lurking as trait or situational disposition: lurking and contributing in enterprise social media
DESCRIPTION
This CSCW 2012 short-paper tests hypotheses from three theories to account for behaviors of 200,000+ people in 8600+ online enterprise communities in IBM. We find little support for theories based on binary traits (either or lurker OR a contributor) or for social learning (legitimate peripheral participation). We propose a theory of (a) general disposition to engage (through either or both of lurking and contributing) and (b) personal decision regarding the method of engagement, depending on factors such as job-role, topic-interest, or social commitment to other participants.TRANSCRIPT
1
Lurking as Personal Trait
or Situational Disposition:Lurking and Contributing in Enterprise Social Media
Michael Muller
IBM Research
Cambridge, MA, USA
2
Outline
• Study hypotheses based on three theories of lurking and
contributing in social media:
• … using a rich data source of over 200,000 users,
in over 8700 online communities …
• … allowing new analyses that examine, for each person, their
lurking and contributing activities in multiple online
communities
• Implications for
– Theory
– Facilitation of communities
3# Communities Contributed
# Communities Lurked
Multiple Online Spaces
• Source of data
– 8711 online communities in IBM Connections Communities,
an enterprise online communities service
– Basic statistics
• Users 224,232
• Contributors 22,949
• Communities 8,711
• Communities/Member 1 - 184, median=2
• Members/Community 1 - 14,997, median=9
• Code each person
– Count # Communities
lurked (member)
– Count # Communities
contributed
4
# Contributed
# Lurked
# Contributed
# Lurked
Theories that describe contributing and lurking
• Binary trait theory:
– Lurking vs. contributing
– Curien et al. 2006 – “loafer”, “freeloader”
– Panciera et al. 2010 – “born vs. made? born”
� Either a lurker or a contributor, but not both
• Continuity-of-engagement theory:
– Lurking and contributing combined
– Nonnecke et al. 2006
� Engagement drives both lurking and contributing
• Social learning theory:
– Lurking as preparation for contributing
– Lave and Wenger, 1990 – “social learning”
– Preece and Shneiderman, 2009 – “reader to leader”
� Lurk immediately after joining; then contribute later
Contributors
Lurkers
Eng
agem
ent
Time after joining
Contributing
LurkingContributing
5
Very Little Support for Binary Trait Theory
3563 “pure”contributors
19386 people who both contribute and lurk
84% of people who Contributed
(in one community)
Lurked (in another community)201283 “pure” lurkers
6
Moderate Support for Continuity-of-Engagement Theory
3563 “pure”contributors
19386 people who both contribute and lurk
Correlation of Contributing & Lurking
Pearson r = .375, p<.01
Spearman rho = .352, p<.01201283 “pure” lurkers
7
Decile Analysis: Lurking and Contributing Over Time
• Decile analysis
– Define activity span= joindate to lastactivitydate
– Divide into equal tenths(deciles)
• Discard last date, becauseit is guaranteed to haveactivity
– Analyze contributions per decile
• Social Learning theory predicts
– Lurk immediately after joining
– Then begin to Contribute later
• Can test predictions for
– Individual users
– Entire communities
Time after joining
Contributing
1
10
1
10
1
10
1
10
1
10
1
10
1
10
1
10
1
10
1
10
Last activity
date
Join
date
Time after joining
Contributing
LurkingContributing
8
Little Support for Social Learning Theory – Individual Users
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 100
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Decile
Sum of Contributions
across Communities
Decile
Sum of Contributions
across Communities Real Estate Manager, SwedenA Real Estate Manager, SwedenA
0
50
100
150
200
250
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
0
50
100
150
200
250
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Decile
Sum of Contributions
across Communities
Decile
Sum of Contributions
across Communities
Collaboration Toolsmith, CanadaB Collaboration Toolsmith, CanadaB
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 100
50
100
150
200
250
300
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Decile
Sum of Contributions
across Communities
Decile
Sum of Contributions
across Communities
Business Analyst (HW products), USAC Business Analyst (HW products), USAC
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Decile
Sum of Contributions
across Communities Real Estate Manager, SwedenA Sales Manager, Czech RepublicD
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Decile
Sum of Contributions
across Communities Real Estate Manager, SwedenA Development Lead, United KingdomE
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Decile
Sum of Contributions
across Communities Real Estate Manager, SwedenA Software Specialist, IrelandF
9
Lurking as Disposition
• Theory: Engagement + disposition
• Yes, but what contributes to the user’s disposition?
– Future ethnographic research into questions of
• Relationship to topic
• Relationship to people in the community
• Work role and responsibilities
• Other factors to be discovered
• Implications for Design: Influencing the user’s disposition
– Burke and colleagues: Users receiving responses to their posts tend to continue in the online community
� Catch them early, before they decrease their activity
• Awareness tools for community facilitators
• Rapid recommendation service to recruit other members to reply
– Engagement is important
• Identify not only early contributors, but also early lurkers
• Encourage both styles of engagement
10
Conclusion and Contribution
• Tested three theories related to lurking and contributing
� Binary trait theory
� Continuity-of-engagement theory
� Social learning theory
• Proposed theory based on engagement (trait) + disposition
– Need for future research to understand factors in users’ dispositions
• Developed a decile analysis for fine-grained understanding of
– Individuals’ patterns of contribution across communities
– Communities’ patterns of contribution across individuals
Decile analysis can be extended for lurkers when view data become available
• Potential design implications
– Importance of early intervention to maintain user interest
– Opportunities to strengthen engagement of both contributors and lurkers
– Opportunities for new tools and practices to make use of these new understandings
