The talk I gave at Communities and Technologies 2009 on using a hyperlingual methodology to identify cultural diversity in the knowledge representations in Wikipedia. Paper at http://www.brenthecht.com/papers/bhecht_CommAndTech2009.pdf

1. Measuring Self-Focus Bias
in Community Maintained
Knowledge Repositories
Brent Hecht and Darren Gergle
Northwestern University

2. Overview
1. Introduction
2. Study 1
3. Study 2
4. Discussion
5. Conclusion

3. Introduction
Sum of World
Knowledge

4. Introduction
Sum of World
Knowledge

5. Introduction

6. Introduction
• Artificial Intelligence

7. Introduction
• Artificial Intelligence
• Natural Language
Processing

8. Introduction
• Artificial Intelligence
• Natural Language
Processing
• Human-Computer
Interaction

9. Introduction
• Artificial Intelligence
• Natural Language
Processing
• Human-Computer
Interaction
• CSCW

10. Introduction
World knowledge
according to whom?

13. Introduction

14. Introduction

15. Introduction

16. Introduction

17. Introduction

18. Introduction

19. Introduction

20. Introduction

21. Introduction
• self-focus bias
• effect of community-held opinions and interests
on the world knowledge in Wikipedia
• if it exists, both positive and negative

22. Introduction
terms and concepts

23. Introduction
terms and concepts
subset of the English Wikipedia Article Graph (WAG)

24. Introduction
terms and concepts
subset of the English Wikipedia Article Graph (WAG)

25. Introduction
terms and concepts
• “Barack Obama” has 2
inlinks
• “Barack Obama” has an
indegree of 2
subset of the English Wikipedia Article Graph (WAG)

26. Introduction
terms and concepts
subset of the English Wikipedia Article Graph (WAG)

27. Introduction
terms and concepts
• indegree → what people
are writing about
• indegree → relatedness
to sum of world knowledge
in each Wikipedia
subset of the English Wikipedia Article Graph (WAG)

28. Introduction
terms and concepts
The United
States Joe Biden
Barack Obama
subset of the English Wikipedia Article Graph (WAG)

29. Introduction
terms and concepts
The United
States Joe Biden
• indegree → what people
are writing about
• indegree → relatedness
to sum of world knowledge
in each Wikipedia
Barack Obama
subset of the English Wikipedia Article Graph (WAG)

30. Study 1
methods
definition of focus

31. Study 1
methods
definition of focus
• focus = indegree in Wikipedia Article
Graph (WAG)

32. Study 1
methods
definition of focus
• focus = indegree in Wikipedia Article
Graph (WAG)
• greater indegree = greater focus

33. Study 1
methods
definition of focus
• focus = indegree in Wikipedia Article
Graph (WAG)
• greater indegree = greater focus
• compare across 15 Wikipedias

34. Study 1
methods
definition of focus
Jonathan Interstate Jonathan
Frakes Pennsylvania Frakes Pennsylvania
99
Penn State Université d'État de
University Pennsylvanie
indegree = 3 indegree = 1
English Wikipedia French Wikipedia

35. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Poutine.JPG
Experiment
methods
Poutine!

36. Study 1
methods
definition of focus
Chez Ashton French Fries Cheddar Cheddar
Cheese Chez Ashton French Fries
Cheese
Poutine Poutine
indegree = 0 indegree = 3
English Wikipedia French Wikipedia

37. Study 1
methods
definition of focus

38. Study 1
methods
sample and statistic

39. Study 1
methods
sample and statistic
• sample = geographic articles

40. Study 1
methods
sample and statistic

41. Study 1
methods
sample and statistic

42. Study 1
methods
sample and statistic
• statistic = spatial indegree sums

43. Study 1
methods
sample and statistic
Flying Finn
Airline
Finland

44. Study 1
methods
sample and statistic
Flying Finn
Airline
Rovaniemi
Finland Helsinki

45. Study 1
methods
sample and statistic
Sub-arctic Sub-arctic
Flying Finn
Climate Climate
Airline
Rovaniemi
Finland Helsinki
Finno-Urgic
Linus Torvalds Languages

