Note: I may return to this summary to add some things I missed from the article.

Summary
In this dense research review, the authors explore the use of computer-mediated communication (CMC) in three contexts:

1. mental health and social functioning
2. social support
3. relationship development

They argue that "mixed-media relationships" present a challenge to the traditional analytical paradigms used by researchers studying CMC. A more holistic, nuanced approach is needed to understand the depth of relationships that utilize CMC.

The authors break down the cues used by CMC theories into five groups:

Reed's Law Summary
In group forming networks (any network where some subset of people can make their own sub-group), value is O(2^N) where N = number of entities. Claim is that adding another person doubles the number of the possible sub-groups (as person D can join or not join each of the existing groups, thus twice as many possible groups).

Criticism of Reed's Law
Argument depends on the value doubling when another person is added; thus, the value should be halved when a person is removed, which isn't likely to be the case on an individual basis if one person from the Yahoo! network is randomly removed. I.e., the value of Yahoo!'s network to me is the same if one random person is removed from my contact.

This generalization of the life of a mailing list or message board fits with experiences I've had as a member of those communities over the years. My only quibble is that this life cycle doesn't account for the creation of new, derivative mailing lists. Message boards & mailing lists, in my experience, tend to grow new branches composed of people frustrated with the signal-to-noise ratio, or who wish to create a new space that is more true to the original intent of the list creators. I've seen both healthy offshoots as well as failed attempts to create new spaces, but it seems that these breakaway actions always occur around Stage 5.

As many others have capably summarized, Schunk's main points are that goal-setting:

• Is more effective when specific, attainable goals are set (as opposed to "do your best" goals)
• Focuses attention on task completion components that will help them achieve goal
• Helps people process information
• Motivates people to exert effort

Goal setting in Cool Running
I am most intrigued by the notion that goal setting is effective because people formulate a plan of attack for achieving the goal. As Judy Olson is fond of saying in 622, "plans are nothing, planning is everything."

Erika and Jesse have already done an excellent job summarizing this article, so I'll sum it up in one sentence for my own benefit: people frequently compare themselves to others in order to evaluate their current state or make some prediction about their aptitude for a different activity.

Application
While much of the comparison occurs out of my view offline (or privately, internally), I feel pretty confident that comparison with others is a common activity on Cool Running. The upward and downward comparisons Suls describes are readily available in this community. In fact, the criteria by which I could compare myself are made readily available in the thread titles/topics. The Couch-to-5K program, the 30-somethings threads, the "pre-dawn patrol" runners, all offer me easy access to upward or downward comparisons described by Suls.

If you find this blog entry lacking in any way, it's because no one else was logged in when I posted it :)

Summary
In a study of 48 undergrads (mean age of 20), researchers find that the "mere presence" of others increases one's arousal, which in turn enhances the tendency for people to perform "stronger dominant responses" (190). In other words, the presence of others helped performance for familiar or easy tasks and hindered it when the task was new or difficult. It appears practicing your commencement speech a few times is a good idea.

Critique and connections
So... does this apply online? Perhaps this is a bad example, but I can't say from my own experience that the awareness of others logged into CTools enhances my performance. Then again, the authors suggest that performance gains level off after an initial period; so perhaps my contributions to the SI Admit forum were exceptional whereas now I am unaffected by the mere presence of others online.

Summary
The authors discuss the problem in online communities in which troublemakers take advantage of the low cost of registering a new identity. The result is a community in which users "defect" by causing trouble and registering a new screenname. Without a deterrent to one's online identity, this cycle can make for some unpleasant online communities, as witnessed by the online community dedicated to discussion of premature births.

The solution proposed involves a persistent identity that costs money to set up. The thinking is that people are less likely to defect when they know that 1) their online identity would be harmed and 2) there would be a cost associated with setting up a new identity.

Summary
The authors explore the idea that people are intrinsically motivated to perform certain activities, and that the addition of extrinsic rewards as a motivator serves to undermine the interest in completing the activity. In other words, there are times when it is not necessary or appropriate to provide a reward for completing an activity; internal motivation is sufficient to complete the task.

Psychologists are unable to sufficiently explain why this is, though. Three categories of explanations for this undermining effect are offered.

• "the effects of an event such as a reward depend on how it affects perceived self-determination and perceived competence" (628). Rewards may undermine if they make the subject feel that they are not accomplishing the task on their own.

Summary
Reputation systems in all their forms function to "construct a meaningful history" (p. 2) of a member of an online community. This study takes eBay as its primary example, but the effects of reputation systems are readily observed in many other venues besides e-commerce. LinkedIn, for example, has quite literally a professional reputation system for job seekers and employers to use. The authors state that for reputation systems to be effective, they must (paraphrasing for my own edification):

• Exist in an environment in which people care about potential future interactions