology in a large‐sized undergraduate class, where the effectiveness of multilearner participation and prompt learner‐instructor interaction is often challenged. The authors analyzed the effectiveness of a so‐called “lean” communication medium using hand‐held mobile devices, whose brief text‐based messages considerably limit the speed of information exchange. Adopting a social construction perspective of media richness theory and a reinforced approach to learning and practice, the authors conjectured that an interactive learning system built with wireless PDA devices can enhance individual practices and reinforce peer influences. Consequently, they expected better understanding and higher satisfaction among learners. A field experiment with 118 participants in the treatment and 114 participants in the control group supported their hypotheses. Their results suggested that richness of a “lean” medium could be increased in certain socially constructed conditions, thus extending existing notions of computer‐aided instruction towards a techno‐social learning model.

Abstract New Web 2.0 technologies such as wikis permit any organizational member of a virtual community of practice (CoP) to dynamically edit, integrate, and rewrite content (what we call knowledge shaping) as well as contribute personal knowledge. Previous research on factors that motivate contribution in virtual CoPs has focused exclusively on factors explaining why people contribute their personal knowledge, with no research focused on why people make the knowledge‐shaping contributions (rewriting, integrating, and restructuring pages) which are possible with wikis. We hypothesize that factors that explain frequency of contribution will be different for those who shape from those who contribute only their personal knowledge. The results support our hypotheses. In addition, we find that shapers are not more likely to be managers or members of a community's core group who might typically serve in an administrator role, contrary to prior expectations. The implications of using Web 2.0 tools to encourage this shaping behavior are discussed.

An approach to organizing storage in database systems is presented that, under a wide range of conditions, saves both storage space and processing time. Text values in a database are replaced by short, fixed-length, rank-preserving numeric tokens. The actual values are stored in separate, non-redundant storage. Database operations that depend only on the relative magnitude of data values can be performed directly on the tokens. Tokenization is shown to improve database performance most in situations where there are a lot of ad hoc queries and a low volume of database insertions relative to other operations.