Knowledge Sharing in Online Communities: Learning to Cross Geographic and Hierarchical Boundaries

References

• Alavi M, Leidner DE (2001) Knowledge management and knowledge management systems: Conceptual foundations and research issues. MIS Quart. 25(1):107–136.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Allen T (1977) Managing the Flow of Technology: Technology Transfer and the Dissemination of Technological Information Within the Research and Development Organization (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Amir Y (1969) Contact hypothesis in ethnic relations. Psych. Bull. 71(5):319–342.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Argote L (2012) Organizational Learning: Creating, Retaining and Transferring Knowledge (Springer, New York).Google Scholar
• Arguello J, Butler BS, Joyce E, Kraut R, Ling KS, Rosé C, Wang X (2006) Talk to me: Foundations for successful individual-group interactions in online communities. Proc. SIGCHI Conf. Human Factors Comput. Systems (ACM, New York), 959–968.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Atchadé YF (2006) An adaptive version for the Metropolis-adjusted Langevin algorithm with a truncated drift. Methodology Comput. Appl. Probab. 8(2):235–254.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bagozzi RP, Dholakia UM (2006) Open source software user communities: A study of participation in Linux user groups. Management Sci. 52(7):1099–1115.Link, Google Scholar
• Bisgin H, Agarwal N, Xu X (2012) A study of homophily on social media. World Wide Web 15(2):213–232.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Borgatti SP, Cross R (2003) A relational view of information seeking and learning in social networks. Management Sci. 49(4):432–445.Link, Google Scholar
• Bradner E, Mark G (2002) Why distance matters: Effects on cooperation, persuasion and deception. Proc. 2002 ACM Conf. Comput. Supported Cooperative Work (ACM, New York), 226–235.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Brass DJ (1995) Creativity: It’s all in your social network. Cameron MF, Goia D, eds. Creative Action in Organizations: Ivory Tower Visions and Real World Voices (Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA),94–99.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Brass DJ, Galaskiewicz J, Greve HR, Tsai W (2004) Taking stock of networks and organizations: A multilevel perspective. Acad. Management J. 47(6):795–817.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Braun M, Bonfrer A (2009) Censoring, interdependence and scalability for dyadic social media data. Working paper, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge.Google Scholar
• Brewer MB, Brown RJ (1998) Intergroup relations. Gilbert DT, Fiske ST, Lindzey G, eds. The Handbook of Social Psychology (McGraw-Hill, New York), 554–594.Google Scholar
• Bunderson S (2003) Recognizing and utilizing expertise in work groups: A status characteristics perspective. Admin. Sci. Quart. 48(4):557–591.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Burke M, Joyce E, Kim T, Anand V, Kraut R (2007) Introductions and requests: Rhetorical strategies that elicit response in online communities. Steinfeld C, Pentland BT, Ackerman M, Contractor N, eds. Communities Tech. 2007: Proc. Third Communities Tech. Conf. (Springer, New York), 21–39.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Burt RS (1992) Structural Holes (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA).Crossref, 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
• Byrne DE (1971) The Attraction Paradigm (Academic Press, Waltham, MA).Google Scholar
• Byrne D, Nelson D (1964) Attraction as a function of attitude similarity-dissimilarity: The effect of topic importance. Psychonomic Sci. 1(1):93–94.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Byrne D, Wong TJ (1962) Racial prejudice, interpersonal attraction, and assumed dissimilarity of attitudes. J. Abnormal Soc. Psych. 65(4):246–253.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Byrne D, Clore GL Jr, Worchel P (1966) Effect of economic similarity-dissimilarity on interpersonal attraction. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 4(2):220–224.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cameron A, Trivedi P (2005) Microeconometrics: Methods and Applications, 1st ed. (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Clark HH, Marshall CR (2002) Definite reference and mutual knowledge. Altmann GTM, ed. Psycholinguistics: Critical Concepts in Psychology (Routledge, New York), 414–458.Google Scholar
• Cohen BP, Zhou X (1991) Status processes in enduring work groups. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 56(2):179–188.Crossref, 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
• Cramton CD (2001) The mutual knowledge problem and its consequences for dispersed collaboration. Organ. Sci. 12(3):346–371.Link, Google Scholar
• Crandall D, Cosley D, Huttenlocher D, Kleinberg J, Suri S (2008) Feedback effects between similarity and social influence in online communities. Proc. 14th ACM SIGKDD Internat. Conf. Knowledge Discovery Data Mining (ACM, New York), 160–168.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cross R, Sproull L (2004) More than an answer: Information relationships for actionable knowledge. Organ. Sci. 15(4):446–462.Link, Google Scholar
