Service Business

, Volume 7, Issue 4, pp 687–711 | Cite as

Determinants of collective intelligence quality: comparison between Wiki and Q&A services in English and Korean users

  • Jaehun Joo
  • Ismatilla Normatov
Empirical Article


Although web-enabled collective intelligence (CI) plays a critical role in organizational innovation and collaboration, the dubious quality of CI is still a substantial problem faced by many CI services. Thus, it is important to identify determinants of CI quality and to analyze the relationship between CI quality and its usefulness. One of the most successful services of web-enabled CI is Wikipedia accessible all over the world. Another type of CI service is Naver KnowledgeiN, a typical and popular CI site offering question and answer (Q&A) services in Korea. Wikipedia is a multilingual and web-based encyclopedia. Thus, it is necessary to study the influence relationships among CI quality, its determinants, and CI usefulness according to different CI type and languages. In this paper, we propose a new research model reflecting multi-dimensional factors related to CI quality from user’s perspective. To test a total of 15 hypotheses drawn from the research model, a total of 691 responses were collected from Wikipedia and KnowledgeiN users in South Korea and US. Expertise of contributors, community size, and diversity of contributors were identified as determinants of perceived CI quality. Perceived CI quality has significantly influenced on perceived CI usefulness from user’s perspective. CI type and different language partially play a role of moderators. The expertise of contributors plays a more important role in CI quality in the case of Q&A services such as KnowledgeiN compared to Wiki services such as Wikipedia. This implies that Q&A service requires more expertise and experiences in particular areas rather than the case of Wiki service to improve service quality. The relationship between community size and perceived CI quality was different according to CI type. The community size has a greater effect on CI quality in case of Wiki service than that of Q&A service. The number of contributors in Wikipedia is important because Wiki is an encyclopedia service which is edited and revised repeatedly from many contributors while the answer given in Naver KnowledgeiN cannot be edited by others. Finally, CI quality has a greater effect on its usefulness in case of Wiki service rather than Q&A service. In this paper, we suggested implications for practitioners and theorists.


Collective intelligence Collective intelligence quality Wiki service Q&A service Wikipedia 


