Forum Size and Content Contribution per Person: A Field Experiment

References

• Aaltonen A, Seiler S (2015) Cumulative growth in user-generated content production: Evidence from Wikipedia. Management Sci. 62(7):2054–2069.Link, Google Scholar
• Ackerman MS (1998) Augmenting organizational memory: A field study of answer garden. ACM Trans. Inform. Systems 16(3):203–224 (TOIS).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Albanese R, van Fleet DD (1985) Rational behavior in groups: The free-riding tendency. Acad. Management Rev. 10(2):244–255.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Alnuaimi OA, Robert LP, Maruping LM (2010) Team size, dispersion, and social loafing in technology-supported teams: A perspective on the theory of moral disengagement. J. Management Inform. Systems 27(1):203–230.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ashraf N, Bandiera O, Lee SS (2014) Awards unbundled: Evidence from a natural field experiment. J. Econom. Behav. Organ. 100:44–63.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bales R, Borgatta E (1966) Size of group as a factor in the interaction profile. Hare AP, Borgatta E, Bales R, eds. Small Groups: Studies in Social Interaction (Knopf, New York), 495–512.Google Scholar
• Barron G, Yechiam E (2002) Private email requests and the diffusion of responsibility. Comput. Human Behav. 18(5):507–520.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bateman PJ, Gray PH, Butler BS (2011) Research note—the impact of community commitment on participation in online communities. Inform. Systems Res. 22(4):841–854.Link, Google Scholar
• Beaudoin MF (2002) Learning or lurking? Tracking the “invisible” online student. Internat. Higher Ed. 5(2):147–155.Google Scholar
• Beenen G, Ling K, Wang X, Chang K, Frankowski D, Resnick P, Kraut RE (2004) Using social psychology to motivate contributions to online communities. Proc. 2004 ACM Conf. Comput. Supported Cooperative Work (ACM, New York), 212–221.Google Scholar
• Boudreau KJ, Lacetera N, Lakhani KR (2011) Incentives and problem uncertainty in innovation contests: An empirical analysis. Management Sci. 57(5):843–863.Link, Google Scholar
• Bray RM, Kerr NL, Atkin RS (1978) Effects of group size, problem difficulty, and sex on group performance and member reactions. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 36(11):1224–1240.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Breslow L, Pritchard DE, DeBoer J, Stump GS, Ho AD, Seaton DT (2013) Studying learning in the worldwide classroom: Research into edX’s first MOOC. Res. Practice Assessment 8:13–25.Google Scholar
• Brodie RJ, Ilic A, Juric B, Hollebeek L (2013) Consumer engagement in a virtual brand community: An exploratory analysis. J. Bus. Res. 66(1):105–114.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Brooks FP (1975) The Mythical Man-Month: Essays on Software Engineering (Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Budhathoki N, Haythornthwaite C (2013) Motivation for open collaboration: Crowd and community models and the case of OpenStreetMap. Amer. Behav. Sci. 57(5):548–575.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Burtch G, Hong Y, Bapna R, Griskevicius V (2017) Stimulating online reviews by combining financial incentives and social norms. Management Sci. 64(5):2065–2082.Link, Google Scholar
• Butler BS (2001) Membership size, communication activity, and sustainability: A resource-based model of online social structures. Inform. Systems Res. 12(4):346–362.Link, Google Scholar
• Butler B, Sproull L, Kiesler S, Kraut R (2002) Community effort in online groups: Who does the work and why. Weisband S, Atwater L, eds. Leadership at a Distance: Research in Technologically Supported Work (Psychology Press, London), 171–194.Google Scholar
• Cameron AC, Trivedi P (2013) Regression Analysis of Count Data (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Carillo K, Okoli C (2011) Generating quality open content: A functional group perspective based on the time, interaction, and performance theory. Inform. Management 48(6):208–219.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chidambaram L, Tung LL (2005) Is out of sight, out of mind? An empirical study of social loafing in technology-supported groups. Inform. Systems Res. 16(2):149–168.Link, Google Scholar
• Chiu C-M, Hsu M-H, Wang ETG (2006) Understanding knowledge sharing in virtual communities: An integration of social capital and social cognitive theories. Decision Support Systems 42(3):1872–1888.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Clow D (2013) MOOCs and the funnel of participation. Proc. 3rd Internat. Conf. Learning Analytics Knowledge (ACM, New York), 185–189.Google Scholar
• Coetzee D, Fox A, Hearst MA, Hartmann B (2014) Should your MOOC forum use a reputation system? Proc. 17th ACM Conf. Comput. Supported Cooperative Work Social Comput. (ACM, New York), 1176–1187.Google Scholar
• Constant D, Sproull L, Kiesler S (1996) The kindness of strangers: The usefulness of electronic weak ties for technical advice. Organ. Sci. 7(2):119–135.Link, Google Scholar
• Di Gangi PM, Wasko MM, Hooker RE (2010) Getting customers’ ideas to work for you: Learning from Dell how to succeed with online user innovation communities. MIS Quart. Executive 9(4):213–228.Google Scholar
• Diehl M, Strobe W (1987) Productivity loss in brainstorming groups: Toward the solution of a riddle. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 53(3):497–509.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Faraj S, von Krogh G, Monteiro E, Lakhani KR (2016) Special section introduction—Online community as space for knowledge flows. Inform. Systems Res. 27(4):668–684.Link, Google Scholar
