X-Git-Url: https://projects.mako.cc/source/bmh-research_statement/blobdiff_plain/02d8553b614ec886e86c05ea400ed06fdf496f7d..ee513714d01821208dbf545508e94edbbe80bd4b:/bmh-research_statement.tex

diff --git a/bmh-research_statement.tex b/bmh-research_statement.tex
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6407fdc
--- /dev/null
+++ b/bmh-research_statement.tex
@@ -0,0 +1,315 @@
+\documentclass[10pt]{memoir}
+
+% based on kieran healy's memoir modifications
+\usepackage{mako-mem}
+\chapterstyle{article-3}
+\pagestyle{memo}
+
+\usepackage{ucs}
+\usepackage[utf8x]{inputenc}
+
+\usepackage[T1]{fontenc}
+\usepackage{textcomp}
+\usepackage[garamond]{mathdesign}
+
+\usepackage[letterpaper,left=1.2in,right=1.2in,top=1.15in,bottom=1.1in]{geometry}
+
+% packages i use in essentially every document
+\usepackage{graphicx}
+\usepackage{wrapfig}
+\usepackage{enumerate}
+
+% packages i use in many documents but leave off by default
+% \usepackage{amsmath, amsthm, amssymb}
+% \usepackage{dcolumn}
+% \usepackage{endfloat}
+
+% import and customize urls
+\usepackage[usenames,dvipsnames]{color}
+\usepackage[breaklinks]{hyperref}
+
+\hypersetup{colorlinks=true, linkcolor=Black, citecolor=Black, filecolor=Blue,
+    urlcolor=Blue, unicode=true}
+
+% add bibliographic stuff 
+% \usepackage[round]{natbib}
+% \def\citepos#1{\citeauthor{#1}'s (\citeyear{#1})}
+% \def\citespos#1{\citeauthor{#1}' (\citeyear{#1})}
+
+% import vc stuff after running `make vc`: \input{vc} \pagestyle{kjhgit}
+
+\begin{document}
+
+\setlength{\parskip}{4.5pt}
+
+\baselineskip 14.5pt
+
+\title{Research Statement}
+\author{Benjamin Mako Hill}
+
+\maketitle
+
+I study collective action in online communities and seek to understand
+why some attempts at collaborative production -- like Wikipedia and
+Linux -- build large volunteer communities while the vast majority
+never attract even a second contributor. I am particularly interested
+in how the design of communication and information technologies shape
+fundemental social outcomes with broad theoretical and practical
+implications -- like the decision to join a community or contribute to
+a public good. My research is deeply interdisciplinary, consists
+primarily of ``big data'' quantitative analyses, and lies at the
+intersection of sociology, communication, and human-computer
+interaction.
+
+Using Internet-based peer production projects as my research settings,
+my work seeks to understand the conditions for collective action using
+observational data from real communities.  This work has been shaped
+by three complentary approaches: (1) the comparison of failures to
+build communities to rare successful attempts; (2) attention to the
+role of reputation and status in the mobilization of volunteers; and
+(3) analysis of design changes as ``natural experiments'' building a
+deeper, and often causal, understanding from observational
+data. Nearly all of my work incorporates at least two of these
+approaches.
+
+\section{Studying Attempts at Collective Action}
+
+Although there have been many thousands of studies of online
+collective action, the vast majority have only considered projects
+like Wikipedia and Linux that have successfully built communities -- a
+characterization that can be extended to observational work on
+collective action more generally. In this sense, most previous
+analyses have systematically selected on their dependent
+variable. Instead, most of my research treats projects as the unit of
+analysis and collective action as the outcome of interest -- comparing
+the successful examples of collective action to attempts that never
+got off the ground.
+
+% \begin{wrapfigure}{r}{0.4\textwidth}
+%  \begin{centering}
+%  \includegraphics[width=2.4in]{figures/wp_citations_by_year.png}
+%  \caption{Number of published academic articles with ``wikipedia''
+%  in title by year.}
+%  \label{fig:wppapers}
+%  \end{centering}
+%\end{wrapfigure}
+
+\begin{wrapfigure}{r}{2.6in}
+ \begin{centering}
+ \includegraphics[width=2.6in]{figures/scratch_screenshot_default.jpg}
+ \caption{A screenshot of the Scratch programming environment
+   where users create animations and interactive games.}
+ \label{fig:scratchapp}
+ \end{centering}
+ \vspace{-2em}
+\end{wrapfigure}
+
+In one study, I compare Wikipedia to seven attempts to create online
+collaborative encyclopedia projects that were launched previously
+\cite{hill_almost_2012}. Using an inductive, grounded-theory based
+analysis of founder interviews and archival data, I propose four
+hypotheses to explain why Wikipedia attracted many more
+contributors. Although the paper's methods diverge from the
+quantitative, ``big data'' approach typical of most of my work, the
+research question and strategy is representative.
