Observations from Jana Gallus videos

What motivates fruitful human coordination, and what makes it meaningful?

Example: ways to retain Wikipedia contributors over time? → Active editors has declined over time, especially among newcomers

Examine whether non-monetary awards provide a social recognition that increases over time
Randomize who gets award. No career benefits. Control is unaware, so no potential demotivation of people who do not get awards. Award 150 people each month.
—> Awards increase retention by 20%. Recognition drives increase in engagement. Effects persist for a year; increase willingness to do behind-the-scenes, tedious work
⇒ Even purely symbolic awards motivate people

Example: do gender gaps persist in virtual communities (Wikipedia), and do they persist as you go up the hierarchy (admin)

Wikipedia editors who reveal gender are disproportionally male — 92% vs. 8%. (Will control for this.)
Generally, women show higher valence (positive commentary) and less likelihood to engage in controversial topics
However, gender gaps disappear with power — female admins are just as negative and likely to engage in controversial articles as males

Could be selection bias? Yes, though we see evidence of “treatment effect” of position of authority

⇒ Gender differences are not as fixed as previously thought; authority positions do affect behavior

Does self-stereotyping cause a gender gap in knowledge contributions?
Can recognition be designed to close the gender gap?
Yes, women are less likely to speak up, even when they have the right answer.
Lab study - teams answering math questions, using verbal as control
Women are more sensitive to contextual factors - publicity and seeing faces, e.g.
Award recipients are much more likely to speak up — recognition works

In particular — face to face removes the gender gap; other recognitions have impact but don’t actually close gender gap.
Does this yield an increased sense of freedom or put a burden on the person (to be deserving of the award?)