Session 3

Part 1

Tedjamulia et al.’s article gave me a new perspective on certain aspects of social psychology, first of all, and also online communities. I like how the study delved into extrinsic and intrinsic motivations for OC usage. Although I do agree with their claim, the question unanswered for me though is why extrinsic motivation is so much more powerful in the online environment (under certain circumstances).

I guess if I had my own story to share, it would have been my money-making experience in Second Life. Last semester, even in the midst of a ton of homework due the following week, I managed to take a break in between projects to spend three whole hours clicking on this or that object, teleporting all around SL, and getting paid while doing so, with the promise that I could “level-up”. Once I reached a certain amount of Lindens, I could reach another level and double the amount I made, so I kept at it. I was pretty excited about making 60 whole Linden dollars in all… “I can buy lots of new outfits, bicycles, shoes for my avatar, etc.” …Then I realized it came out to like 24 cents in real life, which made me feel a little silly. But the extrinsic and intrinsic motivation were certainly there. Extrinsic being the virtual dollars I make, intrinsic the rush of getting anything for “free.”

However, like they say, time is money. I could have signed up for a part-time job that paid minimum wage and within 3 hours I would’ve made $21.75. That translates into 5,519 Linden dollars. I could’ve bought myself a virtual mansion, virtual SUV and probably my own virtual island.

Tedjamulia also mentions the need for OCs to pay attention to those with high achievement needs, since they tend to set higher goals for themselves and actually complete them. I think this is a pretty good idea, but maybe should be approached with some caution. Can we be sure that the high achievers are getting along smoothly with other users who have low-to-medium achievement needs? Also they need to be sure that they are rewarding high achievers for positive effort and not riling any of the other users.

An interesting point that Ling et al.’s article makes is that group settings tend to encourage social loafing. As an aside, this is the problem that I’ve seen happen time and again with real-life group work, which I’ve personally observed happen about 40%of the time in my own graduate school experience, and tends to be an unacknowledged problem. Also, I think they are on target about online users needing to feel unique. However, I’d like to extend this claim: it may only be true in America and several other countries, where there is an added emphasis on individuality. I wonder how this hypothesis would play out in other countries and cultures where uniqueness is downplayed, and the concept of (real life) community is elevated.

Part 2

Online community: Alternative Health on iVillage

What modes of participation are there?
A public message board that does not require an account to view, only to post. You can: start a discussion, add to a discussion, create a profile for others to view, flag inappropriate responses, subscribe to particular discussions, add tags to your own post, create macros.

How is participation encouraged?
1. Views: You can see how many times your post was viewed so even if only 1 person responded to your post, you know that you’ve made a contribution that was (perhaps) useful to someone.

2.  Quick response: Once something is posted, replies usually come within the next 2-3 days.

3. Consistent response: The designated “community moderators” are very good at not only creating original posts, but responding to members’ posts on a consistent, frequent basis. Community moderators seem to be the backbone of these forums.

4. Useful, descriptive responses: When a member asked “What types of music are calming?” people replied with the exact artists names and song titles that produce a calming effect for them.

5. Control over inappropriate comment: I’ve seen message boards goes down the tube the minute the webmaster loses control over what members are posting. Users of this particular forum (mostly women) want to be able to post in safe, friendly environment free of attacks. Not once among the 50+ posts did I see an obscene or blatantly offensive post.

Which types of content draw the most responses?
alternative medicines: 30
scents and their effect on mood: 25
calmness: 16
food: 12
creative DIY methods used in alternative health: 10

I guess I was drawn to this site because of Schrock’s claim that women tend to be more extroverted and prone to self-disclosure in online communities. I don’t think I could have proven that without a proper comparison to an online forum for men (possible term project for me?), but to zero in on a women’s forum is a start. I would say that the “community moderators” have a stronger tendency towards self-disclosure, since they are ones who not only write the most posts/replies, but more importantly, they put their real-life self-portrait in their profiles and write publicly about health issues that are perceived as very personal and private to others.

The findings of this mini-study actually seem to support the existing theory that Ridings and Gefen attempted to modify in their study: that people join SNSs to exchange information or social support. In this case, I felt that both were stronger here than the desire for friendship and recreation, with the desire to exchange information being the strongest. Social support came up second most frequently, especially in posts were users shared their various ailments with each other and offered not only remedies, but their empathy/sympathy. In my own experience with OCs, I have had the tendency first to use them as a means to socialize with friends, and then secondly as venues for information exchange.