Research on "passive" social media use?
Hi all, A question related to what we do NOT do while spending our time on social network sites: Im currently trying to dig up academic literature documenting in some form the numbers of active versus passive users of social media, with special focus on the passive users. Active here for the sake of argument meant in a broad sense: uploading content, commenting, rating; and passive as just watching or reading, but not interacting with content in any way. Im basically interested in all forms of recent academic research on this, which actually provide some numbers, not just mentionings of rule of thumbs or second-hand information. Particularly, Id love to know if anyone has researched how many people just read status updates and do NOT comment, retweet, Like them etc on sites like Facebook or Twitter. (I know its a tricky question and perhaps not very useful to make the distinction, since most are likely to have commented or liked at some point, but then again I surmise some people are more likely to do it on a more regularly basis than others, and some are very rarely active??) What I have found so far: A 2008 OfCom report in their UK survey results reports that 40% looks at other peoples sites (eg. SNS profiles) without leaving messages, but does not deal with passivity otherwise. A Sysomos survey of Twitter users claims to have found that 21% of people with Twitter-accounts have never tweeted (so they must be passive readers of other peoples tweets?). I know of Jenny Preeces early work on lurkers, and Jose Van Dijck in her 2009 paper Users like you? Theorizing agency in user-generated content mentions a Forrester report from 2007 Mapping Participation in Activities (which you have to pay for), talking of 33% of users being passive spectators (of videos, blogs etc) and 52% inactives. An OECD 2007 report Participative Web: User-Generated content (according to Dijck) says more than 80% are passive recipients of content. All in all not much knowledge to go by, and mostly just numbers. And then theres the 1/10/89 % meme, but how substantial is it: www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2006/jul/20/guardianweeklytechnologysection2 I've perused Danah Boyds extensive list on social network research, but at least judging from the titles of articles listed there & still unknown to me, passive SNS use hasnt really been the topic of any papers so far? So: Do any of you know of any (other) work in this area? Ill be happy to do a summary here or in the social media sphere.. Lisbeth Klastrup, IT University of Copenhagen
Hi Lisbeth, I wonder whether we shoud keep using this term "passive" to describe users who do not post comments or upload content, as listening, watching and reading are rich and meaningful ways of interacting with content (there is a vaste and not so new amount of scholar work on how the audiences in litterature and arts contribute to make what they listen, read and watch by these same activities of reading or lietening), regarding Internet Kate Crawford is working on this topic, you can found the paper she presented in the COST298 conference in Copenhagen this year in the online proceedings at http://miha2.ef.uni-lj.si/cost298/gbc2009-proceedings/papers/P202.pdf Best Amparo ----- Mensaje original ----- De: Lisbeth Klastrup <klastrup@itu.dk> Fecha: Miércoles, Noviembre 4, 2009 15:44 Asunto: [Air-L] Research on "passive" social media use? A: air-l@listserv.aoir.org CC: klastrup@itu.dk
Hi all, A question related to what we do NOT do while spending our time on social network sites:
Im currently trying to dig up academic literature documenting in some form the numbers of active versus passive users of social media, with specialfocus on the passive users. Active here for the sake of argument meant in a broad sense: uploading content, commenting, rating; and passive as just watching or reading, but not interacting with content in any way. Im basically interested in all forms of recent academic research on this, which actually provide some numbers, not just mentionings of rule of thumbs or second-hand information. Particularly, Id love to know if anyone has researched how many people just read status updates and do NOT comment, retweet, Like them etc on sites like Facebook or Twitter. (I know its a tricky question and perhaps not very useful to make the distinction, since most are likely to have commented or liked at some point, but then again I surmise some people are more likely to do it on a more regularly basis than others, and some are very rarely active??)
What I have found so far: A 2008 OfCom report in their UK survey results reports that 40% looks at other peoples sites (eg. SNS profiles) without leaving messages, but does not deal with passivity otherwise. A Sysomos survey of Twitter users claims to have found that 21% of people with Twitter-accounts have never tweeted (so they must be passive readers of other peoples tweets?).
