<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Royal Deer Design &#187; research</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.royaldeerdesign.com/tag/research/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.royaldeerdesign.com</link>
	<description>Web Design Company</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 15:08:29 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>Quality of Wikipedia</title>
		<link>http://www.royaldeerdesign.com/2010/06/quality-of-wikipedia/</link>
		<comments>http://www.royaldeerdesign.com/2010/06/quality-of-wikipedia/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Jun 2010 19:03:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Sheuli]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Internet Business News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[research]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[web]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[web site]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[website]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wikipedia]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://coot.arvixe.com/~royald/?p=2222</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Researchers from Thomas Jefferson University checked the accuracy of information on the popular open-source encyclopedia Wikipedia with that on the National Cancer Institute&#8217;s Physician Data Query. PDQ is a professional database that is peer-reviewed and edited. Both sources were fact-checked against textbooks. The final conclusion: Wikipedia is accurate but poorly written. Results shows that Wikipedia]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Researchers from Thomas Jefferson University checked the accuracy of information on the popular open-source encyclopedia Wikipedia with that on the National Cancer Institute&#8217;s Physician Data Query. PDQ is a professional database that is peer-reviewed and edited. Both sources were fact-checked against textbooks. The final conclusion: Wikipedia is accurate but poorly written.</p>
<p>Results shows that Wikipedia is not worse than the professional website. Only 2% of the information on either was different than in textbooks. However, it is interesting that researchers found that Wikipedia&#8217;s information was written at a higher level of complexity than the professional PDQ.</p>
<p>The study says that Wikipedia is as accurate source of information as a professionally reviewed resource.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.royaldeerdesign.com/2010/06/quality-of-wikipedia/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>No quantity, but quality matters</title>
		<link>http://www.royaldeerdesign.com/2010/03/no-quantity-but-quality-matters/</link>
		<comments>http://www.royaldeerdesign.com/2010/03/no-quantity-but-quality-matters/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Mar 2010 11:04:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Sheuli]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Internet Business News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[research]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Twitter]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://coot.arvixe.com/~royald/?p=2429</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A group of researchers have been published a research paper which has proven that Twitter follower count is relatively an insignificant metric when it comes to determining influence. The researchers examined the Twitter accounts of millions active users. The conclusion is that accounts with the largest number of followers are not always related to their]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A group of researchers have been published a research paper which has proven that Twitter follower count is relatively an insignificant metric when it comes to determining influence. The researchers examined the Twitter accounts of millions active users. The conclusion is that accounts with the largest number of followers are not always related to their influence.</p>
<p>You can read more at: <em>twitter.mpi-sws.org</em></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.royaldeerdesign.com/2010/03/no-quantity-but-quality-matters/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
