ارتباط میان کیفیت مقالات حوزه علم اطلاعات در ویکی‌پدیای انگلیسی با رتبه‌ بازیابی‌شان در موتورهای جستجو

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکترای علم اطلاعات و دانش‌شناسی، دانشگاه شیراز

2 استاد گروه علم اطلاعات و دانش‌شناسی، دانشگاه شیراز

چکیده

هدف: بررسی ارتباط میان کیفیت مقالات حوزه علم اطلاعات در ویکی‌پدیای انگلیسی با رتبه بازیابی‌شان در موتورهای جستجوی گوگل، یاهو، و بینگ.
روش‌شناسی: با روش پیمایشی-توصیفی و براساس چهارچوب شناسایی‌شده، ابعاد کیفیت شامل اعتبار، کامل‌بودن، پیچیدگی، آگاهی‌بخشی، ثبات، روزآمدی، و فراریت برای هر مقاله محاسبه شده‌ است.
یافته‌ها: مقالات بررسی‌شده در ابعاد پیچیدگی و فراریت نسبتاً مطلوب ارزیابی شدند؛ اما در ابعاد کامل‌بودن، روزآمدی، و آگاهی‌بخشی وضعیت مناسبی نداشتند. بینگ به‌لحاظ صوری، رتبه نخست بیشترین تعداد نمایش مقالات ویکی‌پدیا را داشت؛ اما در رتبه بازیابی مقالات میان موتورهای جستجو تفاوت معناداری وجود نداشت. به‌استثنای شاخص روزآمدی، میان سایر ابعاد کیفیت اطلاعات با رتبه بازیابی مقاله ارتباط معناداری دیده نشد.
نتیجه‌گیری: ویکی‌نویسان باید با رعایت اصول لازم در نگارش آثار خود در بهبود مؤلفه‌های کامل‌بودن، روزآمدی، و آگاهی‌بخشی تلاش کنند. مسائل تجاری پشت پرده سامانه‌های بازیابی اطلاعات که انتشار الگوریتم رتبه‌بندی آنها را با محدودیت روبه‌رو می‌کند، می‌تواند توجیهی برای نبود رابطه میان برخی ابعاد کیفیت اطلاعات مقالات با رتبه بازیابی آنها باشد.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

Information Quality dimensions of Information Science articles in English Wikipedia: exploring the relationship between ranking of the Wikipedia articles in search engines and the quality of the articles

نویسندگان [English]

  • Z. Yousefi 1
  • A. Jowkar 2
1 PhD Candidate of Knowledge and Information Science, Shiraz University
2 Professor, Knowledge and Information Science, Shiraz University
چکیده [English]

Purpose: Investigating the Information Quality dimensions of Information Science articles in English Wikipedia and exploring the relationship between ranking of the Wikipedia articles in search engines and the quality of the articles.
Methodology: Using a descriptive- survey method and based on the identified framework, different indices related to the quality dimensions including credibility, completeness, complexity, awareness, stability, timeliness, and volatility are computed for the selected sample.
Findings: The examined article showed a relatively favorable situation in terms of complexity and volatility but they did not have a very proper situation in terms of completeness, complexity and awareness.
It was shown that although the Bing performed a better job in terms of retrieving Wikipedia articles in the top ten results compared to the other examined search engines
there was no significant difference in the ranking of the articles among the evaluated search engines. There is no significant relation between the rank of a retrieved article in a search engine and the information quality dimensions except for the timeliness.
Conclusion: Wikipedia authors should try to improve the other dimensions of the information quality including completeness, complexity and awareness by enhancing their writing skills. The lack of a relationship between some components of the Information Quality and the rank of Wikipedia articles in the search engines may be related to the financial and commercial actions behind the scene of the information retrieval systems which have restricted them not to reveal their ranking algorithms.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Information quality
  • Results relevance ranking
  • Search engines
یقطین، مریم؛ هنرجویان، زهره؛ و ستوده، هاجر (1394). بررسی تازگی اطلاعات فارسی: مطالعه موردی روزنامه‌های فارسی نمایه‌شده در پایگاه‌های گوگل، یاهو و بینگ. پژوهشنامه پردازش و مدیریت اطلاعات، 30 (3)، 737-758.

