Can online buddies and bandwagon cues enhance user participation in online health communities?

We explore psychological mechanisms of user contribution in an online community.We test effects of online buddy invitation and bandwagon cues on user contribution.The online buddy invitation may not work positively in online communities.Bandwagon cues will attenuate negative reactions to online buddy's exclusivity.Community feedback needs to be precise to optimize effects of social facilitation. Individuals are more likely to obtain information and support from online health communities than offer help to other users (Fox & Jones, 2009; Preece, Nonnecke, & Andrews, 2004). The current study attempts to resolve this problem of under-contribution by proposing two theory-based persuasive strategies-a specific request in the form of an online buddy and collective community feedback in the form of bandwagon cues. A 2 (online buddy: absence vs. presence) by 2 (bandwagon cues: weak vs. strong) between-participants experiment tested the effects of these strategies on psychological outcomes, including perceived responsibility, social presence, sense of community, and perceived helpfulness, as well as their posting attitudes, posting intentions, and website attitudes, across two sessions. Contrary to expectations, we found that the assignment of online buddies in a health community forum leads to negative psychological and behavioral consequences, especially in the absence of strong community feedback. Furthermore, the online buddy feature interacts with bandwagon cues to activate different cognitive processes, leading to differential interpretation of the meanings of those bandwagon cues-either as compliments (in the presence of online buddy) or as unreliable feedback (in the absence of online buddy). Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

[1]  Greg Barron,et al.  Learning to Ignore Online Help Requests , 2003, Comput. Math. Organ. Theory.

[2]  Hal B. Gregersen,et al.  Task interdependence and extrarole behavior : a test of the mediating effects of felt responsibility , 1991 .

[3]  David Gefen,et al.  Virtual Community Attraction: Why People Hang Out Online , 2006, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[4]  Robert B. Zajonc,et al.  Expectancy and Feedback as Independent Factors in Task Performance. , 1969 .

[5]  D. Russell,et al.  Social support and adaptation to stress by the elderly. , 1986, Psychology and aging.

[6]  Jennifer Preece,et al.  What lurkers and posters think of each other [online community] , 2004, 37th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 2004. Proceedings of the.

[7]  B. Latané,et al.  The Unresponsive Bystander: Why Doesn't He Help? , 1972 .

[8]  John M. Levine,et al.  Creating the Ideal Group: Composition Effects at Work , 2018, Understanding Group Behavior.

[9]  E. Deci,et al.  Ego-involved persistence: When free-choice behavior is not intrinsically motivated , 1991 .

[10]  S. Kiesler,et al.  Applying Common Identity and Bond Theory to Design of Online Communities , 2007 .

[11]  S. Shyam Sundar,et al.  Motivational Technologies: A Theoretical Framework for Designing Preventive Health Applications , 2012, PERSUASIVE.

[12]  S. Sundar.  Self as source: Agency and customization in interactive media , 2008 .

[13]  Laku Chidambaram,et al.  Is Out of Sight, Out of Mind? An Empirical Study of Social Loafing in Technology-Supported Groups , 2005, Inf. Syst. Res..

[14]  Robert E. Kraut,et al.  CHAPTER 12 – Applying Social Psychological Theory to the Problems of Group Work , 2002 .

[15]  C. V. van Uden-Kraan,et al.  Participation in online patient support groups endorses patients' empowerment. , 2009, Patient education and counseling.

[16]  Jonathan Bishop,et al.  Increasing participation in online communities: A framework for human-computer interaction , 2007, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[17]  Robert E. Kraut,et al.  Increasing commitment to online communities by designing for social presence , 2011, CSCW.

[18]  Karl L. Wuensch,et al.  Electronic Helping Behavior: The Virtual Presence of Others Makes a Difference , 2005 .

[19]  Mark Levine,et al.  The responsive bystander: how social group membership and group size can encourage as well as inhibit bystander intervention. , 2008, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[20]  Adrian Furnham,et al.  Predicting the Use of Complementary Medicine: A Test of the Theories of Reasoned Action and Planned Behavior1 , 2001 .

[21]  Nancy K. Schlossberg,et al.  Marginality and mattering: Key issues in building community , 1989 .

