Reasons to Trust Wikipedia as a Source of Knowledge

Main Article Content

Felipe Álvarez Osorio

Abstract

This paper analyzes, under the framework of applied social epistemology (that is, from an analytical and normative perspective),
the debate around the reliability of Wikipedia as a source of knowledge by proposing that Wikipedia is reliable and
therefore should be trusted as a source for acquiring real arguments.

Article Details

How to Cite
Álvarez Osorio, F. (2023). Reasons to Trust Wikipedia as a Source of Knowledge. Revista Comunicación, 32(1), 52–60. https://doi.org/10.18845/rc.v32i44.6791
Section
Ensayos

References

Chase, J. y Coady, D.. (2019). The Routledge Handbook of Applied Epistemology. NY: Routledge

Claes, F. y Tramullas, J. (2021). Estudios sobre la credibilidad de Wikipedia: una revisión. Área Abierta, 21(2), 187-204

Coady, D. (2012). What to Believe Now: Applying Epistemology to Contemporary Issues. Wiley-Blackwell: Singapore

de Laat, P. B. (2010). “How Can Contributors to Open- Source Communities Be Trusted?” Ethics and Information Technology 12(4): 327–41

Elmimouni, H. Forte, A y Morgan, J. (7-9 de septiembre de 2022). Why People Trust Wikipedia Articles: Credibility Assessment Strategies Used by Readers. The 18th International Symposium on Open Collaboration. Madrid, Spain

Espinosa, J. (29 de noviembre de 2021). Patricia Díaz, directora de Wikimedia Chile: “Wikipedia no es citable, lo ideal es ir a la fuente”. ADN. Recuperado de https://www.adnradio.cl/tecnologia-y-videojuegos/ 2021/09/29/wikipedia-por-accion-de-provosteno-somos-fuente citable.html

Fallis, D. (2012). Wikipistemology. En Goldman, A. y Whitcomb, D. (Eds.), Social Epistemology: Essential Readings (pp. 297- 313). Oxford: OUP

Faulkner, P. (2011). Knowledge on Trust. Oxford: OUP

Frost-Arnold, K. (2019). Wikipedia. En Chase, J y Coady, D. (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Applied Epistemology (pp. 28-40). NY: Routledge

———————(2021). The Epistemics Danger of Context Collapse Online. En J. Lackey (Ed.), Applied Epistemology (pp. 437-456). Oxford: OUP

Giles, J. (2005). Internet encyclopaedias go head to head. Nature 438, 900-901

Goldman, A. (2012a). Why Social Epistemology is Real Epistemology. En A. Goldman (Ed.), Reliabilism and Contemporary Epistemology (pp. 248-279). Oxford: OUP

—————. (2012b). A Guide to Social Epistemology. En A. Goldman (Ed.), Reliabilism and Contemporary Epistemology (pp. 221-247). Oxford: OUP

Gunn, H. y Lynch, Michael. (2021). The Internet and Epistemic Agency. En J. Lackey (Ed.), Applied Epistemology (pp. 389-409). Oxford: OUP

Hardwig, J. (1985). Epistemic Dependence. The Journal of Philosophy 82(7), 335-349

Hwang, T.J. Bourgeois, F. Pahrm, S. (2014). Drug Safety in the Digital Age. New England Journal of Medicine 370 (26), 2460-2462

Magnus, P. D. (2009). On Trusting Wikipedia. Episteme 6, 74-90

Moran, R. (2006). Getting Told and Being Believed. En Lackey, J. y Sosa, E. (Eds.), The Epistemology of Testimony (pp. 272-306). Oxford: OUP

Nature. (2006). “Nature’s Response to Encyclopaedia Britannica”. Recuperado el 28 de mayo de 2023. https://www.nature.com/nature/britannica/eb_advert_response_final.pdf

Read, B. (2006). “Can Wikipedia ever make the grade?” Chronicle of Higher Education, 53(10): A31.

Rosenzweig, R. (2006). Can History be Open Source? Wikipedia and the Future of the Past. The Journal of American History Volume 93(1), 117-146

Searle, J. (2010). Making the Social World. Oxford: OUP

Sierra, A y González, N. (2021). “Percepción de los estudiantes sobre la fiabilidad de la wikipedia”. Bordón: Revista de pedagogía, 73(1), 111

Soler-Adillon, J. Pavlovic, D. y Freixa, P. (2018). Wikipedia en la Universidad: cambios en la percepción de valor con la creación de contenidos”. Comunicar, 26(54): 39-48

Thi Nguyen, C. (2021). How Twitter Gamifies Communication. En J. Lackey (Ed.), Applied Epistemology (pp. 410-436).Oxford: OUP