I know of Jenny Preeces early work on lurkers, and Jose Van Dijck in her 2009 paper Users like you? Theorizing agency in user-generated contentmentions a Forrester report from 2007 Mapping Participation in Activities (which you have to pay for), talking of 33% of users being passive spectators (of videos, blogs etc) and 52% inactives. An OECD 2007 report Participative Web: User-Generated content (according to Dijck) says more than 80% are passive recipients of content. All in all not much knowledge to go by, and mostly just numbers. And then theres the 1/10/89 % meme, but how substantial is it: www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2006/jul/20/guardianweeklytechnologysection2
I've perused Danah Boyds extensive list on social network research, but at least judging from the titles of articles listed there & still unknown to me, passive SNS use hasnt really been the topic of any papers so far?
So: Do any of you know of any (other) work in this area? Ill be happy to do a summary here or in the social media sphere..
Lisbeth Klastrup, IT University of Copenhagen
_______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
Amparo Lasén Dpto Sociología I Facultad de Ciencias Políticas y Sociología UCM Campus de Somosaguas Pozuelo de Alarcón 28223 0034913942899 alasen@cps.ucm.es
Hi Amparo, all It's certainly an interesting debate on what we should call users of social media who do not post comments or upload content. I agree "passive" is maybe not a strong enough expression for non-contributory participation but I find it so much nicer than the terrible expression "lurkers" to describe such users! I cringe and recoil when I hear the term "lurker". It suggests presence with dubious intentions to me, I think of some guy in a 1940s Hollywood gangster movie with a big coat and turned up collar waiting in a dark alley... :-) Kind regards Mark Gaved The Open University Milton Keynes MK7 6AA http://www.pi-project.ac.uk/ -----Original Message----- From: air-l-bounces@listserv.aoir.org [mailto:air-l-bounces@listserv.aoir.org] On Behalf Of MARIA AMPARO LASEN DIAZ Sent: 04 November 2009 17:24 To: klastrup@itu.dk Cc: air-l@listserv.aoir.org; klastrup@itu.dk Subject: Re: [Air-L] Research on "passive" social media use? Hi Lisbeth, I wonder whether we shoud keep using this term "passive" to describe users who do not post comments or upload content, as listening, watching and reading are rich and meaningful ways of interacting with content (there is a vaste and not so new amount of scholar work on how the audiences in litterature and arts contribute to make what they listen, read and watch by these same activities of reading or lietening), regarding Internet Kate Crawford is working on this topic, you can found the paper she presented in the COST298 conference in Copenhagen this year in the online proceedings at http://miha2.ef.uni-lj.si/cost298/gbc2009-proceedings/papers/P202.pdf Best Amparo The Open University is incorporated by Royal Charter (RC 000391), an exempt charity in England & Wales and a charity registered in Scotland (SC 038302).
Hi Mark and everyone, Yes, you're right about the undertones of "lurker", and we could talk about the undertones of "passive" too. The problem I find for "passive" is that, reading, watching and listening are forms of participation and forms of interacting with the content. Of course, they are different from the other content productive forms of interaction, but my guess is that by calling ones passive and the other active we are not accounting for what such activities as listening and watching entail, as well as hiding their role in the production of the content, in the way they contribute to shape and to give meaning to what is written, played, displayed, etc. All the best Amparo ----- Mensaje original ----- De: "M.B.Gaved" <M.B.Gaved@open.ac.uk> Fecha: Jueves, Noviembre 5, 2009 13:53 Asunto: RE: [Air-L] Research on "passive" social media use? A: 'MARIA AMPARO LASEN DIAZ' <alasen@cps.ucm.es> CC: "'air-l@listserv.aoir.org'" <air-l@listserv.aoir.org>
Hi Amparo, all
It's certainly an interesting debate on what we should call users of social media who do not post comments or upload content.
I agree "passive" is maybe not a strong enough expression for non-contributory participation but I find it so much nicer than the terrible expression "lurkers" to describe such users!
