user generated content, motivation to post
Hi, A Mater student of one of my colleagues is researching about people's motivation to post, to share comments and evaluations about products and services, and about the social function of such activities. His hypothesis is that people augment their reality by being read and listened, that this activity would reinforce their existence as a subjects. He's looking for references and concepts about these questions. I would be grateful if you could help. Thank you very much, All the best Amparo Lasén Dpto Sociología I Facultad de Ciencias Políticas y Sociología UCM Campus de Somosaguas Pozuelo de Alarcón 28223 0034913942899 alasen@cps.ucm.es
Interesting. There's a great article about motivations to post in open source user support communities (one of the few articles with data on reading, not just posting): Lakhani, K. and von Hippel, E. (2003). How open source software works: “free” user-to-user assistance. Research Policy, 32:923–943. Highlight for me: people read to learn, and post when it's easy for them to answer. What that says about "reinforcing their existence as subjects" I'm not so sure :) --J http://james.howison.name On Feb 2, 2010, at 13:41, MARIA AMPARO LASEN DIAZ wrote:
Hi,
A Mater student of one of my colleagues is researching about people's motivation to post, to share comments and evaluations about products and services, and about the social function of such activities. His hypothesis is that people augment their reality by being read and listened, that this activity would reinforce their existence as a subjects. He's looking for references and concepts about these questions. I would be grateful if you could help.
Thank you very much,
All the best
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/
Another paper addressing many motivational issues is - Preece, Jennifer and Shneiderman, Ben (2009) "The Reader-to-Leader Framework: Motivating Technology-Mediated Social Participation," *AIS Transactions on Human-Computer Interaction* (1) 1, pp. 13-32 http://aisel.aisnet.org/thci/vol1/iss1/5/ ~ Dana ================== Dana Rotman PhD candidate University of Maryland iSchool <http://aisel.aisnet.org/thci/vol1/iss1/5/> On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 2:05 PM, James Howison <james@howison.name> wrote:
Interesting.
There's a great article about motivations to post in open source user support communities (one of the few articles with data on reading, not just posting):
Lakhani, K. and von Hippel, E. (2003). How open source software works: “free” user-to-user assistance. Research Policy, 32:923–943.
Highlight for me: people read to learn, and post when it's easy for them to answer. What that says about "reinforcing their existence as subjects" I'm not so sure :)
On Feb 2, 2010, at 13:41, MARIA AMPARO LASEN DIAZ wrote:
Hi,
A Mater student of one of my colleagues is researching about people's
motivation to post, to share comments and evaluations about products and services, and about the social function of such activities. His hypothesis is that people augment their reality by being read and listened, that this activity would reinforce their existence as a subjects. He's looking for references and concepts about these questions. I would be grateful if you could help.
Thank you very much,
All the best
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/
I believe XKCD does the best summary of what motivates many to contribute to Internet content. http://xkcd.com/386/ - Marc On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 11:09 AM, Dana Rotman <danarot@gmail.com> wrote:
Another paper addressing many motivational issues is - Preece, Jennifer and Shneiderman, Ben (2009) "The Reader-to-Leader Framework: Motivating Technology-Mediated Social Participation," *AIS Transactions on Human-Computer Interaction* (1) 1, pp. 13-32 http://aisel.aisnet.org/thci/vol1/iss1/5/
~ Dana
================== Dana Rotman PhD candidate University of Maryland iSchool
<http://aisel.aisnet.org/thci/vol1/iss1/5/>
On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 2:05 PM, James Howison <james@howison.name> wrote:
Interesting.
There's a great article about motivations to post in open source user support communities (one of the few articles with data on reading, not just posting):
Lakhani, K. and von Hippel, E. (2003). How open source software works: “free” user-to-user assistance. Research Policy, 32:923–943.
Highlight for me: people read to learn, and post when it's easy for them to answer. What that says about "reinforcing their existence as subjects" I'm not so sure :)
On Feb 2, 2010, at 13:41, MARIA AMPARO LASEN DIAZ wrote:
Hi,
A Mater student of one of my colleagues is researching about people's
motivation to post, to share comments and evaluations about products and services, and about the social function of such activities. His hypothesis is that people augment their reality by being read and listened, that this activity would reinforce their existence as a subjects. He's looking for references and concepts about these questions. I would be grateful if you could help.
