Identity and bond-based attachment and implications for design

Summary
Apologies for the length. This paper will likely factor heavily into my final papers about Cool Running, so I wanted to document it well.

Ren, Kraut, and Kiesler examine the design implcations for online communities given certain social psychological theories of common identity and common bond. They also make the larger point that theory matters and can provide a "more principled approach" to the design of online communities.

Common identity: a feeling of attachment to the group as a whole rather than to fellow group members. The authors assert that common identity online implies a commitment to the purpose of the online community.
Common bond: a feeling of attachment to their group and to group members. The authors assert that common bond online is displayed through social or emotional attachments to particular members of the community.

Takeaways

• Common identity-based attachments to community are more likely to occur when community members are similarly categorized (Prop. 1)
• Common bond-based attachments are more likely to occur when community members engage in personal interaction with one another, share similar attitudes, or have personal knowledge of one another (Prop. 2)
• Bond-based attachment encourages more off-topic discussion (and is generally more tolerant of it) and is more tolerant of social loafing (Props. 4, 5)
• Members with identity-based attachment will be more likely to conform to group norms (Prop. 6)
• Newcomers will feel more welcome in identity-based online communities and are more likely to engage in generalized reciprocity (as opposed to specific) (Props. 7, 8)
• Identity-based attachment weakens with discussion diversity; bond-based weakens with membership turnover (Prop. 9)
• Bond and identity attachments can overlap in the same community (p. 19)
• Identity-to-bond transitions have been observed (the Bruce community, p. 22)
• Topic moderation (or lack of) has consequences for membership, depending on whether community members seek a bond or identity attachment from the community
• Group size considerations: identity-based attachment communities can withstand high turnover and large community populations
• "Neighborhoods" within large communities can help the population congregate around different themes

Connection
This identity/bond framework explains parts of Cool Running quite well. I can see both attachments at work in the community.

Suggestive of a strong identity-based attachment within Cool Running:
1. The community is so large yet continues to function smoothly (identity-based)
2. Newcomers feel welcome
3. The community withstands high turnover easily, and can function well with an abundance of social loafing occurring

Suggestive of a strong bond-based attachment within Cool Running:
1. Community members exchange personal knowledge with each other and share similar attitudes
2. Off-topic discussion is tolerated

One point to explore further: the relationship between identity/bond-based attachment and the creation of joint enterprise. On p. 14-15, the authors make the claim that people with identity-based attachments are likely to compensate for social loafing that occurs in the community by taking over responsibilities and/or contributing more heavily. I feel like there is a connection here to joint enterprise as Wenger defines it (from my Wenger blog post):
1. It is the result of a collective process of negotiation
2. It is both pursued and defined by those engaged in it (i.e., it's a dynamic, changing, evolving thing)
3. It creates mutual accountability

In what ways (if any?) does identity-based attachment contribute to the definition of a community's joint enterprise?