Research Faux Pas: The Stigma of Wikipedia

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

Related collections

Most cited references 4

Record: found
Abstract: not found
Article: not found

Internet encyclopaedias go head to head.

Jim Giles (2005)

0 comments Cited 282 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: not found
Article: not found

Wikipedia as a Data Source for Political Scientists: Accuracy and Completeness of Coverage

Adam Brown (2011)

0 comments Cited 31 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Wikipedia as an evidence source for nursing and healthcare students

Carol Haigh (2011)

Where students once were confined to the University library, they are now at liberty to wander through cyber-space at will. There is evidence to suggest that student have been very quick to exploit the opportunities that the Internet can offer them. Students frequently cited search engines such as Google and Web 2.0 information sharing sites such as Wikipedia as the first places they look when seeking information for an assignment. Although a number of disciplines have accepted that Wikipedia can be viewed as an accurate and legitimate evidence source nurse educators tend to view Wikipedia with a degree of suspicion. The purpose of this paper is to carry out an exploratory study of health and health related content on a sample of Wikipedia site with the overall intention of assessing the quality of their source and supporting information. A 10% sample of health related Wikipedia entries were evaluated, with a total of 2598 references assessed. In total 1473 (56%) of the references citied on the Wikipedia pages reviewed could be argued to come from clearly identifiable reputable sources. This translates to a mean number of reputable sources of M=29 per Wikipedia entry. The quality of the evidence taken obtained from the 2500 plus references from over 50 Wikipedia pages was of sufficiently sound quality to suggest that, for health related entries, Wikipedia is appropriate for use by nursing students. Copyright © 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

0 comments Cited 25 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

All references

Author and article information

Journal

Title: Behavioral & Social Sciences Librarian

Abbreviated Title: Behavioral & Social Sciences Librarian

Publisher: Informa UK Limited

ISSN (Print): 0163-9269

ISSN (Electronic): 1544-4546

Publication date Created: August 28 2015

Publication date (Print): August 28 2015

Volume: 34

Issue: 3

Pages: 165-169

Article

DOI: 10.1080/01639269.2015.1062587

SO-VID: a25f337a-c8ed-4b5f-9838-7622f3ac31ac

History

Data availability:

Research Faux Pas: The Stigma of Wikipedia

Read this article at

Abstract

Related collections

Wikipedia Quality

Most cited references 4

Internet encyclopaedias go head to head.

Wikipedia as a Data Source for Political Scientists: Accuracy and Completeness of Coverage

Wikipedia as an evidence source for nursing and healthcare students

Author and article information

Journal

Article

History

Comments

Comment on this article

Similar content 2,170

Cited by 1

Most referenced authors 55