Wikipedia Searches Reveal Differing Styles of Curiosity (scientificamerican.com) 16
Wikipedia's massive dataset helped researchers identify three styles of curiosity -- "busybody," "hunter," and "dancer" -- based on how users navigate its pages (see: wiki rabbit hole). These curiosity styles reflect broader social trends and highlight curiosity's role in connecting information rather than merely acquiring it. Scientific American reports: In this lexicon, a busybody traces a zigzagging route through many often distantly related topics. A hunter, in contrast, searches with sustained focus, moving among a relatively small number of closely related articles. A dancer links together highly disparate topics to try to synthesize new ideas. "Curiosity actually works by connecting pieces of information, not just acquiring them," says University of Pennsylvania network scientist Dani Bassett, cosenior author on a recent study of these curiosity types in Science Advances. "It's not as if we go through the world and pick up a piece of information and put it in our pockets like a stone. Instead we gather information and connect it to stuff that we already know."
The team tracked more than 482,000 people using Wikipedia's mobile app in 50 countries or territories and 14 languages. The researchers charted these users' paths using "knowledge networks" of connected information, which depict how closely one search topic (a node in the network) is related to another. Beyond just mapping the connections, they linked curiosity styles to location-based indicators of well-being, inequality, and other measures. In countries with higher education levels and greater gender equality, people browsed more like busybodies. In countries with lower scores on these variables, people browsed like hunters. Bassett hypothesizes that "in countries that have more structures of oppression or patriarchal forces, there may be a constraining of knowledge production that pushes people more toward this hyperfocus." The researchers also analyzed topics of interest, ranging from physics to visual arts, for busybodies compared with hunters (graphic). Dancer patterns, more recently confirmed, were excluded. Editor note: This article was published on December 24, 2024, based on a study published in October, 2024.
The team tracked more than 482,000 people using Wikipedia's mobile app in 50 countries or territories and 14 languages. The researchers charted these users' paths using "knowledge networks" of connected information, which depict how closely one search topic (a node in the network) is related to another. Beyond just mapping the connections, they linked curiosity styles to location-based indicators of well-being, inequality, and other measures. In countries with higher education levels and greater gender equality, people browsed more like busybodies. In countries with lower scores on these variables, people browsed like hunters. Bassett hypothesizes that "in countries that have more structures of oppression or patriarchal forces, there may be a constraining of knowledge production that pushes people more toward this hyperfocus." The researchers also analyzed topics of interest, ranging from physics to visual arts, for busybodies compared with hunters (graphic). Dancer patterns, more recently confirmed, were excluded. Editor note: This article was published on December 24, 2024, based on a study published in October, 2024.
So, Wikipedia tracks its users (Score:2, Interesting)
I for one would be more interested in what other data is being collected, how it is being stored, who has access to it, and so on, more than this nonsense about "hunters" and "dancers".
Re:So, Wikipedia tracks its users (Score:5, Insightful)
The information collected is what you enter into the app and your interactions with it.
But don't get your panties in a twist. It is opt-in.
Re: (Score:2)
The information collected is what you enter into the app and your interactions with it.
Exactly same thing can be said about, you know, every privacy-raping app in existence. Windows also sends to mothership "oh, only whatever you type into the OS, and all your interactions with it"
But don't get your panties in a twist. It is opt-in.
Okay, at least there's that. That also makes the cited results completely worthless due to the epic selection bias, but whatever.
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly same thing can be said about, you know, every privacy-raping app in existence.
Privacy-raping app: sells info to advertising networks and inject ads.
Wikipedia: does not sell data nor injects ads; makes stats on what users typed or links they followed, then publishes research.
That also makes the cited results completely worthless due to the epic selection bias, but whatever.
This is how scientific research is done. People have to volunteer their data or biological samples. They can include or exclude certain uses or re-uses; they have to read and sign paperwork. Some don't want, some cannot consent (unconscious, dementia, minors of age -- asking consent to family members is more delic
Re: (Score:2)
The information collected is what you enter into the app and your interactions with it.
Exactly same thing can be said about, you know, every privacy-raping app in existence. Windows also sends to mothership "oh, only whatever you type into the OS, and all your interactions with it"
But don't get your panties in a twist. It is opt-in.
Okay, at least there's that. That also makes the cited results completely worthless due to the epic selection bias, but whatever.
Your "epic selection bias" claim shows a fundamental misunderstanding of the research, and I'm being diplomatic. The study didn’t rely on a biased, self-selected group—Wikipedia’s mobile app is used globally by millions, and the dataset spans 482,000 users across 50 countries and 14 languages. That’s not some cherry-picked sample; it’s one of the largest and most diverse datasets ever analyzed for curiosity research. If you’re going to throw around terms like "selection b
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
I for one would be more interested in what other data is being collected, how it is being stored, who has access to it, and so on, more than this nonsense about "hunters" and "dancers".
busybody detected.
Re: (Score:2)
they're really tracking browsers or accounts, not people since they have no way to tell if it's just an individual's or a groups computer
Re: (Score:2)
"The team tracked more than 482,000 people using Wikipedia's mobile app in 50 countries or territories and 14 languages."
I for one would be more interested in what other data is being collected, how it is being stored, who has access to it, and so on, more than this nonsense about "hunters" and "dancers".
The study used anonymized data from Wikipedia's mobile app to analyze browsing patterns, not to "track" individuals as you imply. Unlike the invasive surveillance practices of many platforms, Wikipedia operates under one of the most transparent and privacy-conscious frameworks in tech. Maybe read their privacy policy before making baseless insinuations. As for dismissing the study as "nonsense," it’s a fascinating investigation into how humans seek knowledge—a topic with far more intellectual m
These are not different "people" , but "modes" (Score:5, Interesting)
I recognize myself doing all three styles of navigation depending on topic, intention and time available.
I wonder if they have crunched all their data into a single style for each user without differentiating how the same person behaves differently among distinct sessions.
Re: (Score:2)
"I recognize myself doing all three styles of navigation depending on topic, intention and time available."
No mod points today, so me too will have to do. Skipping through English history is not the same as which isotopes when irradiated in a nuclear reactor's pressure vessel.
Re: (Score:2)
I recognize myself doing all three styles of navigation depending on topic, intention and time available.
I wonder if they have crunched all their data into a single style for each user without differentiating how the same person behaves differently among distinct sessions.
I know enough graph theory to understand how they are modeling curiosity, and like you, I have spent enough time on wikipedia in all the modes they describe to really connect with the ideas in this paper. You make a great point that people likely use different modes of curiosity depending on context, and the paper actually touches on this. While it identifies distinct curiosity styles (hunter, busybody, dancer) based on knowledge network structures, it doesn’t assume these are rigid personality traits
I am the hunter (Score:2)
Like yesterday i was listening to John Fogerty so i looked him up and read about him, then read about his brother and their band Creedence Clearwater Revival
Re: (Score:2)