Thank you very much,
All the best
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/
_______________________________________________ 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/
In addition to the fine work already cited, Kollock's *The economies of online cooperation: Gifts and public goods in cyberspace* still has utility in framing motivations for contribution. Available via books.google: http://books.google.com/books?id=NxAuOTt9cvIC&lpg=PP1&pg=PA219#v=onepage&q=k... - Marc On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 12:26 PM, Marc Smith <marc.smith.email@gmail.com>wrote:
I believe XKCD does the best summary of what motivates many to contribute to Internet content.
- Marc
On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 11:09 AM, Dana Rotman <danarot@gmail.com> wrote:
Another paper addressing many motivational issues is - Preece, Jennifer and Shneiderman, Ben (2009) "The Reader-to-Leader Framework: Motivating Technology-Mediated Social Participation," *AIS Transactions on Human-Computer Interaction* (1) 1, pp. 13-32 http://aisel.aisnet.org/thci/vol1/iss1/5/
~ Dana
================== Dana Rotman PhD candidate University of Maryland iSchool
<http://aisel.aisnet.org/thci/vol1/iss1/5/>
On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 2:05 PM, James Howison <james@howison.name> wrote:
Interesting.
There's a great article about motivations to post in open source user support communities (one of the few articles with data on reading, not just posting):
Lakhani, K. and von Hippel, E. (2003). How open source software works: “free” user-to-user assistance. Research Policy, 32:923–943.
Highlight for me: people read to learn, and post when it's easy for them to answer. What that says about "reinforcing their existence as subjects" I'm not so sure :)
On Feb 2, 2010, at 13:41, MARIA AMPARO LASEN DIAZ wrote:
Hi,
A Mater student of one of my colleagues is researching about people's
motivation to post, to share comments and evaluations about products and services, and about the social function of such activities. His hypothesis is that people augment their reality by being read and listened, that this activity would reinforce their existence as a subjects. He's looking for references and concepts about these questions. I would be grateful if you could help.
Thank you very much,
All the best
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
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/
_______________________________________________ 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/
I believe that looking at reputation networks is close to your research question. Paul Resnick offered a bibliography in 2004 "Reputation Research Network." http://web.si.umich.edu/reputations/ http://web.si.umich.edu/reputations/bib/bib.html My reasoning is that people often post to networks to boost their reputations. Clearly this would be a motivation for some. Lots of research has been done in this area already so it may be necessary to distinguish the motivation of reputation from other motivations. Cheers, Denise Denise N. Rall, PhD. Special Projects, Faculty of Arts & Science, Southern Cross University, Lismore NSW 2480 AUSTRALIA Mobile +(61) (0)438 233 344 http://www.scu.edu.au/schools/esm/staff/pages/drall/ "Darker Shades of Royal" Exhibition Opening SAT 27 Feb. 1-3 PM Northern Rivers Community Arts Gallery, 44 Cherry Street, Ballina NSW 2478 --- On Wed, 3/2/10, MARIA AMPARO LASEN DIAZ <alasen@cps.ucm.es> wrote: __________________________________________________________________________________ Yahoo!7: Catch-up on your favourite Channel 7 TV shows easily, legally, and for free at PLUS7. www.tv.yahoo.com.au/plus7
Is the thinking that motivations for commenting on products and services differ significantly from motivations for other types of online participation? Many product evaluation systems are social environments; a few are not. I doubt that same kinds of people populate both to same degree. It might not be a good idea to lump them together. An interesting tack might be to compare systems that allow for identity and reputation development with those that are truly anonymous -- where there is no handle with which to develop an identity. -z -- Zeynep Tufekci, Ph.D. Department of Sociology and Anthropology University of Maryland, Baltimore County 1000 Hilltop Circle, Baltimore, MD zeynep@umbc.edu @techsoc http://www.technosociology.org
