Given Wikipedia’s breadth of coverage, social impact, and longevity as an impactful open knowledge resource, the encyclopedia has been the subject of considerable interdisciplinary research. Building on scholarship related to collaboration, authorship, ownership, and editing in Wikipedia, this study sought to better understand Wikipedians as writers, paying specific attention to their sense of ownership. While previous research has shown that editors engage in individualist editing practices at times, often ignoring community-mediated policy regarding ownership, findings from a mixed-method survey of 117 editors demonstrate the existence of both “individual” and “community” notions of ownership that often reinforce, or mutually inform, each other. This study adds clarity to these issues by demonstrating how feelings of individual ownership, voice, and pride in writing often occur in collaborative circumstances. This research ultimately extends our understanding of collaborative writing in what is one of the most well-known collaborative websites. Despite contemporary theoretical strides advocating for relinquishing ownership concepts in favor of distributed or ecological frameworks, the concept of ownership remains prevalent within digital writing communities, exemplified by Wikipedia.
BenklerY.ShawA.HillB. M. (2015). Peer production: A form of collective intelligence. In MaloneT.BernsteinM. (Eds.), Handbook of collective intelligence (pp. 175-204). MIT Press.
CreswellJ. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage.
7.
CummingsR. E. (2009). Lazy virtues: Teaching writing in the age of Wikipedia. Vanderbilt University Press.
8.
DerridaJ.LawlorL. (2011). Voice and phenomenon: Introduction to the problem of the sign in Husserl’s phenomenology. Northwestern University Press.
9.
Di LauroF.JohinkeR. (2017). Employing Wikipedia for good not evil: Innovative approaches to collaborative writing assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 42(3), 478-491. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2015.1127322
10.
DriscollD. L.JinD. (2018). The box under the bed: How learner epistemologies shape writing transfer. Across the Disciplines, 15(4), 1-20. https://doi.org/10.37514/ATD-J.2018.15.4.19
11.
Evenstein SigalovS.NachmiasR. (2017). Wikipedia as a platform for impactful learning: A new course model in higher education. Education and Information Technologies, 22(6), 2959-2979. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-016-9564-z
HalfakerA.KitturA.KrautR. E.RiedlJ. (2009). A jury of your peers: Quality, experience and ownership in Wikipedia [Conference session]. WikiSym ’09: Proceedings of the 5th International Symposium on Wikis and Open Collaboration, Orlando, FL (Article 15). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/1641309.1641332
14.
HalfakerA.KitturA.RiedlJ. (2011). Don’t bite the newbies: How reverts affect the quantity and quality of Wikipedia work [Conference session]. WikiSym ’11: Proceedings of the 7th International Symposium on Wikis and Open Collaboration, Mountain View, CA (pp. 163-172). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/2038558.2038585
JiangJ.VetterM. A. (2019). The good, the bot, and the ugly: Problematic information and critical media literacy in the postdigital era. Postdigital Science and Education, 2(1), 78-94. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42438-019-00069-4
18.
JonesJ. (2008). Patterns of revision in online writing: A study of Wikipedia’s featured articles. Written Communication, 25(2), 262-289. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088307312940
19.
KennedyK. (2010). Textual machinery: Authorial agency and bot-written texts in Wikipedia. In SmithM.WarnickB. (Eds.), The responsibilities of rhetoric (pp. 303-309). Waveland Press.
20.
KennedyK. (2016). Textual curation: Authorship, agency, and technology in Wikipedia and Chambers’s Cyclopædia. The University of South Carolina Press.
KripleanT.BeschastnikhI.McDonaldD. W.GolderS. A. (2007). Community, consensus, coercion, control: Cs*w or how policy mediates mass participation [Conference session]. GROUP ’07: Proceedings of the 2007 International ACM Conference on Supporting Group Work, Sanibel Island, FL (pp. 167-177). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/1316624.1316648
23.