46. Study 1
methods
sample and statistic
Sub-arctic Sub-arctic
Flying Finn
Climate Climate
Airline
Rovaniemi
• Finland has an
indegree sum = 4
Finland Helsinki
Finno-Urgic
Linus Torvalds Languages

47. Study 1
null hypothesis

48. Study 1
null hypothesis
H0: Indegree sums will have roughly the
same distribution in every Wikipedia

49. Study 1
null hypothesis
H0: Indegree sums will have roughly the
same distribution in every Wikipedia
All Wikipedias agree on focus distribution

50. Study 1
null hypothesis
H0: Indegree sums will have roughly the
same distribution in every Wikipedia
All Wikipedias agree on focus distribution
Self-focus bias does not exist

51. Study 1
self-focus hypothesis

52. Study 1
self-focus hypothesis
H1: Each language’s Wikipedia will have
higher indegree sums in countries where
the language is prominent

53. Study 1
self-focus hypothesis
H1: Each language’s Wikipedia will have
higher indegree sums in countries where
the language is prominent
Each Wikipedia will demonstrate greater
focus on its language’s culture hearth

54. Study 1
self-focus hypothesis
H1: Each language’s Wikipedia will have
higher indegree sums in countries where
the language is prominent
Each Wikipedia will demonstrate greater
focus on its language’s culture hearth
Self-focus bias exists

55. Indegree Sums in the Russian Wikipedia

56. Indegree Sums in the English Wikipedia

57. Indegree Sums in the Polish Wikipedia

58. Study I
results
Country Indegree Sum
Germany 718,668
United States 114,720
France 110,554
Switzerland 103,387
Austria 95,986
Italy 93,116
German Wikipedia

59. Study I
results
Country Indegree Sum
Finland 55,331
United States 25,664
Germany 11,972
Russia 10,076
United Kingdom 9,402
Italy 7,948
Finnish Wikipedia

60. Study I
results
Country Indegree Sum
Japan 453,048
Italy 70,922
United States 60,384
China 37,208
Germany 25,276
United Kingdom 20,690

61. Study I
results
Country Indegree Sum
Japan 453,048
Italy 70,922
United States 60,384
China 37,208
Germany 25,276
United Kingdom 20,690
Japanese Wikipedia

64. Study I
results

65. Study I
results
!

66. Study I
results
Country Indegree Sum
United States 1,366,261
United Kingdom 439,582
France 189,698
Germany 151,503
Canada 146,191
Italy 129,133
English Wikipedia

67. Study I
results
Country Indegree Sum
Y United States 1,366,261
United Kingdom 439,582
France 189,698
Germany 151,503
Canada 146,191
Italy 129,133
English Wikipedia

68. Study I
results
Country Indegree Sum
Y United States 1,366,261
Y United Kingdom 439,582
France 189,698
Germany 151,503
Canada 146,191
Italy 129,133
English Wikipedia

69. Study I
results
Country Indegree Sum
Y United States 1,366,261
Y United Kingdom 439,582
Y France 189,698
Germany 151,503
Canada 146,191
Italy 129,133
English Wikipedia

70. Study I
results
Country Indegree Sum
Y United States 1,366,261
Y United Kingdom 439,582
N France 189,698
Germany 151,503
Canada 146,191
Italy 129,133
English Wikipedia

71. Study I
results
Country Indegree Sum
Y United States 1,366,261
Y United Kingdom 439,582
N France 189,698
N Germany 151,503
Canada 146,191
Italy 129,133
English Wikipedia

72. Study I
results
Country Indegree Sum
Y United States 1,366,261
Y United Kingdom 439,582
N France 189,698
N Germany 151,503
Y Canada 146,191
Italy 129,133
English Wikipedia

73. Study I
results
Country Indegree Sum
Y United States 1,366,261
Y United Kingdom 439,582
N France 189,698
N Germany 151,503
Y Canada 146,191
N Italy 129,133
English Wikipedia

