Toward an epistemology of Wikipedia

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

108 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Wikipedia (the "free online encyclopedia that anyone can edit") is having a huge impact on how a great many people gather information about the world. So, it is important for epistemologists and information scientists to ask whether people are likely to acquire knowledge as a result of having access to this information source. In other words, is Wikipedia having good epistemlc consequences? After surveying the various concerns that have been raised about the reliability of Wikipedia, this article argues that the epistemic consequences of people using Wikipedia as a source of information are likely to be quite good. According to several empirical studies, the reliability of Wikipedia compares favorably to the reliability of traditional encyclopedias. Furthermore, the reliability of Wikipedia compares even more favorably to the reliability of those information sources that people would be likely to use if Wikipedia did not exist (viz., Web sites that are as freely and easily accessible as Wikipedia). In addition, Wikipedia has a number of other epistemic virtues (e.g., power, speed, and fecundity) that arguably outweigh any deficiency in terms of reliability. Even so, epistemologists and information scientists should certainly be trying to identify changes (or alternatives) to Wikipedia that will bring about even better epistemic consequences. This article suggests that to improve Wikipedia, we need to clarify what our epistemic values are and to better understand why Wikipedia works as well as it does.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1662-1674
Number of pages13
JournalJournal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology
Volume59
Issue number10
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 2008

Fingerprint

Wikipedia
epistemology
Surveying
source of information
Epistemology
Websites

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Information Systems
  • Library and Information Sciences

Cite this

Toward an epistemology of Wikipedia. / Fallis, Don T.

In: Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Vol. 59, No. 10, 08.2008, p. 1662-1674.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{fa04eccac49740399e10a7565c1701ad,
title = "Toward an epistemology of Wikipedia",
abstract = "Wikipedia (the {"}free online encyclopedia that anyone can edit{"}) is having a huge impact on how a great many people gather information about the world. So, it is important for epistemologists and information scientists to ask whether people are likely to acquire knowledge as a result of having access to this information source. In other words, is Wikipedia having good epistemlc consequences? After surveying the various concerns that have been raised about the reliability of Wikipedia, this article argues that the epistemic consequences of people using Wikipedia as a source of information are likely to be quite good. According to several empirical studies, the reliability of Wikipedia compares favorably to the reliability of traditional encyclopedias. Furthermore, the reliability of Wikipedia compares even more favorably to the reliability of those information sources that people would be likely to use if Wikipedia did not exist (viz., Web sites that are as freely and easily accessible as Wikipedia). In addition, Wikipedia has a number of other epistemic virtues (e.g., power, speed, and fecundity) that arguably outweigh any deficiency in terms of reliability. Even so, epistemologists and information scientists should certainly be trying to identify changes (or alternatives) to Wikipedia that will bring about even better epistemic consequences. This article suggests that to improve Wikipedia, we need to clarify what our epistemic values are and to better understand why Wikipedia works as well as it does.",
author = "Fallis, {Don T}",
year = "2008",
month = "8",
doi = "10.1002/asi.20870",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "59",
pages = "1662--1674",
journal = "Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology",
issn = "2330-1635",
publisher = "John Wiley and Sons Ltd",
number = "10",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Toward an epistemology of Wikipedia

AU - Fallis, Don T

PY - 2008/8

Y1 - 2008/8

N2 - Wikipedia (the "free online encyclopedia that anyone can edit") is having a huge impact on how a great many people gather information about the world. So, it is important for epistemologists and information scientists to ask whether people are likely to acquire knowledge as a result of having access to this information source. In other words, is Wikipedia having good epistemlc consequences? After surveying the various concerns that have been raised about the reliability of Wikipedia, this article argues that the epistemic consequences of people using Wikipedia as a source of information are likely to be quite good. According to several empirical studies, the reliability of Wikipedia compares favorably to the reliability of traditional encyclopedias. Furthermore, the reliability of Wikipedia compares even more favorably to the reliability of those information sources that people would be likely to use if Wikipedia did not exist (viz., Web sites that are as freely and easily accessible as Wikipedia). In addition, Wikipedia has a number of other epistemic virtues (e.g., power, speed, and fecundity) that arguably outweigh any deficiency in terms of reliability. Even so, epistemologists and information scientists should certainly be trying to identify changes (or alternatives) to Wikipedia that will bring about even better epistemic consequences. This article suggests that to improve Wikipedia, we need to clarify what our epistemic values are and to better understand why Wikipedia works as well as it does.

AB - Wikipedia (the "free online encyclopedia that anyone can edit") is having a huge impact on how a great many people gather information about the world. So, it is important for epistemologists and information scientists to ask whether people are likely to acquire knowledge as a result of having access to this information source. In other words, is Wikipedia having good epistemlc consequences? After surveying the various concerns that have been raised about the reliability of Wikipedia, this article argues that the epistemic consequences of people using Wikipedia as a source of information are likely to be quite good. According to several empirical studies, the reliability of Wikipedia compares favorably to the reliability of traditional encyclopedias. Furthermore, the reliability of Wikipedia compares even more favorably to the reliability of those information sources that people would be likely to use if Wikipedia did not exist (viz., Web sites that are as freely and easily accessible as Wikipedia). In addition, Wikipedia has a number of other epistemic virtues (e.g., power, speed, and fecundity) that arguably outweigh any deficiency in terms of reliability. Even so, epistemologists and information scientists should certainly be trying to identify changes (or alternatives) to Wikipedia that will bring about even better epistemic consequences. This article suggests that to improve Wikipedia, we need to clarify what our epistemic values are and to better understand why Wikipedia works as well as it does.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=48849087249&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=48849087249&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1002/asi.20870

DO - 10.1002/asi.20870

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:48849087249

VL - 59

SP - 1662

EP - 1674

JO - Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology

JF - Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology

SN - 2330-1635

IS - 10

ER -