User:OrenBochman/WGT/WikiMach test
< User:OrenBochman | WGT
intro
editDerive a psych tests to personalize user engagement experience.
- MACH test
- Risk aversion (Hyperbolic v.s. Exponential Discounting Test)
- Stylometric
- Social/Game Role Compatibility
- Learning style
Original Mach Test
edit- Never tell anyone the real reason you did something unless it is useful to do so.
- The best way to handle people is to tell them what they want to hear.
- One should take action only when sure it is morally right. [note 1]
- Most people are basically good and kind. [note 1]
- It is safest to assume that all people have a vicious streak and it will come out when they are given a chance.
- Honesty is the best policy in all cases. [note 1]
- There is no excuse for lying to someone else. [note 1]
- It is hard to get ahead without cutting corners here and there.
- All in all, it is better to be humble and honest than important and dishonest.[note 1]
- When you ask someone to do something for you, it is best to give the real reasons for wanting it rather than giving reasons that carry more weight. [note 1]
- Most people who get ahead in the world lead clean, moral lives. [note 1]
- Anyone who completely trusts anyone else is asking for trouble.
- The biggest difference between most criminals and other people is that criminals are stupid enough to get caught.
- Most men are brave. [note 1]
- It is wise to flatter important people.
- It is possible to be good in all respects.[note 1]
- Barnum was very wrong when he said that there’s a sucker born every minute.[note 1]
- Generally speaking, men won’t work hard unless they’re forced to do so.
- People suffering from incurable diseases should have the choice of being put painlessly to death.
- Most men forget more easily the death of their father than the loss of their property.
Modified Mach Test
edit- Refomulate the questions in the context of English Wikipedia as a conceptual viahcle for creating the self selection signature test.
- On talk pages it is best to avoid discclosing the real reason you did something unless it is useful to do so.
- In consensus discussions, the best way to handle people is to tell them what they want to hear.
- Community members should take action only when sure it is sanctioned by policy. [note 1]
- Most contributors to Wikimedia projects are basically good and kind. [note 1]
- It is safest to assume that all editors have a vicious streak and it will come out in a content dispute.
- Honesty is the best policy in all cases. [note 1]
- There is no excuse for lying to someone else. [note 1]
- It is hard to get ahead without cutting corners here and there.
- All in all, it is better to have have humble and honest than important and dishonest.[note 1]
- When you ask someone to do something for you, it is best to give the real reasons for wanting it rather than giving reasons that carry more weight. [note 1]
- Most editors who seek promotion to admin in Wikipedia are significant contributors respecting rules and guidleines. [note 1]
- Anyone who completely trusts other editors is asking for trouble.
- The biggest difference between most COI-editors and other people is that COI-editors are stupid enough to get caught.
- Most ediors are bold. [note 1]
- It is wise to flatter adminis, chapter and WMF members.
- It is possible to be good in all respects.[note 1]
- Barnum was very wrong when he said that there’s a sucker born every minute.[note 1]
- Generally speaking, editors won't work hard unless they're coerced to do so.
- People who are incurably disruptive should be painlessly and premenetly banned.
- Most editors forget more easily the retirement of their mentor than the loss of their articles.
A Wiki mach test
editIt looks like using a behavioral signatures to test for this may be more robust and be more subtle to automation than administrating a questionnaire. ideally the test would use self-selection criteria as well as self de-selection criteria to weed in and weed out users. What may be different in the partial test is that some metrics may be stronger than others and a complex formula + correlation might be needed to validate and align the two scales.
- testing Machiavellian tendencies of wikipedians:
- user uses multiple disclosed account for editing
- user uses multiple undisclosed account for editing
- user canvasing
- user has limited posting for an issues he voted on
- mass posting for an issue (spamming)
- user expressed positive/negative sentiment biased (campaigning )
- user expressed neutral sentiment (neutral )
- has sought out people based on view-point (non-partisan)
- has sought out people based on view-point (vote stacking)
- contacted users openly (open)
- contacted users off wiki = (stealth)
- user has been blocked
- user has been unblocked early
- user has been banned
- user has been unbanned early
- user has a fun club
- user has changed username more than once
- user has a semi protected user page
- user has a semi protected talk page
- has been subject of check user
- has edited controversial topics
- has contributed to good articles
- forum shopping
- arbitration
- won an arbitration
- lost an arbitration
- commended by arbitration
- nomination
- flags collection
- admin
- beaurowcrat
- check user
- oversight
- steward
- policy discussion
- initiated
- succeeded
- user's edits deleted
- reverted/rollback edits
- reverted/rollback edits non spam (30%+ of content eventual introduced)
- reversing vote in debates.
notes
editreferences
edit