74. Study I
results
Country Indegree Sum
Y United States 1,366,261
Y United Kingdom 439,582
N France 189,698
N Germany 151,503
Y Canada 146,191
N Italy 129,133
English Wikipedia

75. Study I
results
Country Indegree Sum
United States 1,366,261
Y United Kingdom 439,582
N France 189,698
N Germany 151,503
Y Canada 146,191
N Italy 129,133
English Wikipedia

76. Study I
results
Country Indegree Sum
Num United States 1,366,261
Y United Kingdom 439,582
N France 189,698
N Germany 151,503
Y Canada 146,191
N Italy 129,133
English Wikipedia

77. Study I
results
Country Indegree Sum
Num United States 1,366,261
Y United Kingdom 439,582
France 189,698
N Germany 151,503
Y Canada 146,191
N Italy 129,133
English Wikipedia

78. Study I
results
Country Indegree Sum
Num United States 1,366,261
Y United Kingdom 439,582
Den France 189,698
N Germany 151,503
Y Canada 146,191
N Italy 129,133
English Wikipedia

79. Study I
results
USA 1,366,261
SFR(W English ) = = = 7.2
France 189,698

80. Study I
results
Language Self-focus Ratio
English 7.2
Japanese 6.4
German 6.3
French 4.2
Italian 3.6
Catalan 2.9
Spanish 2.4
Finnish 2.2
Polish 1.7
Norwegian 1.4
Chinese 1.2
Dutch 0.7
Swedish 0.6
Portuguese 0.3

81. Study 1I
methods
sample and statistic
• sample = geographic articles
• statistic = spatial indegree sums

82. Study 1I
methods
sample and statistic
• sample = geographic articles
• statistic = spatial indegree sums

83. Study 1I
methods
sample and statistic
• sample = geographic articles
• statistic = spatial indegree sums
spatial pagerank score sums

85. Study 1I
results
Language Self-focus Ratio
Catalan 2.7
Finnish 1.7
Norwegian 0.5

86. Discussion
hyperlingual approach

87. Discussion
hyperlingual approach
• 15 Wikipedias (22)

88. Discussion
hyperlingual approach
• 15 Wikipedias (22)
• over 8 million articles

89. Discussion
hyperlingual approach
• 15 Wikipedias (22)
• over 8 million articles
• over 270 million links

90. Discussion
hyperlingual approach
• 15 Wikipedias (22)
• over 8 million articles
• over 270 million links
• English less than 1/4 the
data

91. Discussion
hyperlingual approach
• 15 Wikipedias (22)
• over 8 million articles
• over 270 million links
• English less than 1/4 the
data
• it was “easy” with
WikAPIdia software

92. Discussion
hyperlingual approach

93. Discussion
hyperlingual approach
• general benefits

94. Discussion
hyperlingual approach
• general benefits
• similarities → more robust findings

95. Discussion
hyperlingual approach
• general benefits
• similarities → more robust findings
• differences → cultural diversity

96. Discussion
hyperlingual approach
• general benefits
• similarities → more robust findings
• differences → cultural diversity
• mine cultural diversity

97. Discussion
hyperlingual approach
• general benefits
• similarities → more robust findings
• differences → cultural diversity
• mine cultural diversity
• “culturally-aware applications”

98. Discussion
hyperlingual approach
• general benefits
• similarities → more robust findings
• differences → cultural diversity
• mine cultural diversity
• “culturally-aware applications”
• very rarely in literature

99. Discussion
Africa

100. Conclusion
Cliffs Notes
1. self-focus is a systemic bias in Wikipedia
• people reorient world knowledge
around themselves
• many implications for technologies

102. Indegree Sums in the English Wikipedia

103. Conclusion
Cliffs Notes
1. self-focus is a systemic bias in Wikipedia
• people reorient world knowledge
around themselves
• many implications for technologies
2. hyperlingual approach proved very
useful

104. Acknowledgements
Nada Petrović
Colleagues at the Collabolab
NSF #0705901
Microsoft Research
Contact Info
brent@u.northwestern.edu
www.brenthecht.com