LaniadoD.TassoR. (2011). Co-authorship 2.0: Patterns of collaboration in Wikipedia [Conference session]. Proceedings of the 22nd ACM Conference on Hypertext and Hypermedia Eindhoven, The Netherlands (pp. 201-210). https://doi.org/10.1145/1995966.1995994
24.
LarsonB. N. (2016). Gender/genre: The lack of gendered register in texts requiring genre knowledge. Written Communication, 33(4), 360-384. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088316667927
25.
LeufB.CunninghamW. (2001). The wiki way: Quick collaboration on the web. Addison-Wesley.
26.
LiA.YaoZ.YangD.KulkarniC.FarzanR.KrautR. E. (2020). Successful online socialization: Lessons from the Wikipedia Education program [Conference session]. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 4(CSCW1), New York, NY, USA (pp. 1-24). https://doi.org/10.1145/3392857
27.
MaguireM.DelahuntB. (2017). Doing a thematic analysis: A practical, step-by-step guide for learning and teaching scholars. All Ireland Journal of Higher Education, 9(3), 3351.
McDowellZ. J.VetterM. A. (2022b). Wikipedia as open educational practice: Experiential learning, critical information literacy, and social justice. Social Media + Society, 8(1), 205630512210782. https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051221078224
30.
MenkingA.EricksonI.PrattW. (2019). People who can take it: How women Wikipedians negotiate and navigate safety [Conference session]. Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Glasgow (pp. 1-14). https://doi.org/10.1145/3290605.3300702
31.
MorganG. A.LeechN. L.GloecknerG. W.BarrettK. C. (2013). IBM SPSS for introductory statistics: Use and interpretation (5th ed.). Taylor & Francis.
32.
PancieraK.HalfakerA.TerveenL. (2009). Wikipedians are born, not made: A study of power editors on Wikipedia [Conference session]. GROUP ’09: Proceedings of the ACM 2009 International Conference on Supporting Group Work, Sanibel Island, FL (pp. 51-60). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/1531674.1531682
33.
PentzoldC. (2011). Imagining the Wikipedia community: What do Wikipedia authors mean when they write about their ‘community’?New Media & Society, 13(5), 704-721. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444810378364
34.
PurdyJ. P. (2009). When the tenets of composition go public: A study of writing in Wikipedia. College Composition and Communication, 61(2), 351-71. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ868267
35.
RayA.GraeffE. (2008). Reviewing the author function in the age of Wikipedia. In VicinusM.EisnerC. (Eds.), Originality, imitation, and plagiarism: Teaching writing in the digital age (pp. 39-47). University of Michigan Press.
36.
ReagleJ. M. (2010). Good faith collaboration: The culture of Wikipedia. MIT Press.
37.
ReymanJ. (2011). The role of authorship in the practice and teaching of technical communication. In RifeM. C.SlatteryS.DeVossD. N. (Eds.), Copy(write): Intellectual property in the writing classroom (pp. 347-367). The WAC Clearinghouse; Parlor Press. https://doi.org/10.37514/PER-B.2011.2355.2.19
38.
SimoneD. (2014). Copyright or copyleft? Wikipedia as a turning point for authorship. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2330766
39.
SpigelmanC. (2000). Across property lines: Textual ownership in writing groups. Southern Illinois University Press.
40.
Thom-SantelliJ.CosleyD. R.GayG. (2009). What’s mine is mine: Territoriality in collaborative authoring [Conference session]. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Boston, MA (pp. 1481-1484). https://doi.org/10.1145/1518701.1518925
VetterM. A. (2014). Archive 2.0: What composition students and academic libraries can gain from digital-collaborative pedagogies. Composition Studies, 42(1), 35-53. https://www.jstor.org/stable/compstud.42.1.003
43.
VetterM. A. (2020). Possible enlightenments: Wikipedia’s encyclopedic promise and epistemological failure. In ReagleJ.KoernerJ. (Eds.), Wikipedia @ 20 (pp. 285-296). The MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/12366.003.0024
44.
VetterM. A.McDowellZ. J.StewartM. (2019). From opportunities to outcomes: The Wikipedia-based writing assignment. Computers and Composition, 52, 53-64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2019.01.008
