X-Git-Url: https://projects.mako.cc/source/bmh-research_statement/blobdiff_plain/2d8640cdc15752dec4daa249664baf86884a4085..67659f136ab5670a3421009241dc0daa0aff0fa9:/research_statement.tex?ds=inline

diff --git a/research_statement.tex b/research_statement.tex
index ede334a..f351632 100644
--- a/research_statement.tex
+++ b/research_statement.tex
@@ -65,24 +65,25 @@ 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 through the use of
-projects as the unit of analysis; (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 of social processes using
-observational data. Nearly all of my work incorporates at least two of
-these approaches.
+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{Projects As Unit of Analysis}
+\section{Studying Attempts at Collective Action}
 
 Although there have been many thousands of studies of online
-collective action the vast majority have only considered successful
-projects like Wikipedia and Linux.  The majority of research on
-collective action -- on and offline -- has only considered projects
-that have successfully mobilized. In this sense, most previous
-analyses of collection action have systematically selected on their
-dependent variable. Most of my research treats projects as the unit of
-analysis and collective action as the outcome of interest.
+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}
@@ -107,32 +108,32 @@ 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
-hypothesis to explain why Wikipedia attracted many more
+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 a large
+I have also followed this strategy in a series of quantitative studies
+of the Scratch online community: a public website where a large
 community 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}). Despite the fact that 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, 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, I show that
-this type of superficial collaboration leads to negative reactions and
-community displeasure \cite{hill_responses_2010}.
+\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}
  \begin{centering}
@@ -147,13 +148,13 @@ community displeasure \cite{hill_responses_2010}.
 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 effects of
-competition for volunteer labor and find little support for a widely
-cited ecological model of collective action from sociology that treats
+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
-may even benefit from complimentarities and synergies
+can even benefit from complimentarities and synergies
 \cite{hill_is_2012}.
 
 \section{Reputation and Status}
@@ -177,23 +178,24 @@ contributors.
 \end{wrapfigure}
 
 In a study of status-based awards in Wikipedia called ``barnstars''
-(see Figure \ref{fig:barnstar}) I provide an empirical test of an
-influential status-based theory of collective action from
-sociology. Although the study finds support for the widely
-hypothesized ``virtuous cycle'' of status rewards both causing and
-being 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, 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.
+(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 the widely hypothesized ``virtuous cycle'' of
+status rewards both causing and being 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.
 
 %\newpage
 \section{Design-Driven Natural Experiments}
@@ -228,14 +230,16 @@ 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, 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}) -- lead 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 \cite{hill_revealing_2010}.
+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}) -- lead 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}.
 
 % 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}
 
@@ -256,10 +260,11 @@ 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 a manuscript currently under review using data from
-Scratch, 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}.
+example, in an analysis using data from Scratch which 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
@@ -267,7 +272,7 @@ 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 and community.
+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
@@ -278,15 +283,15 @@ communities to encourage contributions and improve 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
+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 and engaged 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
+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.