Yes! I also think it is important to acknowledge aspects of context when looking at motivations for contributing. Simply asking "why do people contribute to online communities/networks/pools of knowledge" can be misleading. To me, motivations are closely related to other apects of the context. So to rephrase the question (by borrowing from gift-giving theory), I think it could be: "what is given/contributed to whom, how and why" where "why" is dependent on the other parts of the question above. What - the characteristics/values of digital goods To whom - the types of relationships involved How - the sociotechnical means for contributing at hand Why - the motivation Possibly the question could be elaborated to include "who", "where" and "when" as well. Also, to follow up on the differences between anonymous and identified contributions, I think there are a number of dimensions that can be fruitfully explored in relation to specific tools and contexts for online contributions (i.e. "how"): Identification (anonymous to identified) Limitation (open to restricted) Incentive (enforced to voluntary) Direction (private to public) Initiative (passive to active) In my mind the concepts above are poles at the ends of a continuum. Thus, it becomes particularly interesting to examine how users, who change preferences, engage with sociotechnical features in order (try) to move from one pole to the other. Notably, the dimensions above are only an initital number - there are certainly more that could be applied. Kind regards Jorgen Skageby Post-doctoral Research Fellow Dept. of Journalism, Media and Communication (JMK) Stockholm University
From: Zeynep Tufekci <socnetres@gmail.com> Reply-To: <socnetres@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2010 20:22:39 -0500 To: AIR <air-l@listserv.aoir.org> Subject: Re: [Air-L] user generated content, motivation to post
Is the thinking that motivations for commenting on products and services differ significantly from motivations for other types of online participation? Many product evaluation systems are social environments; a few are not. I doubt that same kinds of people populate both to same degree. It might not be a good idea to lump them together.
An interesting tack might be to compare systems that allow for identity and reputation development with those that are truly anonymous -- where there is no handle with which to develop an identity.
-z
-- Zeynep Tufekci, Ph.D. Department of Sociology and Anthropology University of Maryland, Baltimore County 1000 Hilltop Circle, Baltimore, MD zeynep@umbc.edu @techsoc http://www.technosociology.org
I have been exploring differences between crowds and communities with attention to motivation to contribute, highlighting the role of coorientation to larger ideas -- e.g., public access, open source, science, etc. These papers are available online and will lead to further references (comments welcome! this effort is still a work in progress): Haythornthwaite, C. (Jan. 2009). Crowds and communities: Light and heavyweight models of peer production. Proceedings of the 42nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society. [http//hdl.handle.net/2142/9457] Haythornthwaite, C. (in press). Online knowledge crowds and communities. In Knowledge Communities. Reno, NV: Center for Basque Studies. [http://hdl.handle.net/2142/14198] Elsewhere, look also for VGI -- voluntary geographic information. Goodchild, M.F. (2007). Citizens as sensors: the world of volunteered geography. GeoJournal, 69, 211-221. Haklay, M., and Weber, P. (2008). OpenStreetMap--User-Generated Street Map. IEEE Pervasive Computing, 7(4), 12-18. Nama Budhathoki (doc student at UIUC) is in the midst of a study of motivations for VGI. Earlier papers include: Budhathoki, N.R., Bruce, B.C., and Nedovic-Budic, Z. (2008). Reconceptualizing the role of the user of spatial data infrastructure, GeoJournal, 72(3-4), 149-160. And, an earlier paper from a special issue in JCMC that asked about motivations. Holohan, A., and Garg, A. (2005). Collaboration online: The example of Distributed Computing. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 10(4), article 16. http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol10/issue4/holohan.html -------------------------------------- Caroline Haythornthwaite Leverhulme Visiting Professor, Institute of Education, University of London (2009-10) Professor, Graduate School of Library and Information Science, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 501 East Daniel St., Champaign IL 61820 (haythorn@illinois.edu)