Anthony, D., Smith, S.W., & Williamson, T. (2005). Explaining quality in Internet collective goods: Zealots and good Samaritans in the case of Wikipedia. Retrieved May 8, 2017, from http://Web.mit.edu/iandeseminar/Papers/Fall2005/anthony.pdf

Bragues, G. (2007). Wiki-Philosophizing in a marketplace of ideas: Evaluating Wikipedia’s entries on seven great minds. Retrieved May 8, 2017, from https://ssrn.com/abstract=978177

Broder, A. (2002). A taxonomy of web search. SIGIR Forum, 36 (2), 3-10.

Can you trust Wikipedia? (2005, October 24). The Guardian. Retrieved July 15, 2018, from https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2005/oct/24/comment.newmedia

Clauson, K., Polen, H., Boulos, M. K., & Dzenowagis, J. (2008). Scope, completeness, and accuracy of drug information in wikipedia. Ann Pharmacother, 42 (12), 1814-1821.

Dalip, D. H., Gonçalves, M. A., Cristo, M., & Calado, P. (2009). Automatic quality assessment of content created collaboratively by web communities: a case study of wikipedia. In JCDL ’09: Proceedings of the 9th ACM/IEEE-CS joint conference on Digital libraries, June 15 - 19, (pp. 295–304). New York: ACM. Retrieved July 20, 2018, from https://dl.acm.org/ citation.cfm?id=1555449

De la Calzada, G., & Dekhtyar, A. (2010). On measuring the quality of Wikipedia articles. In WICOW ‘10: Proceedings of the 4th workshop on Information credibility, April 27, (pp. 11-18). New York: ACM. Retrieved July 20, 2018, from https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1772943

Emigh, W., & Herring, S. (2005). Collaborative authoring on the Web: a genre analysis of online encyclopedias. In Proceedings of the 39th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, January 3-6, IEEE Press. Retrieved July 20, 2018, from https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/1385436/

Ferschke, O. (2014). The quality of content in open online collaboration platforms: Approaches to NLP-supported information quality management in Wikipedia. PhD thesis, Technische Universität, Darmstadt

Giles, J. (2005). Internet encyclopedias go head to head. Nature, 438, 900–901.

Hu, M., Lim, E. P., Sun, A., Lauw, H. W., & Vuong, B. Q. (2007). Measuring article quality in wikipedia: models and evaluation. In CIKM ’07: Proceedings of the sixteenth ACM conference on Conference on information and knowledge management, November 6-10, (pp. 243–252). New York: ACM. Retrieved July 20, 2018, from https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/sis_research/1516/

Jones, J. (2008). Patterns of revision in online writing: a study of wikipedia’s featured articles. Written Communication, 25 (2), 262- 289.

Jones, K. C. (2007). German Wikipedia outranks traditional encyclopedia's online version. Retrieved July 19, 2018, from https://www.informationweek.com/german-wikipedia-outranks-traditional-encyclopedias-online-version/d/d-id/1062250

Kleinberg, J. M. (1999). Authoritative sources in a hyperlinked environment. Journal of the ACM, 46 (5), 604-632.

Lewandowski, D., & Spree, U. (2011). Ranking of Wikipedia articles in search engines revisited: Fair ranking for reasonable quality? Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62 (1), 117-132.

Li, X., Tang, J., Wang, T., Luo, Z., & de Rijke, M. (2015). Automatically assessing Wikipedia article quality by exploiting article–editor networks. In A. Hanbury, G. Kazai, A. Rauber, & N. Fuhr (eds.), Advances in Information Retrieval, LNCS, vol. 9022, (pp. 574-580). Cham: Springer.