• Faraj S, Johnson SL (2011) Network exchange patterns in online communities. Organ. Sci. 22(6):1464–1480.Link, Google Scholar
• Faraj S, Jarvenpaa SL, Majchrzak A (2011) Knowledge collaboration in online communities. Organ. Sci. 22(5):1224–1239.Link, Google Scholar
• Festinger L, Schachter S, Back K (1950) Social Processes in Informal Groups (Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA).Google Scholar
• Fischer CS (1982) To Dwell Among Friends: Personal Networks in Town and City (University of Chicago Press, Chicago).Google Scholar
• Friedman TL (2006) The World Is Flat: A Brief History of the Twenty-First Century (Macmillan, London).Google Scholar
• Fulk J, Heino R, Flanagin AJ, Monge PR, Bar F (2004) A test of the individual action model for organizational information commons. Organ. Sci. 15(5):569–585.Link, Google Scholar
• Fussell SR, Krauss RM (1992) Coordination of knowledge in communication: Effects of speakers’ assumptions about what others know. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 62(3):378–391.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Galegher JR, Kraut RE, Egido C (1990) Intellectual Teamwork: The Social and Technological Bases of Cooperative Work (Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ).Google Scholar
• Gelman A, Hill J (2007) Data Analysis Using Regression and Multilevel/Hierarchical Models (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gelman A, Carlin JB, Stern HS, Rubin DB (2003) Bayesian Data Analysis (Chapman and Hall/CRC, Boca Raton, FL).Google Scholar
• Granovetter M (1983) The strength of weak ties: A network theory revisited. Sociol. Theory 1(1):201–233.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Grant RM (1996) Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm. Strategic Management J. 17(10):109–122.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Greene W (2011) Econometric Analysis, 7th ed. (Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ).Google Scholar
• Hampton KN, Wellman B (2000) Examining community in the digital neighborhood: Early results from Canada’s wired suburb. Ishida T, Isbister K, eds. Digital Cities: Technologies, Experiences, and Future Perspectives (Springer, Heidelberg, Germany), 194–208.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hansen MT (1999) The search-transfer problem: The role of weak ties in sharing knowledge across organization subunits. Admin. Sci. Quart. 44(1):82–85.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Harrison D, Price K, Bell M (1998) Beyond relational demography: Time and the effects of surface- and deep-level diversity on work group cohesion. Acad. Management J. 41(1):96–107.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Harrison DA, Price KH, Gavin JH, Florey AT (2002) Time, teams, and task performance: Changing effects of surface-and deep-level diversity on group functioning. Acad. Management J. 45(5):1029–1045.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hausman JA (1978) Specification tests in econometrics. Econometrica 46(6):1251–1271.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Heckman JJ (1979) Sample selection bias as a specification error. Econometrica 47(1):153–161.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hewstone M, Rubin M, Willis H (2002) Intergroup bias. Annual Rev. Psych. 53(1):575–604.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hollingshead AB, McGrath JE (1995) Computer-assisted groups: A critical review of the empirical research. Guzzo RA, Salas E, eds. Team Effectiveness and Decision Making in Organizations (John Wiley & Sons, New York), 46–78.Google Scholar
• Horton W, Keysar B (1996) When do speakers take into account common ground? Cognition 59(1):91–117.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ibarra H (1993) Personal networks of women and minorities in management: A conceptual framework. Acad. Management Rev. 18(1):56–87.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jaccard J, Turrisi R (2003) Interaction Effects in Multiple Regression (Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jackson SE, May KA, Whitney K (1995) Understanding the dynamics of diversity in decision-making teams. Guzzo RA, Salas E, eds. Team Effectiveness and Decision Making in Organizations (John Wiley & Sons, New York), 204–261.Google Scholar
• Jaffe AB (1986) Technological opportunity and spillovers of R&D: evidence from firms’ patents, profits, and market value. Amer. Econom. Rev. 76(5):984–1001.Google Scholar
• Jehn K, Northcraft G, Neale M (1999) Why differences make a difference: A field study of diversity, conflict, and performance in workgroups. Admin. Sci. Quart. 44(4):741–763.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
• Kiesler S, Siegel J, McGuire TW (1984) Social psychological aspects of computer-mediated communication. Amer. Psych. 39(10):1123–1134.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Krauss RM, Fussell S (1990) Mutual knowledge and communicative effectiveness. Galegher J, Kraut RE, Egido C, eds. Intellectual Teamwork: Social and Technological Foundations of Cooperative Work (Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ), 111–145.Google Scholar
