Draft scope
Develop a proposal for further research around how to best support moderators based on their motivations. This is a complementary task to T387462, which is focused on the design of a central location for moderators and what sort of features might be relevant. This task may have some overlap but focuses on more long-term and broader questions around what factors might impact the transition to moderating and retention. It is expected to be focused on desk research and analysis of past survey data in this quarter.

There are a number of potential interventions that are in scope to evaluate that could directly relate to the motivations of moderators:

• Impact reinforcement – e.g., see Growth:Positive reinforcement
• Incentives – e.g., access to The Wikipedia Library or other user access levels, things of value off-wiki such as certificates.
• Making tasks more enjoyable/rewarding – e.g., if socialization/collaboration is an important motivation, helping editors connect with each other via moderation.
• It is very possible that the research will also identify other interventions that could then be the focus of further research.

Potential research questions:

• What factors are most important to editors taking on moderation work?
• What factors are most important to editor/moderator retention?
• Do editors see moderation as separate from editing?
• Which editor motivations are best aligned with moderation work?
• Which motivations can be supported via impact reinforcement or incentives? Which require more extensive interventions?
• How important is mentorship or other social/collaborative aspects of editing to moderation?

Potential resources / methodology:

• Literature review of external research – e.g., Ren et al. 2023. How Did They Build the Free Encyclopedia? A Literature Review of Collaboration and Coordination among Wikipedia Editors.
• Review of existing incentives / programs on wiki that relate to "leveling up" or retention.
• Review of past studies – e.g., Archetypes, Clovermoss reflections, WikiProjects surveys, Transitions.

Deliverable
Publish a report on Meta that details what was found and concrete recommendations for further study. These recommendations should include well-scoped projects that could be picked up in Q1 and Q2 – i.e. suggested research questions and potential methodology.

Assigned
@TAndic as primary with @MRaishWMF as support/back-up. @Isaac to provide help with scoping, feedback, etc. as needed. @SonjaPerry as product stakeholder for guidance.