• Farzan R, DiMicco JM, Millen DR, Dugan C, Geyer W, Brownholtz EA (2008) Results from deploying a participation incentive mechanism within the enterprise. Proc. SIGCHI Conf. Human Factors Comput. Systems (ACM, New York), 563–572.Google Scholar
• Gallupe RB, Dennis AR, Cooper WH, Valacich JS, Bastianutti LM, Nunamaker JF (1992) Electronic brainstorming and group size. Acad. Management J. 35(2):350–369.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gooding RZ, Wagner JA III (1985) A meta-analytic review of the relationship between size and performance: The productivity and efficiency of organizations and their subunits. Admin. Sci. Quart. 30(4):462–481.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hood N, Littlejohn A, Milligan C (2015) Context counts: How learners’ contexts influence learning in a MOOC. Comput. Ed. 91:83–91.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Huang N, Hong Y, Burtch G (2017) Social network integration and user content generation: Evidence from natural experiments. Management Inform. Systems Quart. 41(4):1035–1058.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hwang EH, Singh PV, Argote L (2015) Knowledge sharing in online communities: Learning to cross geographic and hierarchical boundaries. Organ. Sci. 26(6):1593–1611.Link, Google Scholar
• Ingham AG, Levinger G, Graves J, Peckham V (1974) The Ringelmann effect: Studies of group size and group performance. J. Experiment. Soc. Psych. 10(4):371–384.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jeppesen LB, Frederiksen L (2006) Why do users contribute to firm-hosted user communities? The case of computer-controlled music instruments. Organ. Sci. 17(1):45–63.Link, Google Scholar
• Jones GR (1984) Task visibility, free riding, and shirking: Explaining the effect of structure and technology on employee behavior. Acad. Management Rev. 9(4):684–695.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jones Q, Ravid G, Rafaeli S (2004) Information overload and the message dynamics of online interaction spaces: A theoretical model and empirical exploration. Inform. Systems Res. 15(2):194–210.Link, Google Scholar
• Kane GC, Ransbotham S (2016) Content as community regulator: The recursive relationship between consumption and contribution in open collaboration communities. Organ. Sci. 27(5):1258–1274.Link, Google Scholar
• Kankanhalli A, Tan B, Wei K (2005) Contributing knowledge to electronic knowledge repositories: An empirical investigation. Management Inform. Systems Quart. 29(1):113–143.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Katz ML, Shapiro C (1985) Network externalities, competition, and compatibility. Amer. Econom. Rev. 75(3):424–440.Google Scholar
• Katz ML, Shapiro C (1994) Systems competition and network effects. J. Econom. Perspect. 8(2):93–115.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kerr NL (1989) Illusions of efficacy: The effects of group size on perceived efficacy in social dilemmas. J. Experiment Soc. Psych. 25(4):287–313.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kerr NL, Bruun SE (1981) Ringelmann revisited: Alternative explanations for the social loafing effect. Personality Soc. Psych. Bull. 7(2):224–231.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kerr NL, Bruun SE (1983) Dispensability of member effort and group motivation losses: Free-rider effects. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 44(1):78–94.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kim J (2013) Influence of group size on students’ participation in online discussion forums. Comput. Ed. 62:123–129.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Koh J, Kim YG, Butler B, Bock GW (2007) Encouraging participation in virtual communities. Comm. ACM 50(2):68–73.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lakhani KR, Wolf RG (2005) Why hackers do what they do: Understanding motivation and effort in free/open source software projects. Feller J, Fitzgerald B, Hissam S, Lakhani KR, eds. Perspectives on Free and Open Source Software (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA), 3–22.Google Scholar
• Lampel J, Bhalla A (2007) The role of status seeking in online communities: Giving the gift of experience. J. Comput. Mediated Comm. 12(2):434–455.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Latane B, Darley JM (1968) Group inhibition of bystander intervention in emergencies. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 10(3):215–221.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Latane B, Williams K, Harkins S (1979) Many hands make light the work: The causes and consequences of social loafing. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 37(6):822–832.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lerner J, Tirole J (2002) Some simple economics of open source. J. Indust. Econom. 50(2):197–234.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Li X, Zhang J (2016) The effects of monetary incentives and social comparison on MOOC participation: A randomized field experiment. Proc. 37th Internat. Conf. Inform. Systems (Association for Information Systems, Atlanta), 1152–1164.Google Scholar
