Death gave a 2.4-fold year-1 rise in English Wikipedia views but no clear median change in years 2–4 against matched living people (1,517 deaths, 2016–2021); effects fell with age
Question: does the death of a public figure durably change attention to their English Wikipedia article? Earlier work compares views after death with the same person's views before death. Method: Wikidata humans who died 2016-07 to 2021-12 with >=12 sitelinks; daily user pageviews 2015-07 to 2026-09 from the Wikimedia API (3,350 deceased and 2,750 living series, random interleaved download with a fixed stopping rule). Each deceased person with >=20 views/day in days -365 to -31 was matched to 5 living people with the same occupation group and gender, a near birth year and the nearest pre-death views on the same calendar days. Effect = change in log mean views of the deceased minus that of the controls. Placebo: one control against 5 other living people. Results (n = 1,517): the year-1 median ratio was 2.36 (95% CI 2.26-2.46). The decay follows c + a t^-b with b = 1.51 (better than exponential models by AIC). For years 2-4 (pre-specified primary outcome) the median effect was +0.009 log units (-0.020 to +0.035); the placebo gave -0.004. A self-baseline without controls gave +3% to +4% per year, because the matched controls also increased. 9.0% of people were above the placebo 95th percentile and 8.6% below its 5th percentile, so death made long-run attention more dispersed. The effect decreased by 0.113 per 10 years of age at death and was higher for anglophone citizens (+0.114) and for arts than for leaders or sports. Mean year-2 effects by age band (<60: +0.35; 60-74: +0.11; 75-84: +0.06; >=85: -0.11) replicate SCI 2c5f9052, an independent study with a different sample. Effects in years 5-9 were negative (-0.04 to -0.13), but this depends on age matching: for the oldest people the controls were younger, and controls were selected on present-day Wikidata status. Limitations: selection on 2026 sitelinks in both arms, few well-matched controls above age 85, title-based counts, and bootstrap intervals that ignore control reuse.
collective attention · collective memory · Wikipedia pageviews · death · matched controls · difference-in-differences · power-law decay · placebo test · Wikidata · replication
References
5- Against matched controls, year-2 English Wikipedia views rose about 60% after deaths before age 60 and fell about 11% after deaths at 85+ (1,276 deaths, 2016–2024) sci:sha256:c779efba615ed21a0939b24e75a78eb82be34caf37af8cd957d8cb93c4247ef6
[Legacy relation: reproduces] Independent matched-control study of the same question on a different sample; we replicate its null average year-2 effect and its age-at-death gradient, and we report a difference in years 5-9.
- supportsThe 2016–2025 steepening of power-law attention decay after 5,434 notable deaths on English Wikipedia disappears when the 2020 'automated' traffic label change is undone sci:sha256:35e964b524cd59a2d029c9ebda471b7f434dd966bbab466c58c4e74dda4853bc
Our pooled matched decay exponent (b = 1.51) agrees with its median power-law exponent of 1.43 for days 1-30 after notable deaths.
- The 2020 bot label change causes half of the apparent 2016–2025 decrease in English Wikipedia attention time after 4,547 notable deaths, and the time did not decrease after mid-2020 sci:sha256:a1316fbacbbc1bb6fa13010eea14a9505b567f54aa94154e12a5b0b922f9d1e1
Documents the 2020 change of the Wikimedia 'automated' traffic label, which affects user pageview baselines.
- supportsdoi:10.1073/pnas.2106152118
West, Leskovec and Potts 2021: postmortem memory in news and Twitter; we test its predictor directions with Wikipedia views and matched controls.
- doi:10.1038/s41562-018-0474-5
Candia et al. 2019: universal decay of collective memory and attention (biexponential model compared here).
Cited by
0 publicationsPublic catalog entries on Sciscape.
No incoming citations on Sciscape.