• Lakhani KR, von Hippel E (2003) How open source software works: “Free” user-to-user assistance. Res. Policy 32(6):923–943.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lakhani K, Wolf R (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.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lancaster FW (1978) Toward Paperless Information Systems (Academic Press, Waltham, MA).Google Scholar
• Lauw HW, Shafer JC, Agrawal R, Ntoulas A (2010) Homophily in the digital world: A LiveJournal case study. Internet Comput. 14(2):15–23.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lea M, Spears R (1991) Computer-mediated communication, de-individuation and group decision-making. Internat. J. Man-Machine Stud. 34(2):283–301.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lerner J, Tirole J (2002) Some simple economics of open source. J. Indust. Econom. 50(2):197–234.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Linstone HA, Turoff M, eds. (1976) The Delphi Method: Techniques and Applications (Addison-Wesley, Boston).Google Scholar
• Lu Y, Jerath K, Singh PV (2013) The emergence of opinion leaders in a networked online community: A dyadic model with time dynamics and a heuristic for fast estimation. Management Sci. 59(8):1783–1799.Link, Google Scholar
• Ludford PJ, Cosley D, Frankowski D, Terveen L (2004) Think different: increasing online community participation using uniqueness and group dissimilarity. Proc. SIGCHI Conf. Human Factors Comput. Systems (ACM, New York), 631–638.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ma M, Agarwal R (2007) Through a glass darkly: Information technology design, identity verification, and knkowledge contribution in online communities. Inform. Systems Res. 18(1):42–67.Link, Google Scholar
• Makela K, Kalla HK, Piekkari R (2007) Interpersonal similarity as a driver of knowledge sharing within multinational corporations. Internat. Bus. Rev. 16(1):1–22.Crossref, Google Scholar
• March JG (1991) Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organ. Sci. 2(1):71–87.Link, Google Scholar
• Markus LM (2001) Toward a theory of knowledge reuse: Types of knowledge reuse situations and factors in reuse success. J. Management Inform. Systems 18(1):57–93.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Marquaridt DW (1970) Generalized inverses, ridge regression, biased linear estimation, and nonlinear estimation. Technometrics 12(3):591–612.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mason CH, Perreault WD Jr (1991) Collinearity, power, and interpretation of multiple regression analysis. J. Marketing Res. 28(3):268–280.Crossref, Google Scholar
• McKinsey (2013) Evolution of the networked enterprise: McKinsey global survey results. Report, McKinsey & Company, New York. http://www.mckinsey.com/insights/business_technology/evolution_of_the_networked_enterprise _mckinsey_global_survey_results.Google Scholar
• McPherson JM, Smith-Lovin L (1987) Homophily in voluntary organizations: Status distance and the composition of face-to-face groups. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 52(3):370–379.Crossref, Google Scholar
• McPherson M, Smith-Lovin L, Cook JM (2001) Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks. Annual Rev. Sociol. 27:415–444.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mislove A, Viswanath B, Gummadi KP, Druschel P (2010) You are who you know: Inferring user profiles in online social networks. Proc. Third ACM Internat. Conf. Web Search Data Mining (ACM, New York), 251–260.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Monteiro LF, Arvidsson N, Birkinshaw J (2008) Knowledge flows within multinational corporations: Explaining subsidiary isolation and its performance implications. Organ. Sci. 19(1):90–107.Link, Google Scholar
• Moore G (1990) Structural determinants of men’s and women’s personal networks. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 55(5):726–735.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nonnecke B, Preece J (2000) Lurker demographics: Counting the silent. Proc. SIGCHI Conf. Human Factors Comput. Systems (ACM, The Hague), 73–80.Crossref, Google Scholar
• O’Brien R (2007) A caution regarding rules of thumb for variance inflation factors. Quality Quantity 41(5):673–690.Crossref, Google Scholar
• O’Leary DE (2014) Knowledge management: An empirical analysis of reuse and productivity. J. Decision Systems 23(3):249–265.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Oreg S, Nov O (2008) Exploring motivations for contributing to open source initiatives: The roles of contribution context and personal values. Comput. Human Behav. 24(5):2055–2073.Crossref, Google Scholar
• O’Reilly CA III (1983) The use of information in organizational decision making: A model and some propositions. Cummings LL, Staw BM, eds. Research in Organizational Behavior, Vol. 5 (JAI Press, Greenwich, CT), 103–139.Google Scholar