+
+I have also followed this strategy in a series of quantitative studies
+of the Scratch online community: a public website where millions
+of users create, share, and remix interactive media. The
+community is built around the Scratch programming environment: a
+freely downloadable desktop application that allows amateur creators
+to combine media with programming code (see Figure
+\ref{fig:scratchapp}). Although Scratch is a community designed to
+promote collaboration through content remixing, only about ten percent
+of Scratch projects attract a second contributor.
+
+In one study, co-authored with AndrÃ©s Monroy-HernÃ¡ndez and forthcoming
+in American Behavioral Scientist, I test several of the most widely
+cited theories associated with ``generativity'' (i.e., qualities of
+technology or content that make some works more fertile ground for
+collaboration). I find some support for existing theory but also find
+that, across the board, factors associated with more collaboration are
+also associated with less original and transformative types of
+joint-work \cite{hill_remixing_2012}. In another study of Scratch
+written with Monroy-HernÃ¡ndez and Kristina Olson, I show that this type
+of superficial collaboration leads to negative reactions and community
+displeasure \cite{hill_responses_2010}.
+
+\begin{wrapfigure}{l}{2.6in}
+ \vspace{-1em}
+ \begin{centering}
+ \includegraphics[width=2.6in]{figures/frontpage_modified-topremix.jpg}
+  \caption{The front page of the Scratch online community where users
+    can share and collaborate on projects.}
+ \label{fig:scratchfrontpage}
+ \end{centering}
+ \vspace{-1.5em}
+\end{wrapfigure}
+
+This year, I am conducting a population-level analysis in a new
+dataset I have created that includes 80,000 attempts at wikis (i.e.,
+public, editable, websites similar to Wikipedia). In my first working
+paper using this dataset, I consider inter-organizational competition
+for volunteer labor and find little support for a widely cited
+ecological model of collective action from sociology that treats
+volunteer labor as a fixed and finite resource. Instead, I show that
+contributions to different wikis on the same topic or theme are driven
+primarily by environment-level changes in interest and that projects
+can even benefit from complimentarities and synergies
+\cite{hill_is_2012}.  By looking at failures, these studies provide
+tests of several of the most influential theories of the conditions
+for collective action, suggest important practical and theoretical
+limitations to existing models, and point to previously untheorized
+mechanisms.
+\section{Reputation and Status}
+
+Although empirical research comparing successful and unsuccessful peer
+production projects has been rare, theories have been widespread. No
+theory has been more influential than the suggestion that, in the
+absence of pecuniary rewards, contributions to online public goods are
+driven by the possibility of increased reputation and status for
+contributors.
+
+\begin{wrapfigure}{r}{0.3\textwidth}
+ \vspace{-1em}
+ \begin{centering}
+ \includegraphics[width=1.9in]{figures/barnstar_alone.png}
+ \caption{Image of a ``barnstar'' social award given by Wikipedia
+   contributors to each other to recognize positive contributions .}
+ \label{fig:barnstar}
+ \end{centering}
+ \vspace{-1em}
+\end{wrapfigure}
+
+In a study of status-based awards in Wikipedia called ``barnstars''
+(see Figure \ref{fig:barnstar}) -- a collaboration with Aaron Shaw and
+Yochai Benkler -- I provide an empirical test of an influential
+status-based theory of collective action from sociology. Although the
+study finds support for a widely hypothesized ``virtuous cycle'' in which
+status rewards both cause and are caused by contributions, it also
+finds that this effect is limited to a sub-population of Wikipedia
+contributors -- ``signalers'' who show off their awards
+\cite{hill_status_2012}. This result has broad implications for both
+status-based theories of collective action as well the design of
+reputation-based rewards.
+
+In a mixed methods study of Scratch, written with a team at Microsoft
+Research and nominated for best paper at the CHI 2011 conference
+\cite{monroy-hernandez_computers_2011}, I present both a quantitative
+analysis of a design change and in-depth interviews of users to
+demonstrate how credit-giving is ineffective when it stems from an
+automated system because systems fail to reinforce status-ordering
+with credible human expressions of social deference and
+gratitude. These studies suggest important limits to previous
+theoretical work on status as a motivator for collective action, and
+put forward a more nuanced theoretical model.
