The Wikipedia Gender Gap Revisited: Characterizing Survey Response Bias with Propensity Score Estimation

PLoS ONE

Volumn 8, Issue 6, 2013, Pages

  Hill, Benjamin Mako ^a,c   Shaw, Aaron ^b,c  

^a MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

^b NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c HARVARD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; DATA ANALYSIS; EDITOR; FEMALE; GENDER; HEALTH SURVEY; HUMAN; INTERNET; MALE; NONRESPONSE BIAS; ONLINE SYSTEM; PROPENSITY SCORE; READING; RESPONSE BIAS; SYSTEMATIC ERROR; UNITED STATES; DEMOGRAPHY; QUESTIONNAIRE; SEX DIFFERENCE; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA;

DEMOGRAPHY; FEMALE; HUMANS; INTERNET; MALE; PROPENSITY SCORE; SEX FACTORS; SURVEYS AND QUESTIONNAIRES;

EID: 84879472758     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19326203     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0065782     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Benkler Y (2006) The Wealth of Networks: How Social Production Transforms Markets and Freedom. Yale University Press.
2. Dillman DA, Smyth JD, Christian LM (2009) Internet, mail, and mixed-mode surveys: the tailored design method. Hoboken, N.J.: Wiley & Sons, 3rd edition.
3. Glott R, Ghosh R, Schmidt P (2010) Wikipedia survey. Technical report, UNU-MERIT, Maastricht, Netherlands. Available: http://wikipediasurvey.org/. Accessed 2011 April 4.
4. Cohen N, (2011) Wikipedia ponders its gender-skewed contributions. The New York Times.
5. Wikimedia Foundation (2011) Editor survey 2011. Technical report, San Francisco, CA. Available: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Editor_Survey_2011. Accessed 2012 Dec 4.
6. ComScore (2008). My matrix: Wikimedia foundation sites. Available: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/meta/b/ba/ComScore_trend_data_on_WMF_Sites,_as_of_Nov_08.pdf. Accessed 2013 May 7.
7. Chang L, Krosnick JA, (2009) National surveys via rdd telephone interviewing versus the internet comparing sample representativeness and response quality. Public Opinion Quarterly 73: 641-678.
8. Fox S, Jones S (2008) The social life of health information. Technical report, Pew Internet & American Life Project. Available: http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2009/8-The-Social-Life-of-Health-Information.aspx. Accessed 2011 April 4.
9. Valliant R, Dever JA, (2011) Estimating propensity adjustments for volunteer web surveys. Sociological Methods & Research 40: 105-137.
10. Schonlau M, Soest Av, Kapteyn A, Couper M, (2009) Selection bias in web surveys and the use of propensity scores. Sociological Methods & Research 37: 291-318.
11. Rosenbaum PR, Rubin DB, (1983) The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika 70: 41-55.
12. Pew Research Center (2008). December 2008- health. Available: http://www.pewinternet.org/Shared-Content/Data-Sets/2008/December-2008-Health.aspx. Accessed 2012 May 7.
13. Princeton Survey Research Associates International (2008). Fall tracking 2008 questionnaire. Available: http://www.pewinternet.org/~/media/Files/Data%20Sets/2008/December_2008_Health_Questionnaire.doc. Accessed 2013 March 31.
14. Schonlau M, Zapert K, Simon LP, Sanstad KH, Marcus SM, et al. (2004) A comparison between responses from a propensity-weighted web survey and an identical RDD survey. Social Science Computer Review 22: 128-138.
15. Lee S, Valliant R, (2009) Estimation for volunteer panel web surveys using propensity score adjustment and calibration adjustment. Sociological Methods & Research 37: 319-343.
16. US Census Bureau (2010) Statistical abstract of the united states. Technical report, Washington, DC. Available: http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2010/2010edition.html. Accessed 2012 Dec 4.
17. Hargittai E, Walejko G, (2008) The participation divide: Content creation and sharing in the digital age. Information, Communication and Society 11: 239-256.
18. Collier B, Bear J (2012) Conflict, criticism, or confidence: an empirical examination of the gender gap in wikipedia contributions. In: Proceedings of the ACM 2012 conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work. New York, NY, USA: ACM, CSCW '12, pp. 383-392. doi: 10.1145/2145204.2145265.
19. Morgan JT, Bouterse S, Walls H, Stierch S (2013) Tea and sympathy: crafting positive new user experiences on wikipedia. In: Proceedings of the 2013 conference on Computer supported cooperative work. New York, NY, USA: ACM, CSCW '13, p. 839-848. doi:10.1145/2441776. 2441871.
20. Busch T, (1995) Gender differences in self-efficacy and attitudes toward computers. Journal of Educational Computing Research 12: 147-158.
21. Lundeberg MA, Fox PW, Punccohar J, (1994) Highly confident but wrong: Gender differences and similarities in confidence judgments. Journal of Educational Psychology 86: 114-121.
22. Schumacher P, Morahan-Martin J, (2001) Gender, internet and computer attitudes and experiences. Computers in Human Behavior 17: 95-110.