I cringe and recoil when I hear the term "lurker". It suggests presence with dubious intentions to me, I think of some guy in a 1940s Hollywood gangster movie with a big coat and turned up collar waiting in a dark alley... :-)
Kind regards Mark Gaved
The Open University Milton Keynes MK7 6AA http://www.pi-project.ac.uk/
-----Original Message----- From: air-l-bounces@listserv.aoir.org [mailto:air-l- bounces@listserv.aoir.org] On Behalf Of MARIA AMPARO LASEN DIAZ Sent: 04 November 2009 17:24 To: klastrup@itu.dk Cc: air-l@listserv.aoir.org; klastrup@itu.dk Subject: Re: [Air-L] Research on "passive" social media use?
Hi Lisbeth,
I wonder whether we shoud keep using this term "passive" to describe users who do not post comments or upload content, as listening, watching and reading are rich and meaningful ways of interacting with content (there is a vaste and not so new amount of scholar work on how the audiences in litterature and arts contribute to make what they listen, read and watch by these same activities of reading or lietening), regarding Internet Kate Crawford is working on this topic, you can found the paper she presented in the COST298 conference in Copenhagen this year in the online proceedings at
http://miha2.ef.uni-lj.si/cost298/gbc2009-proceedings/papers/P202.pdf
Best
Amparo
The Open University is incorporated by Royal Charter (RC 000391), an exempt charity in England & Wales and a charity registered in Scotland (SC 038302).
Amparo Lasén Dpto Sociología I Facultad de Ciencias Políticas y Sociología UCM Campus de Somosaguas Pozuelo de Alarcón 28223 0034913942899 alasen@cps.ucm.es
May I suggest that in the vast majority of cases we simply ought to call such actors (and their behaviors) "unobserved", "non-archived", even "unstudied"? Most studies are relying on trace evidence about behavior in communities and the behaviors that these actors are engaging in don't leave traces. By calling them "unobserved" we remind ourselves that we usually don't actually have data on their behaviors, so any label trying to capture our speculations about them, and their behaviors, seems premature. I'm always surprised and pleased at the rich and varied findings that emerge when studies pull back this curtain and seriously study these unobserved, non-archived actors/behaviors. For example the Lakhani and von Hippel (2003) [1] paper was like that for me, since they explicitly studied non-archived behaviors and found that reading---a non-archived, unobserved behavior in most studies---generated the bulk of learning that was a large factor in attracting participants; actually posting a question or answer was a much rarer behavior; the value of reading generated the "pool" of resources that made the visible participation possible at all. At least such a label would remind us that here, truly, is "more study needed" (although thanks indeed for all the references people have posted!). Cheers, James [1]: Lakhani, K. R., & von Hippel, E. (2003). How open source software works: "free" user-to-user assistance. Research Policy, 32(6), 923-943. On Nov 5, 2009, at 08:13, MARIA AMPARO LASEN DIAZ wrote:
Hi Mark and everyone,
Yes, you're right about the undertones of "lurker", and we could talk about the undertones of "passive" too.
The problem I find for "passive" is that, reading, watching and listening are forms of participation and forms of interacting with the content. Of course, they are different from the other content productive forms of interaction, but my guess is that by calling ones passive and the other active we are not accounting for what such activities as listening and watching entail, as well as hiding their role in the production of the content, in the way they contribute to shape and to give meaning to what is written, played, displayed, etc.
All the best
Amparo ----- Mensaje original ----- De: "M.B.Gaved" <M.B.Gaved@open.ac.uk> Fecha: Jueves, Noviembre 5, 2009 13:53 Asunto: RE: [Air-L] Research on "passive" social media use? A: 'MARIA AMPARO LASEN DIAZ' <alasen@cps.ucm.es> CC: "'air-l@listserv.aoir.org'" <air-l@listserv.aoir.org>
Hi Amparo, all
It's certainly an interesting debate on what we should call users of social media who do not post comments or upload content.
I agree "passive" is maybe not a strong enough expression for non-contributory participation but I find it so much nicer than the terrible expression "lurkers" to describe such users!