Hi all, I have also recently been looking at user created content, more from a technical point of view of what is possible, what has been done and DRM implications. Here are a bunch of references relating to these issues. I'd be most obliged for any references people might have for works about the technical aspects of creating content. Lakhani, K. and von Hippel, E. (2003). How open source software works: “free” user-to-user assistance. Research Policy, 32:923–943. Woodrow Barfield - Intellectual Property Rights in Virtual Environments: Considering the Rights of Owners, Programmers and Virtual Avatars - Akron L. Rev. 649 (2006) Alan Chein - A Practical Look at Virtual Property - St. John's L. Rev. 1059 (2006) Casey Fiesler - Everything I Need to Know I Learned from Fandom: How Existing Social Norms Can Help Shape the Next Generation of User-Generated Content - Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment and Technology Law 729 (2007-2008) Daniel Gervais - Tangled Web of UGC: Making Copyright Sense of User-Generated Content, Vand. J. Ent. & Tech. L. 841 (2008-2009) Harris Weems Henderson - Through the Looking Glass: Copyright Protection in the Virtual Reality of Second Life - J. Intell. Prop. 165 (2008-2009) Steven Hetcher - User-Generated Content and the Future of Copyright: Part One - Investiture of Ownership Vand. J. Ent. & Tech. L. 863 (2007-2008 Ryan Kriegshauser - The Shot Heard around the Virtual Worlds: The Emergence and Future of Unconscionability in Agreements Relating to Property in Virtual Worlds, UMKC L. Rev. 1077 (2007-2008) Greg Lastowka - User Generated Content and Virtual Worlds - Vand. J. Ent. & Tech. L. 893 (2007-2008) Todd David Marcus - Fostering Creativity in Virtual Worlds:Easing the restrictiveness of copyright for user created content - New York Law School Law Review - 52 2007/08 Ondrejka, C. R. (2005) ‘Escaping the Gilded Cage: User Created Content and Building the Metaverse - New York Law School Law Review - 49 2004/05 Michael H Passman - Transactions of Virtual Items in Virtual Worlds - Alb. L.J. Sci. & Tech. 259 (2008) Ben Quarmby - Pirates among the Second Life Islands - Why You Should Monitor the Misuse of your Intellectual Property in Online Virtual Worlds - Cardozo Arts & Ent. L.J. 667 (2008-2009) Regards, Morgan Leigh PhD Candidate School of Sociology and Social Work University of Tasmania Caroline Haythornthwaite wrote:
I have been exploring differences between crowds and communities with attention to motivation to contribute, highlighting the role of coorientation to larger ideas -- e.g., public access, open source, science, etc. These papers are available online and will lead to further references (comments welcome! this effort is still a work in progress):
Haythornthwaite, C. (Jan. 2009). Crowds and communities: Light and heavyweight models of peer production. Proceedings of the 42nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society. [http//hdl.handle.net/2142/9457]
Haythornthwaite, C. (in press). Online knowledge crowds and communities. In Knowledge Communities. Reno, NV: Center for Basque Studies. [http://hdl.handle.net/2142/14198]
Elsewhere, look also for VGI -- voluntary geographic information.
Goodchild, M.F. (2007). Citizens as sensors: the world of volunteered geography. GeoJournal, 69, 211-221.
Haklay, M., and Weber, P. (2008). OpenStreetMap--User-Generated Street Map. IEEE Pervasive Computing, 7(4), 12-18.
Nama Budhathoki (doc student at UIUC) is in the midst of a study of motivations for VGI. Earlier papers include:
Budhathoki, N.R., Bruce, B.C., and Nedovic-Budic, Z. (2008). Reconceptualizing the role of the user of spatial data infrastructure, GeoJournal, 72(3-4), 149-160.
And, an earlier paper from a special issue in JCMC that asked about motivations.