• Orlikowski WJ (1996) Improvising organizational transformation over time: A situated change perspective. Inform. Systems Res. 7(1):63–92.Link, Google Scholar
• Pal A, Farzan R, Konstan J, Kraut R (2011) Early detection of potential experts in question answering communities. Konstan J, Conejo R, Marzo J, Oliver N, eds. User Modeling, Adaptation and Personalization (Springer, Heidelberg, Germany), 231–242.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pelled LH (1996) Demographic diversity, conflict, and work group outcomes: An intervening process theory. Organ. Sci. 7(6):615–631.Link, Google Scholar
• Reicher SD (1984) Social influence in the crowd: Attitudinal and behavioural effects of de-individuation in conditions of high and low group salience. British J. Soc. Psych. 23(4):341–350.Crossref, 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
• Riahi F, Zolaktaf Z, Shafiei M, Milios E (2012) Finding expert users in community question answering. Proc. 21st Internat. Conf. Companion World Wide Web (ACM, New York), 791–798.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sampson RC (2007) R&D alliances and firm performance: The impact of technological diversity and alliance organization on innovation. Acad. Management J. 50(2):364–386.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shah C (2010) Collaborative information seeking: A literature review. Woodsworth A, ed. Exploring the Digital Frontier, Advances in Librarianship, Vol. 32 (Emerald Group Publishing, Bingley, UK), 3–33.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shrum W, Cheek NH Jr, MacD S (1988) Friendship in school: Gender and racial homophily. Sociol. Ed. 61(4):227–239.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Siegel J, Dubrovsky V, Kiesler S, McGuire T (1986) Group processes in computer-mediated communication. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 37(2):157–187.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Simpson WB (2001) QAP: The Quadratic Assignment Procedure. Paper presented at the North American Stata Users’ Group Meeting, March 20–21.Google Scholar
• Singh R, Tan LS (1992) Attitudes and attraction: A test of the similarity-attraction and dissimilarity-repulsion hypotheses. British J. Soc. Psych. 31(3):227–238.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Skopek J, Schulz F, Blossfeld H-P (2011) Who contacts whom? Educational homophily in online mate selection. Eur. Sociol. Rev. 27(2):180–195.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sproull L, Kiesler S (1986) Reducing social context cues: Electronic mail in organizational communications. Management Sci. 32(11):1492–1512.Link, Google Scholar
• Sproull L, Kiesler S (1991) New Ways of Working in the Networked Organization (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Stangor C, Lynch L, Duan C, Glas B (1992) Categorization of individuals on the basis of multiple social features. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 62(2):207–218.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tajfel H, Billig MG, Bundy RP, Flament C (1971) Social categorization and intergroup behaviour. Eur. J. Soc. Psych. 1(2):149–178.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tausczik YR, Pennebaker JW (2012) Participation in an online mathematics community: Differentiating motivations to add. Proc. ACM 2012 Conf. Comput. Supported Cooperative Work (ACM, New York) 207–216.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Thelwall M (2009) Homophily in MySpace. J. Amer. Soc. Inform. Sci. Tech. 60(2):219–231.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Van Alstyne MW, Brynjolfsson E (2005) Global village or Cyber-Balkans: Modeling and measuring the integration of electronic communities. Management Sci. 51(6):851–868.Link, Google Scholar
• von Hippel E, von Krogh G (2003) Open source software and the “private-collective” innovation model: Issues for organization science. Organ. Sci. 14(2):209–223.Link, 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 MML, Faraj S (2005) Why should I share? Examining social capital and knowledge contribution in electronic networks of practice. MIS Quart. 29(1):35–57.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Welser HT, Gleave E, Fisher D, Smith M (2007) Visualizing the signatures of social roles in online discussion groups. J. Soc. Structure 8(2):1–32.Google Scholar
• Williams KY, O’Reilly CA III (1998) Demography and diversity in organizations: A review of 40 years of research. Res. Organ. Behav. 20:77–140.Google Scholar
• Zammuto RF, Griffith TL, Majchrzak A, Dougherty DJ, Faraj S (2007) Information technology and the changing fabric of organization. Organ. Sci. 18(5):749–762.Link, Google Scholar
• Zander U, Kogut B (1995) Knowledge and the speed of the transfer and imitation of organizational capabilities: An empirical test. Organ. Sci. 6(1):76–92.Link, Google Scholar
• Zhang J, Ackerman MS, Adamic L (2007) Expertise networks in online communities: Structure and algorithms. Proc. 16th Internat. Conf. World Wide Web (ACM, New York), 221–230.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zipf G (1949) Human Behavior and the Principle of Least Effort (Addison-Wesley, Menlo Park, CA).Google Scholar