I cringe and recoil when I hear the term "lurker". It suggests presence with dubious intentions to me, I think of some guy in a 1940s Hollywood gangster movie with a big coat and turned up collar waiting in a dark alley... :-)
Kind regards Mark Gaved
The Open University Milton Keynes MK7 6AA http://www.pi-project.ac.uk/
-----Original Message----- From: air-l-bounces@listserv.aoir.org [mailto:air-l- bounces@listserv.aoir.org] On Behalf Of MARIA AMPARO LASEN DIAZ Sent: 04 November 2009 17:24 To: klastrup@itu.dk Cc: air-l@listserv.aoir.org; klastrup@itu.dk Subject: Re: [Air-L] Research on "passive" social media use?
Hi Lisbeth,
I wonder whether we shoud keep using this term "passive" to describe users who do not post comments or upload content, as listening, watching and reading are rich and meaningful ways of interacting with content (there is a vaste and not so new amount of scholar work on how the audiences in litterature and arts contribute to make what they listen, read and watch by these same activities of reading or lietening), regarding Internet Kate Crawford is working on this topic, you can found the paper she presented in the COST298 conference in Copenhagen this year in the online proceedings at
http://miha2.ef.uni-lj.si/cost298/gbc2009-proceedings/papers/P202.pdf
Best
Amparo
The Open University is incorporated by Royal Charter (RC 000391), an exempt charity in England & Wales and a charity registered in Scotland (SC 038302).
Amparo Lasén Dpto Sociología I Facultad de Ciencias Políticas y Sociología UCM Campus de Somosaguas Pozuelo de Alarcón 28223 0034913942899 alasen@cps.ucm.es
_______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
Many in the User Centered Design world would say that it is not the people that are unwilling, it's the way the technology is built and it's current barriers to adoption. That it's not the users who are intentionally being 'passive' because they don't want to interact per se, but because the cost/benefit of joining to comment isn't balanced enough for them. There are many corporate studies (Jared Spool et al), that show that users at some point just don't have the energy for yet again one more username and password to add to their ever growing list. This cost is exponential as 'new apps' continue to show promise, but the marketplace is still to young to have real app standards. This is exactly why the OpenID movement was born. So that users would have one username and password for a login wherever they go. Thus reducing their cost. And perhaps the benefits would then tilt into active participant favour. But so far, I have yet to see that movement gain traction. And I just happen to be one of those 'passive' users. I, for one, don't even bother to respond to news articles on my local news's website because it requires registration. I will just be active on other ways in response - on my blog, in twitter, with a neighbour as we rake leaves, with a friend on the phone, etc. Sharon Greenfield Digital Ethnographer On Nov 5, 2009, at 5:13 AM, MARIA AMPARO LASEN DIAZ wrote:
Hi Mark and everyone,
Yes, you're right about the undertones of "lurker", and we could talk about the undertones of "passive" too.
The problem I find for "passive" is that, reading, watching and listening are forms of participation and forms of interacting with the content. Of course, they are different from the other content productive forms of interaction, but my guess is that by calling ones passive and the other active we are not accounting for what such activities as listening and watching entail, as well as hiding their role in the production of the content, in the way they contribute to shape and to give meaning to what is written, played, displayed, etc.
All the best
Amparo
For those of you interested in this discussion between active and passive you might want to look at: Gil de Zúñiga, H. (2009) “Blogs, Journalism and Political Participation”. In Papacharissi, Z. (Eds.) Journalism and Citizenship: New Agendas, (pp. 108-123). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, LEA/Francis Taylor. for a distinction between "paasive" and "active" blogging Best, Hernando ___________________________________________________ Hernando Rojas Assistant Professor Department of Life Sciences Communication School of Journalism & Mass Communication (affiliated) Latin American Caribbean & Iberian Studies (affiliated) University of Wisconsin - Madison ----- Original Message ----- From: MARIA AMPARO LASEN DIAZ <alasen@cps.ucm.es> Date: Thursday, November 5, 2009 7:13 am Subject: Re: [Air-L] Research on "passive" social media use? To: "M.B.Gaved" <M.B.Gaved@open.ac.uk> Cc: "'air-l@listserv.aoir.org'" <air-l@listserv.aoir.org>
Hi Mark and everyone,
Yes, you're right about the undertones of "lurker", and we could talk about the undertones of "passive" too.
