Laura W. Black

Self-Governance Through Group Discussion in Wikipedia Measuring Deliberation in Online Groups

Virtual teams and other online groups can find it challenging to establish norms that allow them to effectively balance task and relational aspects of their discussions. Yet, in our reliance on organizational and team theories, small group scholars have overlooked the potential for learning from examples offered by online communities. Theories of deliberation in small groups offer scholars a way to assess such discussion-centered self-governance in online groups. The study operationalizes the conceptual definition of deliberative discussion offered by Gastil and Black (2008) to examine the small group discussions that undergird policy-making processes in a well-established online community, Wikipedia. Content analysis shows that these discussions demonstrated a relatively high level of problem analysis and providing of information, but results were mixed in the group’s demonstration of respect, consideration, and mutual comprehension. Network visualizations reveal structural patterns that can be useful in examining equality, influence, and group member roles. The combination of measures has implications for future research in deliberative discussion and virtual teamwork.

Wiki Networks: Connections of Creativity and Collaboration

A wiki is a web site anyone can edit, where each modification to each page is recorded and archived. Because of their flexible structure, support for discussion, and ease of use, wikis are becoming an increasingly popular platform for supporting online communities. The core of the chapter introduces three example inquiries employing NodeXL to address three different types of questions in wiki systems. The first example studies a set of wiki pages at the Empire Wiki that are related by the Castle Project, and it seeks to identify different types of contributors to that project based on both their network attributes and key variables related to the types of pages they do, and do not, edit. Understanding and identifying different types of contributors is useful because it can help web administrators locate highly valuable contributors of different types and figure out whose participation should be encouraged, rewarded, or, in some cases, discouraged or redirected. The second example examines the quality of online discussion on the “talk” pages associated with a particular project on Wikipedia. This research study illustrates the use of content analysis to measure both edges and vertex attributes. NodeXL is used to visualize patterns in the discussion, identify high-quality contributors, and locate problematic interactions where the discussion is not helping the group achieve its task. The third study illustrates strategies for revealing large-scale structure of editing patterns in wikis, drawing on data from Lostpedia. The analysis illustrates the use of affiliation networks and large-scale analysis for exploration of an entire wiki, providing a means for making sense of hundreds of thousands of edits and participants.

Deliberative Moments: Understanding Deliberation as an Interactional Accomplishment

Deliberation is typically theorized as a normative ideal that can only be accomplished momentarily. Drawing from practical theory, this essay develops the concept of deliberative moments that identifies key elements of how deliberation is coconstructed and accomplished in interaction. Similar to their analog dialogic moments, deliberative moments are intense moments of awareness of the self, the other, and the issue. Deliberative moments involve occurrence of three elements: a reason-giving exchange marked by disagreement, stance indicators of listening and respect, and inclusive discourse. We define each of these categories and provide empirical examples.

(Dis)Engagement and Everyday Democracy in Stigmatized Places: Addressing Brain Drain in the Rural United States

This study explores rural young adults’ processes of engaging in practices of everyday democracy after the loss of the area’s largest employer introduced stigmas of unemployment, stagnation, and abandonment. When young people decided to participate in community life despite these stigmas, they primarily engaged through selective participation via their affiliations with nonstigmatized groups or by challenging stigma through acts of creation. In explaining their rationales for these strategies, participants positioned themselves as occupying liminal spaces or as directly answerable for creating a particular type of community. We discuss implications of each position for addressing the practical problem of brain drain.