Knowledge Construction in Wikipedia: A Systemic-Constructivist Analysis

Abstract

We propose a systemic-constructivist perspective for analyzing knowledge construction. In contrast to theories that focus on individuals as actors, the systemic-constructivist approach emphasizes the relevance of social systems and regards the construction of knowledge as a self-referential process that takes place in social systems. We propose that it is the system that defines what is accepted as legitimate knowledge and thus shapes individuals’ behavior. We present this approach and its implications by providing a case study of knowledge construction in Wikipedia. We analyzed the article about the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant shortly after the nuclear catastrophe unfolded. There was a flood of highly uncertain information circulating, which the social system Wikipedia had to deal with and make meaning of. We obtained a group of very diverse people who largely lacked specific background education on the topic but accomplished the collaborative creation of an article that was later considered by experts to be of high quality. By interpreting these occurrences as operations of a social system, we aim to extend the theoretical basis of the learning sciences with an approach that emphasizes systems and their structures instead of individuals or groups. We discuss how this perspective may contribute to understanding collaborative knowledge construction.

Notes

¹ No original research is one of three core content policies that, along with neutral point of view and verifiability, determines the type and quality of material acceptable in articles in Wikipedia (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_original_research).

² http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kernkraftwerk_Fukushima-Daiichi.

³ Luhmann used the term psychic systems. In line with previous publications (e.g., Kimmerle, Moskaliuk, Cress, & Thiel, 2011), we use the more precise term cognitive systems here.

⁴ Cited from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Five_pillars (retrieved June 12, 2012).

⁵ See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Ignore_all_rules (retrieved June 12, 2012).

⁶ http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuklearkatastrophe_von_Fukushima.

⁷ In compliance with the recommendations of our institutional review board, all user-related information remains anonymous.

⁸ Access to all edits was available via the Wikimedia Toolserver with MySQL databases that contains all logged data from Wikipedia.

⁹ http://stats.grok.se/de/201103/Kernkraftwerk%20Fukushima%20I.

¹⁰ This rank does not include the main page, which is by far the most popular one.

¹¹ http://www.wikiroll.com/popularity_en.cgi?lang=de&day_first=15044&day_count=9.

¹² Note that eventually nuclear meltdowns were affirmed for all three reactors (1–3), but empirical support for this proposition was not available before April 2011.

¹³ Authors may comment on their edits. The comments are visible in the version history. They do not, however, appear within the Wikipedia article.

¹⁴ This becomes readily apparent in Wikipedia if new information is added within the bracket frame of a previously existing reference.

¹⁵ Note that references were not only added but also deleted or substituted.

¹⁶ Good thumbnail rule (“Good-faith Googling”): “… if an unsourced addition to an article appears plausible, consider taking a moment to use Google (or some other search engine) to find a reliable source before deciding whether to revert” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Search_engine_test#Good_thumbnail_rule_.28Wikipedia:Good-faith_Googling.29, retrieved June 21, 2012; likewise in the German Wikipedia, http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Belege#Artikel_ohne_Belege, retrieved June 21, 2012).

¹⁷ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Unreferenced (retrieved June 22, 2012); see likewise in the German Wikipedia, http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vorlage:Belege_fehlen (retrieved June 21, 2012).

¹⁸ This epistemological challenge has been addressed by various systems theorists in the context of second-order cybernetics (Maturana & Varela, 1987; Varela, 1991; von Foerster, 1974, 1981, 2003).

¹⁹ http://wikimedia.de/wiki/Zedler-Preis (retrieved June 22, 2012); note that the price was awarded to the article “Nuclear Catastrophe of Fukushima-Daiichi,” to which most of the contents migrated on March 19.