The problem I find for "passive" is that, reading, watching and listening are forms of participation and forms of interacting with the content. Of course, they are different from the other content productive forms of interaction, but my guess is that by calling ones passive and the other active we are not accounting for what such activities as listening and watching entail, as well as hiding their role in the production of the content, in the way they contribute to shape and to give meaning to what is written, played, displayed, etc.
All the best
Amparo ----- Mensaje original ----- De: "M.B.Gaved" <M.B.Gaved@open.ac.uk> Fecha: Jueves, Noviembre 5, 2009 13:53 Asunto: RE: [Air-L] Research on "passive" social media use? A: 'MARIA AMPARO LASEN DIAZ' <alasen@cps.ucm.es> CC: "'air-l@listserv.aoir.org'" <air-l@listserv.aoir.org>
Hi Amparo, all
It's certainly an interesting debate on what we should call users of social media who do not post comments or upload content.
I agree "passive" is maybe not a strong enough expression for non-contributory participation but I find it so much nicer than the terrible expression "lurkers" to describe such users!
I cringe and recoil when I hear the term "lurker". It suggests presence with dubious intentions to me, I think of some guy in a 1940s Hollywood gangster movie with a big coat and turned up collar waiting in a dark alley... :-)
Kind regards Mark Gaved
The Open University Milton Keynes MK7 6AA http://www.pi-project.ac.uk/
-----Original Message----- From: air-l-bounces@listserv.aoir.org [mailto:air-l- bounces@listserv.aoir.org] On Behalf Of MARIA AMPARO LASEN DIAZ Sent: 04 November 2009 17:24 To: klastrup@itu.dk Cc: air-l@listserv.aoir.org; klastrup@itu.dk Subject: Re: [Air-L] Research on "passive" social media use?
Hi Lisbeth,
I wonder whether we shoud keep using this term "passive" to describe users who do not post comments or upload content, as listening, watching and reading are rich and meaningful ways of interacting with content (there is a vaste and not so new amount of scholar work on how the audiences in litterature and arts contribute to make what they listen, read and watch by these same activities of reading or lietening), regarding Internet Kate Crawford is working on this topic, you can found the paper she presented in the COST298 conference in Copenhagen this year in the online proceedings at
http://miha2.ef.uni-lj.si/cost298/gbc2009-proceedings/papers/P202.pdf
Best
Amparo
The Open University is incorporated by Royal Charter (RC 000391), an exempt charity in England & Wales and a charity registered in Scotland (SC 038302).
Amparo Lasén Dpto Sociología I Facultad de Ciencias Políticas y Sociología UCM Campus de Somosaguas Pozuelo de Alarcón 28223 0034913942899 alasen@cps.ucm.es
_______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
Hola all ~ Thank you Hernando for the free plug! Yes, in that book chapter I offer a first hint to a theoretical distinction between passive vs active blog use. In the chapter, data empirically revealed different effects on political participation (voting). That is, reading yield non-significant results in opposition to a more active use of the blogosphere, which predicted voting. In a more recent study with national US data that we'll send for publication soon, we build on that framework. Richer measures of passive vs active blogging are developed. Likewise, the effects are now tested for expanded online and offline political participation indexes, as well as civic engagement. Additionally, the new study provides more insights as for how this process takes place through interpersonal discussion. I'll be happy to send a pre-published copy of the paper to those who need it and hopefully an updated version once when the piece see the light. Best, HGZ Homero Gil de Zúñiga Assistant Professor Director, Center for Journalism & Communication Research School of Journalism College of Communication University of Texas - Austin www.utexas.edu Voice (512) 471 6323 Fax (512) 471 7979 -----Original Message----- From: air-l-bounces@listserv.aoir.org [mailto:air-l-bounces@listserv.aoir.org] On Behalf Of Hernando Rojas Sent: Thursday, November 05, 2009 7:47 PM To: air-l@listserv.aoir.org Subject: Re: [Air-L] Research on "passive" social media use? For those of you interested in this discussion between active and passive you might want to look at: Gil de Zúñiga, H. (2009) "Blogs, Journalism and Political Participation". In Papacharissi, Z. (Eds.) Journalism and Citizenship: New Agendas, (pp. 108-123). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, LEA/Francis Taylor. for a distinction between "paasive" and "active" blogging Best, Hernando ___________________________________________________ Hernando Rojas Assistant Professor Department of Life Sciences Communication School of Journalism & Mass Communication (affiliated) Latin American Caribbean & Iberian Studies (affiliated) University of Wisconsin - Madison ----- Original Message ----- From: MARIA AMPARO LASEN DIAZ <alasen@cps.ucm.es> Date: Thursday, November 5, 2009 7:13 am Subject: Re: [Air-L] Research on "passive" social media use? To: "M.B.Gaved" <M.B.Gaved@open.ac.uk> Cc: "'air-l@listserv.aoir.org'" <air-l@listserv.aoir.org>
Hi Mark and everyone,
Yes, you're right about the undertones of "lurker", and we could talk about the undertones of "passive" too.