  1. Alag S (2009) Collective intelligence in action. Manning Publication Co, GreenwichGoogle Scholar
  2. Anthony D, Smith SW, Williamson T (2005) Explaining quality in internet collective goods: Zealots and good samaritans the case of Wikipedia. Retrieved from
  3. Arazy O, Nov O, Patterson R, Yeo L (2011) Information quality in Wikipedia: the effects of group composition and task conflict. J Manag Inf Syst 27(4):71–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Black EW (2008) Wikipedia and academic peer review? Wikipedia as a recognized medium for scholarly publication? Online Inf Rev 32(1):73–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Boder A (2006) Collective intelligence: a keystone in knowledge management. J Knowl Manag 10(1):81–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bonabeau E (2009) Decisions 2.0: the power of collective intelligence. Sloan Manag Rev 50(2):45–52Google Scholar
  7. Bonaccorsi A, Rossi C (2004) Altruistic individuals, selfish firms? The structure of motivation in open source software. Retrieved from
  8. Brabham DC (2008) Crowdsourcing as a model for problem solving: an introduction and cases. Convergence 14(1):75–90Google Scholar
  9. Brabham DC (2010) Moving the crowd at Threadless. Inf Commun Soc 13(8):1122–1145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bray D, Laubavher R, Malone T (2008) Collective intelligence: promoting diversity, crowd performance algorithms, and better decision outcomes. MIT Sloan School of Management. Retrieved from
  11. Callahan ES, Herring SC (2011) Cultural bias in Wikipedia content on famous persons. J Am Soc Inf Sci 62(10):1899–1915CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Chesney T (2006) An empirical examination of Wikipedia’s credibility. First Monday 11(11)Google Scholar
  13. Chin WW (2000) Frequently asked questions—partial least squares & PLS-Graph. Retrieved from
  14. Convertino G, Grasso A, DiMicco J, De Michelis G, Chi EH (2010) Collective intelligence in organizations: toward a research agenda. In: Proceedings of the 2010 ACM conference on computer supported cooperative, vol 6, No. 10, pp 613–614Google Scholar
  15. Danielson DR (2005) Web credibility. In: Ghaoui C (ed) Encyclopedia of human–computer interaction. Idea Group, Hershey, pp 713–721CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Denning P, Horning J, Parnas D, Weinstein L (2005) Wikipedia risks. Commun ACM 48(12):152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Doan A, Ramakrishnan R, Halevy A (2011) Crowdsourcing systems on the World-Wide Web. Commun ACM 54(4):86–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fallis D (2008) Toward an epistemology of Wikipedia. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol 59(10):1662–1674CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Fornell C, Larcker DF (1981) Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. J Mark Res 18(1):39–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Furtado V, Ayres L, Oliveira M, Vasconcelos E, Caminha C, D’Orleans J, Belchior M (2010) Collective intelligence in law enforcement—the WikiCrimes system. Inf Sci 180:4–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gholami B, Safavi R (2010) Harnessing collective intelligence: Wiki and social network from end-user perspective. In: Proceedings of International Conference on e-Education, e-Business, e-Management and e-Learning, pp 242–246Google Scholar
  22. Giles J (2005) Internet encyclopedias go head to head nature. Nature 438:900–901CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Gong W, Zhang GL, Stump RL (2007) Global internet use and access: cultural considerations. Asia Pacific J Mark Logist 19(1):57–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gronlund J, Sjodin DR, Frishammar J (2010) Open innovation and the stage-gate process: a revised model for new product development. Calif Manag Rev 52(3):106–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Gruber TR (2008) Collective knowledge systems: where the social web meets the Semantic Web. Web Semant 6(1):4–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hair JF, Black WC, Babin BJ, Anderson RE (2010) Multivariate data analysis, 7th edn. Pearson Education, Upper Saddle RiverGoogle Scholar
  27. Hara N, Shachaf P, Hew K (2010) Cross cultural analysis of the Wikipedia community. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol 61(10):2097–2108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hars A, Ou S (2002) Working for free? Motivations for participating in open source projects. Int J Electron Commerce 6:25–39Google Scholar
  29. Hong L, Page S (2004) Groups of diverse problem solvers can outperform groups of high-ability problem solvers. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 101(46):16385–16389CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Howe J (2006) Unadulterated (and scalable) crowdsourcing, crowdsourcing: tracking the rise of the amateur. Retrieved from Scholar
  31. Howe J (2008) Crowdsourcing: why the power of the crowd is driving the future of business. Crown Business, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  32. Hu M, Lim EP, Sun A, Lauw HW, Vuong BQ (2007) Measuring article quality in Wikipedia: models and evaluation. In: Proceedings of CIKM, pp 243-252Google Scholar
  33. Javanmardi S, Ganjisaffar Y, Lopes C, Baldi P (2009) User contribution and trust in Wikipedia. In: Proceedings of collaborative computing: networking. applications and worksharing conference, pp 1–6Google Scholar