Lih, A. (2004). Wikipedia as participatory journalism: Reliable sources? Metrics for evaluating collaborative media as a news resource. In Proceedings of 5th International Symposium on Onlin Journalism, April 16-17. Retrieved July 20, 2018, from http://www.citeulike.org/user/tlucassen/article/4341548

Lipka, N., & Stein, B. (2010). Identifying featured articles in wikipedia: Writing style matters. In WWW’ 10: Proceedings of the 19th international conference on World Wide Web, April 26-30, (pp. 1147- 1148). North Carolina: Raleigh.

Luyt, B., & Tan, D. (2010). Improving Wikipedia’s credibility: References and citations in a sample of history articles. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61 (4), 715–722.

McHenry, R. (2004). The faith-based encyclopedia. Retrieved July 20, 2018, from https://web.archive.org/web/20060719003313/http://www.tcsdaily.com:80/article.aspx?id=111504A

Miller, B. X., Helicher, K., & Berry, T. (2006). I want my wikipedia! Library Journal, 131 (6), 122-124.

Rassbach, L., Pincock, T., & Mingus, B. (2007). Exploring the feasibility of automatically rating online article quality. In 9th joint conference on digital libraries. Retrieved July 20, 2018, from https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/wikimania2007/d/d3/RassbachPincockMingus07.pdf

Rector, L. H. (2008). Comparison of Wikipedia and other encyclopedias for accuracy, breadth, and depth in historical articles. ReferenceServices Review, 36 (1), 7–22.

Reliability of Wikipedia. (n.d.). Retrieved July 20, 2018, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reliability_of_Wikipedia

Rose, D. E., & Levinson, D. (2004). Understanding user goals in web search. In proceedings of the 13th international World Wide Web conference, May 17 – 22, (pp. 13-19). New York: ACM.

Stein, K., & Hess, C. (2007). Does it matter who contributes: a study on featured articles in the german Wikipedia. In HT’ 07: Proceedings of the eighteenth conference on hypertext and hypermedia, September 10 – 12, (pp. 171- 174). New York: ACM.

Stvilia, B., Twidale, M. B., Smith, L. C., & Gasser, L. (2005). Assessing information quality of a community-based encyclopedia. In ICIQ-05: Proceedings of the International Conference on Information Quality, November 10-12, (pp. 442-454). Retrieved July 30, 2018, from http://mitiq.mit.edu/ICIQ/Documents/IQ%20Conference%202005/Papers/AssessingIQofaCommunity-basedEncy.pdf

Vapnik, V. N. (1995). The nature of statistical learning theory. New York: Springer-Verlag.

Waldman, S. (2018, July 20). Who knows? The Guardian. Retrieved July 20, 2018, from https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2004/oct/26/g2.onlinesupplement

Wikipedia: Featured article criteria. (n.d.). Retrieved July 25, 2018, from https://en.wikipedia.org/ wiki/Wikipedia:Featured_article_criteria

Wikipedia: Featured articles. (n.d.). Retrieved July 25, 2018, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Wikipedia:Featured_articles#Business,_economics,_and_finance

Wilkinson, D., & Huberman, B. (2007). Cooperation and quality in Wikipedia. In WikiSym '07: Proceedings of the 2007 international symposium on Wikis. October 21–23, (pp. 157- 164), Montreal, Quebec, Canada. Retrieved July 31, 2018, from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/ download?doi=10.1.1.88.4591&rep=rep1&type=pdf

Zeng, H., Alhossaini, M. A., Ding, L., Fikes, R., & McGuinness, D. L. (2006). Computing trust from revision history. In PST '06: Proceedings of the 2006 International Conference on Privacy, Security and Trust: Bridge the Gap Between PST Technologies and Business Services, October 30- November 01, New York: ACM. Retrieved July 20, 2018, from https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1501445