• Littlejohn A, Hood N, Milligan C, Mustain P (2016) Learning in MOOCs: Motivations and self-regulated learning in MOOCs. Internet Higher Ed. 29:40–48.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lowry PB, Roberts TL, Romano NC, Cheney PD, Hightower RT (2006) The impact of group size and social presence on small-group communication: Does computer-mediated communication make a difference? Small Group Res. 37(6):631–661.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ma M, Agarwal R (2007) Through a glass darkly: Information technology design, identity verification, and knowledge contribution in online communities. Inform. Systems Res. 18(1):42–67.Link, Google Scholar
• Mao A, Mason W, Suri S, Watts DJ (2016) An experimental study of team size and performance on a complex task. PLoS One 11(4):e0153048.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Montgomery JM, Nyhan B, Torres M (2016) How conditioning on posttreatment variables can ruin your experiment and what to do about it. Amer. J. Political Sci. 62(3):760–775.Google Scholar
• Nonnecke B, Andrews D, Preece J (2006) Non-public and public online community participation: Needs, attitudes and behavior. Electronic Commerce Res. 6(1):7–20.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nonnecke B, Preece J (2001) Why lurkers lurk. Proc. AMCIS 2001 (Association for Information Systems, Atlanta), 1521–1530.Google Scholar
• Parker GG, Van Alstyne MW (2005) Two-sided network effects: A theory of information product design. Management Sci. 51(10):1494–1504.Link, Google Scholar
• Pendharkar PC, Rodger JA (2009) The relationship between software development team size and software development cost. Comm. ACM 52(1):141–144.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Preece J, Nonnecke B, Andrews D (2004) The top five reasons for lurking: Improving community experiences for everyone. Comput. Human Behav. 20(2):201–223.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Qiu M, Hewitt J, Brett C (2012) Online class size, note reading, note writing and collaborative discourse. Internat. J. Comput.-Supported Collaborative Learn. 7(3):423–442.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ray S, Kim SS, Morris JG (2014) The central role of engagement in online communities. Inform. Systems Res. 25(3):528–546.Link, Google Scholar
• Ren Y, Kraut R, Kiesler S (2007) Applying common identity and bond theory to design of online communities. Organ. Stud. 28(3):377–408.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Riopelle K, Gluesing JC, Alcordo TC, Baba M, Britt D, McKether W, Monplaisir L, Ratner HH, Wagner KH (2003) Context, task, and the evolution of technology use in global virtual teams. Gibson CB, Cohen SG, eds. Virtual Teams that Work: Creating Conditions for Virtual Team Effectiveness (Jossey-Bass, San Francisco), 239–264.Google Scholar
• Rochet J-C, Tirole J (2003) Platform competition in two-sided markets. J. Eur. Econom. Assoc. 1(4):990–1029.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rosé CP, Carlson R, Yang D, Wen M, Resnick L, Goldman P, Sherer J (2014) Social factors that contribute to attrition in MOOCs. Proc. 1st ACM Conf. Learn. @ Scale Conf. (ACM, New York), 197–198.Google Scholar
• Sun N, Rau PP-L, Ma L (2014) Understanding lurkers in online communities: A literature review. Comput. Human Behav. 38:110–117.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Thomas EJ, Fink CF (1963) Effects of group size. Psych. Bull. 60(4):371–384.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Valacich JS, Dennis AR, Nunamaker JF (1992) Group size and anonymity effects on computer-mediated idea generation. Small Group Res. 23(1):49–73.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Valacich JS, Wheeler BC, Mennecke BE, Wachter R (1995) The effects of numerical and logical group size on computer-mediated idea generation. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 62(3):318–329.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Vuong QH (1989) Likelihood ratio tests for model selection and non-nested hypotheses. Econometrica 57(2):307–333.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wang X, Butler BS, Ren Y (2013) The impact of membership overlap on growth: an ecological competition view of online groups. Organ. Sci. 24(2):414–431.Link, Google Scholar
• Wasko MM, Faraj S (2000) “It is what one does”: Why people participate and help others in electronic communities of practice. J. Strategic Inform. Systems 9(2–3):155–173.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wasko MM, Faraj S (2005) Why should I share? Examining social capital and knowledge contribution in electronic networks of practice. Management Inform. Systems Quart. 29(1):35–57.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wheelan SA (2009) Group size, group development, and group productivity. Small Group Res. 40(2):247–262.Google Scholar
• Wiertz C, de Ruyter K (2007) Beyond the call of duty: Why customers contribute to firm-hosted commercial online communities. Organ. Stud. 28(3):347–376.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Yap L-X, Bock G (2006) Investigation of the effects of members' closeness size and IT in virtual communities: The social network perspective. Proc. AMCIS 2006 (Association for Information Systems, Atlanta), 4453–4460.Google Scholar
• Zalmanson L, Oestreicher-Singer G (2015) Your action is needed: The effect of website-initiated participation on user contributions to content websites. Internat. Conf. Inform. Systems (ICIS 2015): Exploring the Information Frontier, vol. 6 (Curran Associates, Red Hook, NY), 4916.Google Scholar
• Zhang X, Zhu F (2011) Group size and incentives to contribute: A natural experiment at Chinese Wikipedia. Amer. Econom. Rev. 101(4):1601–1615.Crossref, Google Scholar