Week 13 Constructing Community (Part II)

Articles Read

Porter, E. (2004). A Typology of Virtual Communities: A Multi-Disciplinary Foundation for Future Research. JCMC, 10 (1), Article 3, November. http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol10/issue1/porter.html

Rosen, D., Woelfel, J., Krikorian, D., & Barnett, G. A. (2003). Procedures for Analyses of Online Communities. JCMC, 8 (4). Available at http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol8/issue4/rosen.html

Article Summary

Porter, E. (2004). A Typology of Virtual Communities: A Multi-Disciplinary Foundation for Future Research. JCMC, 10 (1), Article 3, November. http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol10/issue1/porter.html

In this piece, Porter proposed a typology to categorize virtual communities. In this paper, a virtual community is defined as an aggregation of individuals or business partners who interact around a shared interest, where the interaction is at least partially supported and/or mediated by technology and guided by some protocols or norms. The proposed typology of virtual communities includes two first-level categories: Member-initiated and Organization-sponsored. At the second level of typology, virtual communities are categorized based on the general relationship orientation of the community. Member-initiated communities foster either social or professional relationships among members. Organization-sponsored communities foster relationships both among members and between individual members and the sponsoring organization. The paper also addressed the various attributes of virtual communities, including purpose (content of interaction), place (extent of technology mediation of interaction), platform (design of interaction), population interaction structure (pattern of interaction), and profit model (return on interaction). Finally, Porter evaluated the typology based on Hunt’s (1991) criteria, and stated the advantages of this typology over competing typologies.

Rosen, D., Woelfel, J., Krikorian, D., & Barnett, G. A. (2003). Procedures for Analyses of Online Communities. JCMC, 8 (4). Available at http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol8/issue4/rosen.html

In this piece, Rosen et al. presented a set of procedures for the analysis and interpretation of the content and structure of online networks and communities. An neural-based content analysis software -- Catpac was used to analyze data based on set parameters. Rosen et al. used the chat data from the Cornell Theory Center’s SciCentr, and analyzed the difference between trends of what the high school students are saying compared to what the Cornell mentors are saying, the gender differences and similarities, and so on. The method of parsing chat data with Catpac turned out to be extremely useful to study the data on individual and group levels. It allows users to input a name file allowing for the immediate analysis of the data on any demographic or systems level. Rosen et al. also talked about the limitations of Catpac and offered suggestions on how to further improve the Catpac.

What do you see as *the* most important impediment or problem for online socializing?

I see the most important impediment for online socializing is lack of accountability. In most cases, people don’t need to be accountable to anyone, because they are anonymous, or because they believe online world is a virtual world where trust and honesty are no longer meaningful. Anonymity has its own advantages such as allowing people to express their views more freely. However, Kevin Kelly, mathematician, a Senior Researcher at Stanford University, and Executive Director of Stanford University's Center for the Study of Language and Information, warns of the dangers of anonymity. According to him, it's OK in small doses, but too much of it is a problem: "(I)n every system that I have seen where anonymity becomes common, the system fails. The recent taint in the honor of Wikipedia stems from the extreme ease which anonymous declarations can be put into a very visible public record. Communities infected with anonymity will either collapse, or shift the anonymous to pseudo-anonymous, as in eBay, where you have a traceable identity behind an invented nickname." Therefore, I think for any online communities it is important to make clear to the members how much trust each member could have on other members, and to figure out how to build such trust.

Discussion Questions (My Questions)

a. What are the particular issues we should pay attention to when analyzing the interactions in an online community?

b. As I have discussed, anonymity has its own advantages and disadvantages. How could we make the best use of its advantages and avoid its disadvantages in educational settings?