Voting behaviors

Summary:

Psychology is weird

Voting behaviors

Lumancer 13 Aug 2013 06:32

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/09/science/internet-study-finds-the-persuasive-power-of-like.html?hp&_r=2&

TLDR: A study involving a reddit-like commenting system suggests that, when the first vote on a piece of content is an upvote, it significantly increases that article's overall rating. Oddly, initial downvotes did not appear to have any effect. We talk a lot around here about dogpiling of negativity, but rarely consider dogpiling of positive sentiments. It really makes me wonder to what extent this effect might be impacting the scores around here.

Re: Voting behaviors

ObserverSeptember 13 Aug 2013 06:37

Speaking from experience, the most intense and nerve wracking part of posting an SCP is the first five votes or so.

Last edited on 13 Aug 2013 06:38 by ObserverSeptember Show more

Re: Voting behaviors

Joreth 13 Aug 2013 06:55

Solution: malicious upvoting with the intent of filling the site with crappy SCPs

Re: Voting behaviors

Ten Second Chicken 13 Aug 2013 06:59

It scares me how much this very problem used to effect me. Now I take great lengths to shield myself from any form of criticism until AFTER I have decided how I feel about a specific SCP. Although, it's kinda hard when there's a freaking vote list that basically shouts at me whether an SCP does or does not suck. Peer pressure, man… It's so easy to unintentionally give in to…

Last edited on 13 Aug 2013 07:10 by Ten Second Chicken Show more

Re: Voting behaviors

ObserverSeptember 13 Aug 2013 07:11

I just quickly scroll down. That usually works.

Re: Voting behaviors

Ten Second Chicken 13 Aug 2013 07:16

yea, but my curiosity keeps getting the better of me, and I sometimes get that quick glance at the rating. To paraphrase the big bang theory (the sitcom, not the actual theory), I enjoy reading articles that can blow my mind, and if I see a good rating, I end up going into the article with my mind "pre-blown". And once a mind is "pre-blown", it cannot be "re-blown".

I'm digressing off topic a little. What I usually do is just cover up the rating with my thumb and pretend it isn't there, then only click on it when I have made my final decision.

Last edited on 13 Aug 2013 07:17 by Ten Second Chicken Show more

Re: Voting behaviors

eric_h 13 Aug 2013 07:08

It used to be, when there were fewer people on the site, that if an SCP hit +5 early on, it was here to stay, and -5 meant it was dead in the water. With more voters, this is no longer true.

---

SCP Wiki Senior Citizen Staff | Thank you for testing my new memetic Forum sig

Re: Voting behaviors

RhettSarlin 14 Aug 2013 01:10

This is why I personally wish that article ratings were hidden to everyone but the author and admins for the first 24 hours…

Re: Voting behaviors

Mulciber 14 Aug 2013 20:48

I agree. I also feel the list of who voted and how is counterproductive to fair assessment. I recently read a comment along the lines of: "Senior Staff X upvoted this, it must be good!" with no additional commentary regarding what the commentor thought of the article. It implied they upvoted simply because a senior staff member did. I think we underestimate how much senior staff votes can potentially influence the decisions of the unsenior not-staff. If your voice is your vote, then let it exist independently, without knowledge of how others voted unless you choose to read commentary.

Last edited on 14 Aug 2013 20:50 by Mulciber Show more

Re: Voting behaviors

Francis Willjam 14 Aug 2013 19:09

I'm lazy and when I log into the site I'll open up every new SCP and read them in order of most upvotes > least upvotes so I kinda go into it with a bit of prejudice. However I don't actually vote on articles that seem to be getting some positive and some negative votes, because the chances are that the article is going to change a lot over the course of a day or even a few hours.