Masamichi Takahashi
ABSTRACT
In this study, we focus on participants called lurkers, who do not post any messages in an online community such as interactive mailing lists and bulletin board systems. We propose a method of classifying participants including lurkers based on two criteria: what types of actions they take outside the online community, and whether or not the online community affects their thoughts. In addition, based on the results of interviews, we propose hypotheses regarding factors that characterize the categories of lurkers. We conduct a questionnaire survey of all participants in two in-house online communities to verify our method and test the hypotheses. There are a considerable number of lurkers who have a strong and wide influence outside the online community. We conclude that such lurkers cannot be neglected in an evaluation of online communities within a company. We also discuss the possibility of online community management by focusing on not only posters but also lurkers who are indirect contributors to increasing the influence of an online community on its outside environment.
- D. Cohen, and L. Prusak, In Good Company. How Social Capital Makes Organizations Work, Boston, MA., Harvard Business School Press, 2001.Google Scholar
- P. Dourish, and S. Bly, Portholes: Supporting Awareness in a Distributed Work Group, In Proceedings of CHI 92, Monterey, California, 1992, 541--547. Google ScholarDigital Library
- H. Duggan, Getting and Retaining Members, available at http://www.fullcirc.com/community/retainmembers.htm, 1999.Google Scholar
- S. R. Hiltz, and M. Turoff, Structuring Computer-Mediated Communication Systems to Avoid Information Overload, Communications of the ACM, 28, 7, 1985, 680--689. Google ScholarDigital Library
- R. Holeton, Wired Frosh, available at http://www.stanford.edu/holeton/wired-frosh/index.html, 1997.Google Scholar
- T. Ishida, (eds.) Community Computing and Support Systems: Social Interaction in Networked Communities, Springer Verlag, 1998.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Jargon-Dictionary Lurker Definition, available at http://www.netmeg.net/jargon.Google Scholar
- J. Katz, Luring the Lurkers, available at http://slashdot.org/features/98/12/28/1745252.shtml, 1998.Google Scholar
- A. J. Kim, Community Building: Secret Strategies for Successful Online Communities on the Web, Berkeley, CA., Peachpit Press, 2000. Google ScholarDigital Library
- P. Kollock, and M. Smith, Managing the Virtual Commons: Cooperation and Conflict in Computer Communities, In Proceedings of Computer--Mediated Communication: Linguistic, Social, and Cross-Cultural Perspectives, John Benjamins, Amsterdam, 1996, 109--128.Google ScholarCross Ref
- R. E. Kraut, R. Fish, R. Root, and B. Chalfonte, Informal Communication in Organizations: Form, Function and Technology, In Oskamp, S. and S. Scacapan, (eds.) Human Reactions to Technology: Claremont Symposium on Applied Social Psychology, Beverly Hills, CA., Sage Publications, 1990.Google Scholar
- B. Latane, K. Williams, and S. Harkins, Many Hands Make Light The Work: The Causes and Consequences of Social Loafing, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1979, 822--832.Google ScholarCross Ref
- H. J. Leavitt, and J. Lipman-Blumen, Hot Groups, Harvard Business Review, July-August, 1995, 109--116.Google Scholar
- N. Lin, Social Capital: A Theory of Social Structure and Action, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2001.Google ScholarCross Ref
- B. Mason, Issues in Virtual Ethnography, In Proceedings of Ethnographic Studies in Real and Virtual Environments: Inhabited Information Spaces and Connected Communities, Edinburgh, 1999, 61--69.Google Scholar
- B. Nonnecke, Lurking in Email-based Discussion Lists, a thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements of South Bank University for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, March, 2000.Google Scholar
- B. Nonnecke, and J. Preece, Persistence and Lurkers: A Pilot Study, In Proceedings of HICSS-33, Maui, Hawaii, 2000. Google ScholarDigital Library
- B. Nonnecke, and J. Preece, Lurker Demographics: Counting the Silent, In Proceedings of CHI 2000, The Hague, 2000, 73--80. Google ScholarDigital Library
- B. Nonnecke, and J. Preece, Why Lurkers Lurk, Americas Conference on Information Systems, 2001.Google Scholar
- J. Perkins, and K. Newman, Two Archetypes in E-discourse: Lurkers and Virtuosos, International Journal of Educational Telecommunications, 2, 2--3, 1996, 155--170.Google Scholar
- J. Preece, J. Supporting Community and Building Social Capital, Communications of the ACM, 45, 4, 2002, 37--39. Google ScholarDigital Library
- T. Schoberth, J. Preece, and A. Heinzl, Online Communities: A Longitudinal Analysis of Communication Activities, In Proceedings of HICSS-36, Big Island, Hawaii, 2003.Google ScholarCross Ref
- M. A. Smith,and A. T. Fiore, Visualization Components for Persistent Conversations, In Proceedings of CHI 2001, Seattle, Washington, 2001, 136--143. Google ScholarDigital Library
- M. Takahashi, S. Kitayama, and I. Kaneko, Measuring and Visualizing Organizational Awareness of Network Communities, Information Processing Society of Japan Journal, Vol. 40, No. 11 (In Japanese), 1999.Google Scholar
- J. Willett, VECO - an Online Community Making a Difference, an Evaluation of the Project, Australian Student Traineeship Foundation and Dusseldorp Skills Forum, Sydney, 1998.Google Scholar
Index Terms
- The active lurker: influence of an in-house online community on its outside environment
Recommendations
Lurker demographics: counting the silent
CHI '00: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human Factors in Computing SystemsAs online groups grow in number and type, understanding lurking is becoming increasingly important. Recent reports indicate that lurkers make up over 90% of online groups, yet little is known about them.
This paper presents a demographic study of lurking ...
The active lurker: influence of an in-house online community on its outside environment[1] (abstract only)
In this study, we focus on participants called lurkers, who do not post any messages in an online community such as interactive mailing lists and bulletin board systems. We propose a method of classifying participants including lurkers based on two ...
The active lurker: a new viewpoint for evaluating the influence of an in-house online community
In this study, we focus on participants called lurkers, who do not post any messages in an online community such as interactive mailing lists and bulletin board systems. We propose a method of classifying participants including lurkers based on two ...
Comments