From art to science of community design
|
Current Score: 6 |
[Personally I found it helpful to read Sassenberg (2002) before reading this paper]
Summary:
Definition of online community:
“online group that interacts over time around a shared purpose, interest, or need”
Note: do not consider shared resources, reciprocity, and community norms or policy to be essential features of online communities
Community design has been an art, with few attempts to apply social science theory to community design.
| Common Identity | Common Bond |
| Attachment to group | Attachment to members of the group |
| Members feel commitment to an online community’s purpose | Members feel socially or emotionally attached to particular members of the community |
| Antecedents 1. Social categorization – define people as members of the same social category 2. Interdependence – created through joint task, common purpose, common fate, or joint reward 3. Out-group presence or inter-group comparison |
Antecedents 1. Social interaction 2. Personal knowledge – self-disclosure, self-presentation 3. Interpersonal similarity |
| Identity-Based Attachment | Bond-Based Attachment |
| More likely to engage in and be tolerant of off-topic discussion | |
| More tolerant of social loafing and less likely to compensate for it. | |
| More likely to conform to group norms | |
| More welcoming of newcomers | |
| Generalized reciprocity | Direct reciprocity |
| Vulnerable to topic drift | Vulnerable to membership turnover |
Questions
1. Couldn’t joint reward be considered a type of common fate? Or does joint reward imply that group members receive benefits only through cooperation?
2. Is there a development pattern in online groups – e.g., initially common bonds may be predominant but as group continues and grows common identity predominates.
3. Is there a size effect? For which size groups are common bond or common identity more likely to be predominant?
Connections:
The article provides more nuanced analysis and recommendations than Kim or Powazek. This is probably due to the analysis being informed by theory and empirical research, as opposed to anecdotal evidence in both Kim and Powazek.