Online social production communities allow efficient construction of valuable and high-quality information sources. To be successful, community members must be effective at collaboration, including makink collective decisions in the presence of disagreement. We examined over 100,000 decisions made by small working groups in Wikipedia, and analyzed how decision quality in these online groups is influenced by four group composition factors: the size of the group, how members were invited to the group, the prior experience of group members, and apparent bias shown by the group administrator. Our findings lead us to recommendations for designers of social production communities.

Wikipedia has millions of articles, many of which receive little attention. One group of Wikipedians believes these obscure entries should be removed because they are uninteresting and neglected; these are the deletionists. Other Wikipedians disagree, arguing that this long tail of articles is precisely Wikipedia's advantage over other encyclopedias; these are the inclusionists. This paper looks at two overarching questions on the debate between deletionists and inclusionists: (1) What are the implications to the long tail of the evolving standards for article birth and death? (2) How is viewership affected by the decreasing notability of articles in the long tail? The answers to five detailed research questions that are inspired by these overarching questions should help better frame this debate and provide insight into how Wikipedia is evolving.

Wikipedia’s brilliance and curse is that any user can edit any of the encyclopedia entries. We introduce the notion of the impact of an edit, measured by the number of times the edited version is viewed. Using several datasets, including recent logs of all article views, we show that frequent editors dominate what people see when they visit Wikipedia, and that this domination is increasing. Similarly, using the same impact measure, we show that the probability of a typical article view being damaged is small but increasing, and we present empirically grounded classes of damage. Finally, we make policy recommendations for Wikipedia and other wikis in light of these findings.

A tagging community's vocabulary of tags forms the basis for social navigation and shared expression.We present a user-centric model of vocabulary evolution in tagging communities based on community influence and personal tendency. We evaluate our model in an emergent tagging system by introducing tagging features into the MovieLens recommender system.We explore four tag selection algorithms for displaying tags applied by other community members. We analyze the algorithms 'effect on vocabulary evolution, tag utility, tag adoption, and user satisfaction.

Recommender systems have emerged in the past several years as an effective way to help people cope with the problem of information overload. One application in which they have become particularly common is in e-commerce, where recommendation of items can often help a customer find what she is interested in and, therefore can help drive sales. Unscrupulous producers in the never-ending quest for market penetration may find it profitable to shill recommender systems by lying to the systems in order to have their products recommended more often than those of their competitors. This paper explores four open questions that may affect the effectiveness of such shilling attacks: which recommender algorithm is being used, whether the application is producing recommendations or predictions, how detectable the attacks are by the operator of the system, and what the properties are of the items being attacked. The questions are explored experimentally on a large data set of movie ratings. Taken together, the results of the paper suggest that new ways must be used to evaluate and detect shilling attacks on recommender systems.

Recommender systems use people's opinions about items in an information domain to help people choose other items. These systems have succeeded in domains as diverse as movies, news articles, Web pages, and wines. The psychological literature on conformity suggests that in the course of helping people make choices, these systems probably affect users' opinions of the items. If opinions are influenced by recommendations, they might be less valuable for making recommendations for other users. Further, manipulators who seek to make the system generate artificially high or low recommendations might benefit if their efforts influence users to change the opinions they contribute to the recommender. We study two aspects of recommender system interfaces that may affect users' opinions: the rating scale and the display of predictions at the time users rate items. We find that users rate fairly consistently across rating scales. Users can be manipulated, though, tending to rate toward the prediction the system shows, whether the prediction is accurate or not. However, users can detect systems that manipulate predictions. We discuss how designers of recommender systems might react to these findings.

Recommender systems have changed the way people shop online. Recommender systems on wireless mobile devices may have the same impact on the way people shop in stores. We present our experience with implementing a recommender system on a PDA that is occasionally connected to the network. This interface helps users of the MovieLens movie recommendation service select movies to rent, buy, or see while away from their computer. The results of a nine month field study show that although there are several challenges to overcome, mobile recommender systems have the potential to provide value to their users today

Collaborative filtering has proven to be valuable for recommending items in many different domains. In this paper, we explore the use of collaborative filtering to recommend research papers, using the citation web between papers to create the ratings matrix. Specifically, we tested the ability of collaborative filtering to recommend citations that would be suitable additional references for a target research paper. We investigated six algorithms for selecting citations, evaluating them through offline experiments against a database of over 186,000 research papers contained in ResearchIndex. We also performed an online experiment with over 120 users to gauge user opinion of the effectiveness of the algorithms and of the utility of such recommendations for common research tasks. We found large differences in the accuracy of the algorithms in the offline experiment, especially when balanced for coverage. In the online experiment, users felt they received quality recommendations, and were enthusiastic about the idea of receiving recommendations in this domain.

Recommender systems have become valuable resources for users seeking intelligent ways to search through the enormous volume of information available to them. One crucial unsolved problem for recommender systems is how best to learn about a new user. In this paper we study six techniques that collaborative filtering recommender systems can use to learn about new users. These techniques select a sequence of items for the collaborative filtering system to present to each new user for rating. The techniques include the use of information theory to select the items that will give the most value to the recommender system, aggregate statistics to select the items the user is most likely to have an opinion about, balanced techniques that seek to maximize the expected number of bits learned per presented item, and personalized techniques that predict which items a user will have an opinion about. We study the techniques thru offline experiments with a large pre-existing user data set, and thru a live experiment with over 300 users. We show that the choice of learning technique significantly affects the user experience, in both the user effort and the accuracy of the resulting predictions.