+
+%\newpage
+\section{Design-Driven Natural Experiments}
+
+Although nearly all of my work has important implications for the
+design of socio-technical systems, I have structured much of my work
+around the evaluation of technological design changes. In several
+papers, I treat design changes as ``natural experiments'' that
+exogenously change the ways that social structure is enacted.
+
+\begin{wrapfigure}{r}{0.25\textwidth}
+ \vspace{-1em}
+ \begin{centering}
+ \includegraphics[width=1.5in]{figures/lilypad.jpg}
+ \caption{A image of the LilyPad Arduino microcontroller.}
+ \label{fig:lilypad}
+ \end{centering}
+ \vspace{-1em}
+\end{wrapfigure}
+
+For example, to evaluate the impact of status-based incentives and
+collaboration in Scratch, I use a regression discontinuity framework
+to measure the causal effect of increased status for collaboration
+\cite{hill_causal_2012}. I show that highlighting collaborative
+projects on the Scratch web page (see the bottom of Figure
+\ref{fig:scratchfrontpage}) resulted in more collaboration but also
+caused a decrease in the amount of total effort exerted by
+contributors. Speaking to fundamental sociological work in the
+literature on collective action, I present evidence that this decrease
+is driven by both an the influx of new contributors and a decrease in
+the effort and contributions of established participants.
+
+In other work with Leah Buechley, I have analyzed sales records of
+hobbyist microcontrollers to argue that relatively simple design
+changes in the \emph{LilyPad Arduino} -- a electronics toolkit
+minimally re-designed for women and girls (see Figure
+\ref{fig:lilypad}) -- led to large increases in the proportion of
+women contributors and drastic shifts in the type of projects created
+\cite{buechley_lilypad_2010}. I have also explored how technical
+errors may be able to provide similar opportunities for analysis by
+interrupting normal operation of a system and revealing internal
+processes that are usually hidden \cite{hill_revealing_2010}. In
+addition to the important theoretical findings in these studies, this
+type of work represents an important methodological advance in that it
+allows for stronger causal claims while also closing the gap between
+theory and design.
+
+% or changes in socio-technical systems describing responsibility for a piece of software can lead to an important impact in the type and structure of contributions in peer production \cite{michlmayr_quality_2003}
+
+\section{Research Agenda}
+
+My research agenda involves further exploration of the determinants of
+collection action online -- especially using a series of large new
+datasets I have recently assembled. I plan to both continue on this
+research trajectory and to create new social and technical
+infrastructure that will allow others researchers to join me in ``big
+data'' observational research with active communities. This section
+outlines some future directions I plan to explore.
+
+\emph{Understanding the Relationship Between Collective Action and
+  Performance} -- My work has treated collective action and production
+as ends in themselves and has largely avoided the consideration of
+issues of performance, efficiency, and quality. Using my existing
+datasets, I plan to compare the performance of collaborative
+production to individually produced works to understand when
+successful collection action leads to increased performance. For
+example, in an analysis using data from Scratch which is currently under
+review -- done in collaboration with Monroy-HernÃ¡ndez -- I show
+important limitations of collaboration through remixing in regards to
+project quality, particularly for more artistic or media-intensive
+works \cite{hill_cost_2012}.
+
+\emph{Integrated Theory of Design for Collective Action} -- My studies
+of status and reputation provide a detailed understanding of the dynamics of
+collection action in relation to one set of important predictors. In future
+work, I plan to evaluate the effect of governance and different
+systems of authority, framing, modularity and project complexity. In
+the long term, I hope to offer a broad set of principles of
+design for online collection action.
+
+\emph{Toolkits for Experimental Social Design} -- My research has been
+possible through personal relationships I have with a series of
+organizations with large, active, online communities (e.g., the MIT
+Media Lab and the Wikimedia Foundation). These organizations, like
+many others, make design changes to the software that supports their
+communities to encourage contributions and improve their users'
+experiences. Most of the time, these organizations have very little
+idea if these changes are effective. I plan to seek funding for, and
+to create, a technical framework and a network of academic and
+practitioner collaborators to facilitate well-designed natural
+experiments by the hosts of large online communities and to share data
+that allows for academic evaluation of these experiments.
+
+Although I study cooperation, I also practice it. In graduate school,
+I have collaborated with a large group of co-authors in many academic
+departments. I intend to continue doing so. In sum, my research uses
+design to contribute to social scientific theories of collective
+action, and uses theories of collective action to influence
+design. Although my research settings are online communities, I
+believe my work has implications for a broad range of disciplines and
+fields.
+
+% bibliography here
+\renewcommand{\bibsection}{\section{\bibname}\prebibhook}
+\baselineskip 14.2pt
+\bibliography{refs-processed}
+\bibliographystyle{unsrt}
+
+\end{document}
+
