  In this paper, we use evidence from a remixing community to evaluate two
pieces of common wisdom about collaboration. First, we test the theory that
jointly produced works tend to be of higher quality than individually authored
products. Second, we test the theory that collaboration improves the quality of
functional works like code, but that it works less well for artistic works like
images and sounds. We use data from Scratch, a large online community where
hundreds of thousands of young users share and remix millions of animations and
interactive games. Using peer-ratings as a measure of quality, we estimate a
series of fitted regression models and find that collaborative Scratch projects
tend to receive ratings that are lower than individually authored works. We
also find that code-intensive collaborations are rated higher than
media-intensive efforts. We conclude by discussing the limitations and
implications of these findings.