  34. Juho S (2009) Applying collective intelligence to idea evaluation at the front end of innovation. Retrieved from
  35. Kuznetsov S (2006) Motivations of contributors to Wikipedia. ACM SIGCAS Comput Soc 36(2):1–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Lane S (2010) Collective intelligence for competitive advantage: crowdsourcing and open innovation. Retrieved from
  37. Lee Y, Strong D, Kahn B, Wang R (2002) AIMQ: a methodology for information quality assessment. Inf Manag 40:133–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Lee SM, Kim T, Noh Y, Lee B (2010) Success factors of platform leadership in Web 2.0 service business. Serv Bus 4:89–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Leimeister JM (2010) Collective intelligence. Bus Inf Syst Eng 2(4):245–248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Lih A (2004) Wikipedia as participatory journalism: reliable sources? Metrics for evaluating collaborative media as a news resource. In: Proceedings of 5th International Symposium on Online Journalism. Retrieved from
  41. Luyt B, Tan D (2010) Improving Wikipedia’s credibility: references and citations in a sample of history articles. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol 61(4):715–722Google Scholar
  42. Lykourentzou I, Papadaki K, Vergados DJ, Polemi D, Loumos V (2010) CorpWiki: a self-regulating Wiki to promote corporate collective intelligence through expert peer matching. Inf Sci 180(1):18–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Maio P (2009) Making sense of collective intelligence. Retrieved from
  44. Malone TW, Laubacher R, Dellarocas C (2010) The collective intelligence genome. Sloan Manag Rev 51(3):21–32Google Scholar
  45. Nam K, Ackerman MS, Adamic LA (2009) Question in knowledge IN? A study of Naver’s question answering community. In: Proceedings of the 27th International Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, ACM, New York, pp 779–788Google Scholar
  46. Narasimhan E, Banerjee U, Nanda H (2007) Applying collective intelligence to knowledge management. In: Proceeding of the 2nd International Conference on Informatics, Selangor, Malaysia, pp 7–13Google Scholar
  47. Nicolaou AI, McKnight DH (2006) Perceived information quality in data exchanges: effects on risk, trust, expected performance and intention to use. Inf Syst Res 17(4):332–351CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Normatov IR, Joo JH (2011) A study on quality factors of web enabled collective intelligence as a donor for business success. Inf Syst 20(3):209–235Google Scholar
  49. Noubel F (2007) Collective intelligence, the invisible revolution. Retrieved from
  50. Nunnally JC, Bernstein IH (1994) Psychometric theory, 3rd edn. McGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  51. Page S (2007) The difference: how the power of diversity creates better groups, firms, schools, and societies. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  52. Prasarnphanich P, Wagner C (2009) The role of Wiki technology and altruism in collaborative knowledge creation. J Comput Inf Syst 49(4):33–41Google Scholar
  53. Rubio R, Martín S, Morán S (2007) Collaborative web learning tools: Wikis and blogs. Comput Appl Eng Educ 18(3):502–511CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Saeed KA, Abdinnour-Helm S (2008) Examining the effects of information system characteristics and perceived usefulness on post adoption usage of information systems. Inf Manag 45(9):376–386CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Steinbock D, Kaplan C, Rodriguez M, Diaz J, Der N, Garcia S (2000) Collective intelligence quantified for computer-mediated group problem solving. University of California Santa Cruz. Retrieved from
  56. Stremtan F (2008) Some considerations regarding collective intelligence. Retrieved from
  57. Stvilia B, Twidale MB, Smith LC, Gasser L (2008) Information quality work organization in Wikipedia. J Am Soc Inf Sci 59(6):983–1001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Surowiecki J (2004) The wisdom of the crowds. Random House, LondonGoogle Scholar
  59. Terranova T (2004) Network culture: politics for the information age. Pluto Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  60. Urzay I (2008) Collective intelligence approaches to malware recognition. Netw Secur 2008(5):14–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Venkatesh V, Davis FD (2000) A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: four longitudinal field studies. Manag Sci 46(2):186–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Wagner C, Majchrzak A (2006) Enabling customer-centricity using Wikis and the Wiki way. J Manag Inf Syst 23(3):17–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Wikipedia (2012) Wikimedia Foundation Inc. Retrieved from
  64. Wilkinson DM, Huberman BA (2007) Assessing the value of cooperation in Wikipedia. First Monday 12(4). Retrieved from
  65. Yang J, Adamic LA, Ackerman MS (2008) Crowdsourcing and knowledge sharing: Strategic user behavior. Proceedings of 9th ACM conference on Electronic Commerce 246–255Google Scholar
  66. Yuan W, Chen Y, Wang R, Du Z (2007) Collective intelligence in knowledge management. Res Pract Issues Enterp Inf Syst 1:651–655Google Scholar
  67. Zwass V (2010) Co-creation: toward a taxonomy and an integrated research perspective. Int J Electron Commerce 15(1):11–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Information Management DepartmentDongguk UniversityGyeongjuSouth Korea
  2. 2.Cooperative Department of Electronic CommerceDongguk UniversityGyeongjuSouth Korea

Personalised recommendations