- What skills, attributes, or connections enable participants to become empowered members of the Wikimedia communities? How are those skills, attributes, or connections obtained and enacted?
- What patterns of individual behavior do Wikimedia project contributors follow? What do these patterns suggest about how software might better support effective collaboration between people?
- Why do editors embrace particular social roles and join particular networks within communities? What relationships do these roles have to their motivations or psychological characteristics?
- How do gender, geography, and other characteristics of editors influence Wikimedia contribution?
Group Dynamics and Organization in Wikipedia and related projects
- Why do particular modes of organization and collective behavior support more inclusive or effective collaborative participation in Wikimedia projects?
- What collective dynamics contribute to abusive patterns of participation (e.g., trolling and vandalism) and how can these be better harnessed or avoided in order to advance Wikimedia community goals?
- How do different Wikipedias, Wikiprojects, and/or WIkimedia projects compare in terms of their organization, norms, and governance?
Readership/Engagement on Wikipedia and related projects
- What do people read on Wikipedia or view or consume on other projects? Is it possible to connect topics to news or events? Have readers’ interests changed over time?
- Is it possible to determine a typical evolutionary path from reading (passive participation) to contributing (active participation)? If yes, what kind of software tools can support this transition process?
- Does the engagement of people differ between countries? Between mobile and other site visitors? What role do local outreach activities play?
Technical Infrastructure and Design in Wikimedia projects
- How are Wikimedia projects shaped by MediaWiki’s technical infrastructure? How might the infrastructure be changed to improve article quality, the engagement of editors, or other outcomes?
- To what extent is the development path of MediaWiki influenced by Wikimedia projects’ communities? For example, to what extent does Wikipedia’s editor community limit development? What design and development practices can facilitate Wikimedia Foundation and community support?
- What effects do new MediaWiki features have on system usability, performance, and participant experiences?
Evaluating Content of Wikimedia projects
- Who writes for Wikipedia or contributes to other Wikimedia projects and how has qualities of contributors affected quality and coverage?
- How can we measure the evolution of Wikipedia, for example, in quality and quantity of content, engagement of editors, or sustainability of the project?
- Is Wikipedia still a growing project? In which topical areas do editors still add content and how has this changed over time?
Knowledge Diffusion, Outreach, and Generalization
- What are the interactions between Wikimedia project and the production and diffusion of new research by the academic or business world?
- As galleries, libraries, archives and museums hire Wikipedians-in-residence, what is the effect of these outreach initiatives involving the growing institutionalization of Wikipedia activities?
- How can findings from research on Wikipedia and Wikimedia generalize to other online communities, organizations, movements, or sociotechnical systems?
Paper Presentation: OpenSym 2017 will be organized as a one track conference in order to emphasize the interdisciplinary character of this conference and to encourage discussion.
Submission Deadline: The research paper submission deadline is April 7th 2017.. Submitted papers should present integrative reviews or original reports of substantive new work: theoretical, empirical, and/or in the design, development and/or deployment of novel concepts, systems, and mechanisms. Research papers will be reviewed to meet rigorous academic standards of publication. Papers will be reviewed for relevance, conceptual quality, innovation and clarity of presentation.
Paper Length: There is no minimum or maximum length for submitted papers. Rather, reviewers will be instructed to weigh the contribution of a paper relative to its length. Papers should report research thoroughly but succinctly: brevity is a virtue. A typical length of a “long research paper” is 10 pages (formerly the maximum length limit and the limit on OpenSym tracks), but may be shorter if the contribution can be described and supported in fewer pages—shorter, more focused papers (called “short research papers” previously) are encouraged and will be reviewed like any other paper. While we will review papers longer than 10 pages, the contribution must warrant the extra length. Reviewers will be instructed to reject papers whose length is incommensurate with the size of their contribution. Papers should be formatted in ACM SIGCHI paper format. Reviewing is not double-blind so manuscripts do not need to be anonymized.
Posters: As in previous years, OpenSym will also be hosting a poster session at the conference. To propose a poster, authors should submit an extended abstract (not more than 4 pages) describing the content of the poster which will be published in a non-archival companion proceedings to the conference. Posters should use the ACM SIGCHI templates for extended abstracts. An example of a poster abstract can be found here. Reviewing is not double-blind so abstracts do not need to be anonymized.
Paper Proceedings: OpenSym is held in-cooperation with ACM SIGWEB and ACM SIGSOFT and the conference proceedings will be archived in the ACM digital library like all prior editions. OpenSym seeks to accommodate the needs of the different research disciplines it draws on including disciplines with archival conference proceedings and disciplines where authors usually present at conferences and publish later. Authors, whose submitted papers have been accepted for presentation at the conference have a choice of:
- having their paper become part of the official proceedings, archived in the ACM Digital Library,
- having no publication record at all but only the presentation at the conference.
Response from authors: For the first time at OpenSym, authors will be given the opportunity to write a response to their reviews before final decisions are made. This should be treated as an opportunity to correct any mistakes or misconceptions in the reviews as well as to propose minor changes that the authors can make during the two weeks between notification and the camera-ready deadline.
- Submission deadline: April 07, 2017
- Reviews sent to authors: June 02, 2017
- Response to reviews from authors due: June 30, 2017
- Decision notification: July 07, 2017
- Camera-ready papers due: July 21, 2017