The problem I find for "passive" is that, reading, watching and listening are forms of participation and forms of interacting with the content. Of course, they are different from the other content productive forms of interaction, but my guess is that by calling ones passive and the other active we are not accounting for what such activities as listening and watching entail, as well as hiding their role in the production of the content, in the way they contribute to shape and to give meaning to what is written, played, displayed, etc.
All the best
Amparo ----- Mensaje original ----- De: "M.B.Gaved" <M.B.Gaved@open.ac.uk> Fecha: Jueves, Noviembre 5, 2009 13:53 Asunto: RE: [Air-L] Research on "passive" social media use? A: 'MARIA AMPARO LASEN DIAZ' <alasen@cps.ucm.es> CC: "'air-l@listserv.aoir.org'" <air-l@listserv.aoir.org>
Hi Amparo, all
It's certainly an interesting debate on what we should call users of social media who do not post comments or upload content.
I agree "passive" is maybe not a strong enough expression for non-contributory participation but I find it so much nicer than the terrible expression "lurkers" to describe such users!
I cringe and recoil when I hear the term "lurker". It suggests presence with dubious intentions to me, I think of some guy in a 1940s Hollywood gangster movie with a big coat and turned up collar waiting in a dark alley... :-)
Kind regards Mark Gaved
The Open University Milton Keynes MK7 6AA http://www.pi-project.ac.uk/
-----Original Message----- From: air-l-bounces@listserv.aoir.org [mailto:air-l- bounces@listserv.aoir.org] On Behalf Of MARIA AMPARO LASEN DIAZ Sent: 04 November 2009 17:24 To: klastrup@itu.dk Cc: air-l@listserv.aoir.org; klastrup@itu.dk Subject: Re: [Air-L] Research on "passive" social media use?
Hi Lisbeth,
I wonder whether we shoud keep using this term "passive" to describe users who do not post comments or upload content, as listening, watching and reading are rich and meaningful ways of interacting with content (there is a vaste and not so new amount of scholar work on how the audiences in litterature and arts contribute to make what they listen, read and watch by these same activities of reading or lietening), regarding Internet Kate Crawford is working on this topic, you can found the paper she presented in the COST298 conference in Copenhagen this year in the online proceedings at
http://miha2.ef.uni-lj.si/cost298/gbc2009-proceedings/papers/P202.pdf
Best
Amparo
The Open University is incorporated by Royal Charter (RC 000391), an exempt charity in England & Wales and a charity registered in Scotland (SC 038302).