Holohan, A., and Garg, A. (2005). Collaboration online: The example of Distributed Computing. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 10(4), article 16. http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol10/issue4/holohan.html -------------------------------------- Caroline Haythornthwaite
Leverhulme Visiting Professor, Institute of Education, University of London (2009-10)
Professor, Graduate School of Library and Information Science, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 501 East Daniel St., Champaign IL 61820 (haythorn@illinois.edu)
_______________________________________________ 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/
--
A bit late to the party, but looking at Digg and the relationship between acknowledged ("dugg") comments and propensity to post again: Halavais, A. (2009). Do dugg diggers digg diligently? Feedback as motivation in collaborative moderation systems, Information Communication & Society, Vol. 12, No. 3., pp. 444-459. Also appears in bloggy form here: http://alex.halavais.net/category/digg - Alex -- -- // // This email is // [x] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. // [ ] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. // // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberflâneur // http://alex.halavais.net //
Wow, many great references, thanks to everyone who posted thus far. The literature on the topic is extensive, but in my work I find that all too often open source (a 'functional' good) and open content (a 'cultural' good) are lumped together. I tried to sketch out their differences w.r.t. motivations and consequences for organization and licensing in this article I published last year:
From open source to open content: Organization, licensing and decision processes in open cultural production Decision Support Systems, Volume 47, Issue 3, June 2009, Pages 229-244 Giorgos Cheliotis
Also relevant is the work by Bob Kraut and his team at CMU on motivations to contribute to online communities. Best, Giorgos Giorgos Cheliotis Assistant Professor Communications and New Media Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences National University of Singapore
I scanned this paper just yesterday, its a paper from the first day of ASIST 2009 ( http://www.asis.org/Conferences/AM09/open-proceedings/frontmatter/titlepage0... ) paper is at http://www.asis.org/Conferences/AM09/open-proceedings/openpage.html *Personal and External Determinants of Medical Bloggers' Knowledge Sharing Behavior<http://www.asis.org/Conferences/AM09/open-proceedings/papers/42.xml> * Faezeh Karimi, Danny C. C. Poo * *This paper investigates the factors affecting medical bloggers’ knowledge sharing behavior from both personal and external aspects. We develop a model based on the social cognitive theory and augment it with the social capital theory. The model is empirically examined based on the survey data collected from 75 bloggers writing on medical issues, and evaluated with confirmatory factor analysis and structural equation modeling. Among the personal factors, we examined outcome expectations including reputation and enjoyment in helping others. Encouragement by others, identification and interaction ties were investigated as external factors. Enjoyment in helping others and reputation were found to have significant direct affect on medical bloggers’ knowledge sharing behavior, while encouragement by others, identification, and interaction ties showed no significant direct affect. However, encouragement by others exhibited significant impact on reputation and enjoyment in helping others. The implications for theory and practice, and future possible research are discussed. On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 5:41 AM, MARIA AMPARO LASEN DIAZ <alasen@cps.ucm.es>wrote:
Hi,
A Mater student of one of my colleagues is researching about people's motivation to post, to share comments and evaluations about products and services, and about the social function of such activities. His hypothesis is that people augment their reality by being read and listened, that this activity would reinforce their existence as a subjects. He's looking for references and concepts about these questions. I would be grateful if you could help.
Thank you very much,
All the best
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/
-- Natalya Godbold PhD Candidate (Human Information Behaviour / Health Communication) Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences University of Technology, Sydney ¯`~.. ¸><((((º>¸. .~´¯`~.. ¸><((((º>¸. .~´¯`~.. ¸><((((º>¸. .><((((º>`~.¸¸.~´¯`~.¸.~´¯`~...¸><((((º> .,,.~´¯`~.. ¸><((((º>¸. .....,,.><((((º>`~.¸¸.~´¯`~.¸.~´¯`~...¸><((((º> .~´¯`~.. ¸><((((º>¸. .,,.~´¯`~.. ¸><((((º>¸. .~´¯`~.. UTS CRICOS Provider Code: 00099F DISCLAIMER: This email message and any accompanying attachments may contain confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, do not read, use, disseminate, distribute or copy this message or attachments. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete this message. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except where the sender expressly, and with authority, states them to be the views of the University of Technology Sydney. Before opening any attachments, please check them for viruses and defects. Think. Green. Do. Please consider the environment before printing this email.
