Gerard Beenen
Paul Resnick
Robert E. Kraut
ABSTRACT
Under-contribution is a problem for many online communities. Social psychology theories of social loafing and goal-setting can provide mid-level design principles to address this problem. We tested the design principles in two field experiments. In one, members of an online movie recommender community were reminded of the uniqueness of their contributions and the benefits that follow from them. In the second, they were given a range of individual or group goals for contribution. As predicted by theory, individuals contributed when they were reminded of their uniqueness and when they were given specific and challenging goals, but other predictions were not borne out. The paper ends with suggestions and challenges for mining social science theories as well as implications for design.
- Butler, B., When is a group not a group: An empirical examination of metaphors for online social structure, in Social and Decision Sciences. 1999, Carnegie Mellon University: Pittsburgh, PA.Google Scholar
- Adar, E. and B.A. Huberman, Free riding on Gnutella. First Monday, 2000. 5(10): p. NP.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Lakhani, K.R. and E.V. Hippel, How open source software works: "Free" user to user assistance. Research Policy, 2003. 32: p. 923--943.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Mockus, A., R.T. Fielding, and H. Andersen, Two case studies of open source software development: Apache and Mozilla. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology, 2002. 11(3): p. 309--346. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Nonnecke, B. and J. Preece, Lurker demographics: Counting the silent, in Proceedings of CHI'2000: Human Factors in Computing Systems. 2000: Hague, The Netherlands. p. 73--80. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Cosley, D., et al., Is Seeing Believing? How Recommender Systems Influence Users' Opinions, in Proceedings of CHI 2003: Human Factors in Computing Systems. 2003: Fort Lauderdale, FL. p. 585--592. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Markus, L., Towards a "critical mass" theory of interactive media: Universal access, interdependence, and diffusion. Communication Research, 1987. 14: p. 491--511.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Grudin, J., Why groupware applications fail: Problems in design and evaluation. Office: Technology and People, 1989. 4(3): p. 245--264.Google Scholar
- Dourish, P. and S. Bly, Portholes: Supporting awareness in a distributed work group, in Proceedings of CHI92: Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1992, ACM: New York. p. 541--547. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Erickson, T. and W. Kellog, Social translucence: An approach to designing systems that support social processes. Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 2000. 7(1): p. 59--83. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Preece, J., Online Communities. 2000, New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
- Viegas, F.B. and J.S.Donath, Chat circles, in Proceedings of CHI'99: Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1999, ACM Press: New York. p. 9--16. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Karau, S. and K. Williams, Social loafing: A meta-analytic review and theoretical integration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1993. 65(4): p. 681--706.Google Scholar
- Ledyard, J., Public goods: A survey of experimental research, in The Handbook of Experimental Economics, J.H. Kagel and A. Roth, Editors. 1995, Princeton University Press: Princeton, NJ. p. pp. 111--194.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Ostrom, E., Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action. 1990, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Kollock, P. and M. Smith, Managing the virtual commons: Cooperation and conflict in computer communities, in Computer-Mediated Communication: Linguistic, Social, and Cross-Cultural Perspectives, S.C. Herring, Editor. 1996, John Benjamin: Amsterdam. p. pp. 109--128.Google Scholar
- Harkins, S.G. and R.E. Petty, Effects of task difficulty and task uniqueness on social loafing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1982. 43: p. 1214--1229.Google Scholar
- Kerr, N.L., Motivation losses in small groups: A social dilemma analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1983. 45: p. 819--828.Google Scholar
- Kerr, N.L. and S. Bruun, The dispensability of member effort and group motivation losses: Free rider effects. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1983. 44: p. 78--94.Google Scholar
- Markey, P.M., Bystander intervention in computer mediated communication. Computers in Human Behavior, 2000. 16(2): p. 183--188.Google Scholar
- Shepperd, J.A. and K.M. Taylor, Social loafing and expectancy-value theory. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 1999. 25(9): p. 1147--1158.Google Scholar
- Locke, E.A. and G.P. Latham, Building a practically useful theory of goal setting and task motivation: A 35 year odyssey. American Psychologist, 2002. 57(9): p. 705--717.Google Scholar
- Thompson, L.F., J.P. Meriac, and J. Cope, Motivating online performance: the influences of goal setting and Internet self-efficacy. Social Science Computer Review, 2002. 20(2): p. 149--160. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Locke, E.A. and G.P. Latham, A Theory of Goal Setting and Task Performance. 1990, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
- Bandura, A., Perceived self-efficacy in cognitive development and functioning. Educational Psychologist, 1993. 28(2): p. 117--148.Google Scholar
- Weldon, E. and L.R. Weingard, Group goals and group performance. British Journal of Social Psychology, 1993. 32: p. 307--334.Google Scholar
- Matsui, T., T. Kakuyama, and M. Onglatco, Effects of goals and feedback on performance in groups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1987. 72(3): p. 407--415.Google Scholar
- Streit, M.C., The effects of group size on goal-setting behavior, task performance, goal commitment, and evaluation potential, in Department of Psychology. 1996, Hofstra University: Long Island, NY.Google Scholar
- White, P.H., M.M. Kjelgaard, and G. Harkins, Testing the contribution of self-evaluation to goal setting effects. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1995. 69(1): p. 69--79.Google Scholar
- Kraut, R., Applying social psychological theory to the problems of group work, in HCI Models, Theories and Frameworks: Toward A Multidisciplinary Science, J.M. Carroll, Editor. 2003, Morgan Kaufman: New York. p. 325--356.Google Scholar
- Ross, E.A., Social Psychology: An Outline and Source Book. 1908, New York: The Macmillan Company.Google Scholar
- Brown, R. and S.L. Gaertner, Blackwell Handbook of Social Psychology: Intergroup Processes. 2001, Oxford, UK: Blackwell.Google Scholar
- Gilbert, D.T., S.T. Fiske, and G. Lindzey, The Handbook of Social Psychology. 1998, Boston: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
- Higgins, E.T. and A.W. Kruglanski, Social psychology: Handbook of Basic Principles. 1996, New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
- Deci, E.L., R. Koestner, and R.M. Ryan, A meta-analytic review of experiments examining the effects of extrinsic rewards on intrinsic motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 1999. 125(6): p. 627--66.Google Scholar
Index Terms
- Using social psychology to motivate contributions to online communities
Recommendations
Personalized incremental users' engagement: driving contributions one step forward
GROUP '12: Proceedings of the 2012 ACM International Conference on Supporting Group WorkSuccessful contributors in online communities go through a lifecycle of membership status starting from the periphery and moving to the core over time. We argue that a personalized incremental engagement strategy can mobilize a larger proportion of ...
Social comparisons to motivate contributions to an online community
PERSUASIVE'07: Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on Persuasive technologyIt is increasingly common for online communities to rely on members rather than editors to contribute and moderate content. To motivate members to perform these tasks, some sites display social comparisons, information designed to show members how they ...
Exploring and mitigating social loafing in online communities
The motivation to share members' knowledge is critical to an online community's survival and success. Previous research has established that knowledge sharing intentions are based on group cohesion. Several studies also suggested that social loafing ...
Comments