Amparo Lasén Dpto Sociología I Facultad de Ciencias Políticas y Sociología UCM Campus de Somosaguas Pozuelo de Alarcón 28223 0034913942899 alasen@cps.ucm.es
_______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
Liesbeth, Passive use may be widespread, at least on some sites. In a study of online video sites, Cha et.al. found that users rated the video on only 0.22% of YouTube views, and commented on 0.16%. They cite a Reuters article that reports that Hitwise have found similar results: only .16% of visits to YouTube are video uploads, and .2% of Flickr visits are uploads. I have not been able to get my hands on any publication from Hitwise. Is this special for YouTube, Flickr, and other sites that the OfCom study named "User Generated Content sites" (and were not regarded social network sites), or can we expect similar numbers for Twitter, Facebook, etc.? Cha, Meeyoung, et al. "I Tube, You Tube, Everybody Tubes: Analyzing the World's Largest User Generated Content Video System." Proceedings from the Internet Measuremet Conference, San Diego, 2007. New York: ACM, 2007. <http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=1298306.1298309> Auchard, Eric. "Participation on Web 2.0 Sites Remain Weak". _Reuters.com_, 17. April, 2007. <http://www.reuters.com/article/internetNews/idUSN1743638820070418
--anders
Hi I have been working on the peripheral users of virtual communities as well and I couldn't find hitwise paper either. However this is the reference I got closest: Tancer, B. (2007). State of the web: Measuring Web 2.0 consumer participation. Paper presented at the Web 2.0 Expo, Moscone West, San Francisco. contacting author may help. Elif On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 12:25 PM, Anders Fagerjord < anders.fagerjord@media.uio.no> wrote:
Liesbeth,
Passive use may be widespread, at least on some sites.
In a study of online video sites, Cha et.al. found that users rated the video on only 0.22% of YouTube views, and commented on 0.16%. They cite a Reuters article that reports that Hitwise have found similar results: only .16% of visits to YouTube are video uploads, and .2% of Flickr visits are uploads. I have not been able to get my hands on any publication from Hitwise.
Is this special for YouTube, Flickr, and other sites that the OfCom study named "User Generated Content sites" (and were not regarded social network sites), or can we expect similar numbers for Twitter, Facebook, etc.?
Cha, Meeyoung, et al. "I Tube, You Tube, Everybody Tubes: Analyzing the World's Largest User Generated Content Video System." Proceedings from the Internet Measuremet Conference, San Diego, 2007. New York: ACM, 2007. < http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=1298306.1298309>
Auchard, Eric. "Participation on Web 2.0 Sites Remain Weak". _Reuters.com_, 17. April, 2007. < http://www.reuters.com/article/internetNews/idUSN1743638820070418>
--anders
_______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
All, Low active participation rates do not necessarily entail low engagement rate or users' reservations about participation. The question that perhaps should be asked is about the level of participation and engagement. Because YouTube was brought up as an example, I want to point out out study of YouTube users and their perspective of participation which is vastly different from what the story the participation metrics told us. Rotman, D., Golbeck, J., Preece, J., 2009. The community is where the rapport is - on sense and structure in the YouTube community. Proceedings of the 4th International conference on communities and technologies, C&T'09. ACM: New York. http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1556467# Cheers, ~ Dana ====================== Dana Rotman PhD candidate University of Maryland iSchool http://www.terpconnect.umd.edu/~drotman/ <http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1556467#> On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 12:25 PM, Anders Fagerjord < anders.fagerjord@media.uio.no> wrote:
Liesbeth,
Passive use may be widespread, at least on some sites.
In a study of online video sites, Cha et.al. found that users rated the video on only 0.22% of YouTube views, and commented on 0.16%. They cite a Reuters article that reports that Hitwise have found similar results: only .16% of visits to YouTube are video uploads, and .2% of Flickr visits are uploads. I have not been able to get my hands on any publication from Hitwise.
Is this special for YouTube, Flickr, and other sites that the OfCom study named "User Generated Content sites" (and were not regarded social network sites), or can we expect similar numbers for Twitter, Facebook, etc.?
Cha, Meeyoung, et al. "I Tube, You Tube, Everybody Tubes: Analyzing the World's Largest User Generated Content Video System." Proceedings from the Internet Measuremet Conference, San Diego, 2007. New York: ACM, 2007. < http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=1298306.1298309>
Auchard, Eric. "Participation on Web 2.0 Sites Remain Weak". _Reuters.com_, 17. April, 2007. < http://www.reuters.com/article/internetNews/idUSN1743638820070418>
--anders
_______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
participants (10)
-
Anders Fagerjord -
Dana Rotman -
elif yilmaz -
Gil De Zuniga, Homero -
Hernando Rojas -
James Howison -
Lisbeth Klastrup -
live -
M.B.Gaved -
MARIA AMPARO LASEN DIAZ