When I say "scanned", I mean that I read it very quickly. :-) On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 11:15 AM, natalya godbold <ngodbold@gmail.com> wrote:
I scanned this paper just yesterday, its a paper from the first day of ASIST 2009 ( http://www.asis.org/Conferences/AM09/open-proceedings/frontmatter/titlepage0... )
paper is at http://www.asis.org/Conferences/AM09/open-proceedings/openpage.html
*Personal and External Determinants of Medical Bloggers' Knowledge Sharing Behavior<http://www.asis.org/Conferences/AM09/open-proceedings/papers/42.xml> * Faezeh Karimi, Danny C. C. Poo *
*This paper investigates the factors affecting medical bloggers’ knowledge sharing behavior from both personal and external aspects. We develop a model based on the social cognitive theory and augment it with the social capital theory. The model is empirically examined based on the survey data collected from 75 bloggers writing on medical issues, and evaluated with confirmatory factor analysis and structural equation modeling. Among the personal factors, we examined outcome expectations including reputation and enjoyment in helping others. Encouragement by others, identification and interaction ties were investigated as external factors. Enjoyment in helping others and reputation were found to have significant direct affect on medical bloggers’ knowledge sharing behavior, while encouragement by others, identification, and interaction ties showed no significant direct affect. However, encouragement by others exhibited significant impact on reputation and enjoyment in helping others. The implications for theory and practice, and future possible research are discussed.
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 5:41 AM, MARIA AMPARO LASEN DIAZ <alasen@cps.ucm.es
wrote:
Hi,
A Mater student of one of my colleagues is researching about people's motivation to post, to share comments and evaluations about products and services, and about the social function of such activities. His hypothesis is that people augment their reality by being read and listened, that this activity would reinforce their existence as a subjects. He's looking for references and concepts about these questions. I would be grateful if you could help.
Thank you very much,
All the best
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/
-- Natalya Godbold PhD Candidate (Human Information Behaviour / Health Communication) Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences University of Technology, Sydney
¯`~.. ¸><((((º>¸. .~´¯`~.. ¸><((((º>¸. .~´¯`~.. ¸><((((º>¸. .><((((º>`~.¸¸.~´¯`~.¸.~´¯`~...¸><((((º> .,,.~´¯`~.. ¸><((((º>¸. .....,,.><((((º>`~.¸¸.~´¯`~.¸.~´¯`~...¸><((((º> .~´¯`~.. ¸><((((º>¸. .,,.~´¯`~.. ¸><((((º>¸. .~´¯`~..
UTS CRICOS Provider Code: 00099F DISCLAIMER: This email message and any accompanying attachments may contain confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, do not read, use, disseminate, distribute or copy this message or attachments. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete this message. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except where the sender expressly, and with authority, states them to be the views of the University of Technology Sydney. Before opening any attachments, please check them for viruses and defects.
Think. Green. Do.
Please consider the environment before printing this email.
-- Natalya Godbold PhD Candidate (Human Information Behaviour / Health Communication) Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences University of Technology, Sydney ¯`~.. ¸><((((º>¸. .~´¯`~.. ¸><((((º>¸. .~´¯`~.. ¸><((((º>¸. .><((((º>`~.¸¸.~´¯`~.¸.~´¯`~...¸><((((º> .,,.~´¯`~.. ¸><((((º>¸. .....,,.><((((º>`~.¸¸.~´¯`~.¸.~´¯`~...¸><((((º> .~´¯`~.. ¸><((((º>¸. .,,.~´¯`~.. ¸><((((º>¸. .~´¯`~.. UTS CRICOS Provider Code: 00099F DISCLAIMER: This email message and any accompanying attachments may contain confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, do not read, use, disseminate, distribute or copy this message or attachments. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete this message. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except where the sender expressly, and with authority, states them to be the views of the University of Technology Sydney. Before opening any attachments, please check them for viruses and defects. Think. Green. Do. Please consider the environment before printing this email.
participants (12)
-
Alexander Halavais -
Caroline Haythornthwaite -
Dana Rotman -
Denise N. Rall -
Giorgos Cheliotis -
James Howison -
Jorgen Skageby -
Marc Smith -
MARIA AMPARO LASEN DIAZ -
Morgan Leigh -
natalya godbold -
Zeynep Tufekci