[22]  Timothy R. Levine,et al.  Behavioral adaptation, confidence, and heuristic-based explanations of the probing effect , 2001 .

[23]  Henk Elffers,et al.  Be Aware to Care: Public Self-Awareness Leads to a Reversal of the Bystander Effect. , 2012 .

[24]  P. Kollock.  The Economies of Online Cooperation: Gifts and Public Goods in Cyberspace , 1999 .

[25]  S. Shyam Sundar,et al.  Does Blogging Empower Women? Exploring the Role of Agency and Community , 2012, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[26]  Qian Xu,et al.  The bandwagon effect of collaborative filtering technology , 2008, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[27]  B. Shneiderman,et al.  The Reader-to-Leader Framework: Motivating Technology-Mediated Social Participation , 2009 .

[28]  J. Hackman,et al.  Development of the Job Diagnostic Survey , 1975 .

[29]  R. Ryan,et al.  Control and information in the intrapersonal sphere: An extension of cognitive evaluation theory. , 1982 .

[30]  Lila Krishnan,et al.  Reactions to help: Reciprocity, responsibility and reactance , 1979 .

[31]  Carol Holland,et al.  The ‘Healthy Passport’ intervention with older people in an English urban environment: effects of incentives and peer-group organisers in promoting healthy living , 2008, Ageing and Society.

[32]  Chao-Min Chiu,et al.  Exploring and mitigating social loafing in online communities , 2010, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[33]  David Gefen,et al.  Some antecedents and effects of trust in virtual communities , 2002, J. Strateg. Inf. Syst..

[34]  Abdul Ghani Kanesan Abdullah,et al.  The Effectiveness of Buddy Support System Implementation among Science Teachers: The Case of Malaysia , 2010 .

[35]  Jennifer Preece,et al.  The top five reasons for lurking: improving community experiences for everyone , 2004, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[36]  Alcides Velasquez,et al.  Motivations to participate in online communities , 2010, CHI.

[37]  Steven J. Karau,et al.  Social Loafing: Research Findings, Implications, and Future Directions , 1995 .

[38]  Janet Fulk,et al.  Organizations and Communication Technology , 1990 .

[39]  S. Chaiken,et al.  The psychology of attitudes. , 1993 .

[40]  A. Ingham,et al.  The Ringelmann effect: Studies of group size and group performance , 1974 .

[41]  Bo Zhang,et al.  Communicating Art, Virtually! Psychological Effects of Technological Affordances in a Virtual Museum , 2015, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact..

[42]  C. Cutrona,et al.  Stress and Social Support—in Search of Optimal Matching , 1990 .

[43]  John Short,et al.  The social psychology of telecommunications , 1976 .

[44]  Carolyn Penstein Rosé,et al.  Talk to me: foundations for successful individual-group interactions in online communities , 2006, CHI.

[45]  K. Williams,et al.  Many Hands Make Light the Work: The Causes and Consequences of Social Loafing , 1979 .

[46]  Yong Du,et al.  Modeling the Behavior of Lurkers in Online Communities Using Intentional Agents , 2006, 2006 International Conference on Computational Inteligence for Modelling Control and Automation and International Conference on Intelligent Agents Web Technologies and International Commerce (CIMCA'06).

[47]  Dana L. Thomson.  Beyond the Classroom Walls: Teachers' and Students' Perspectives on How Online Learning Can Meet the Needs of Gifted Students , 2010 .

[48]  B. Latané.  The psychology of social impact. , 1981 .

[49]  Franziska Marquart,et al.  Communication and persuasion : central and peripheral routes to attitude change , 1988 .

[50]  Jennifer Preece,et al.  Shedding Light on Lurkers in Online Communities , 1999 .

[51]  L. Berkowitz,et al.  AFFECTING THE SALIENCE OF THE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY NORM: EFFECTS OF PAST HELP ON THE RESPONSE TO DEPENDENCY RELATIONSHIPS. , 1964, Journal of abnormal psychology.

[52]  J. Valacich,et al.  Group Size and Anonymity Effects on Computer-Mediated Idea Generation , 1992 .

[53]  I. Ajzen,et al.  Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior , 1980 .

[54]  S. Chaiken.  The heuristic model of persuasion. , 1987 .

[55]  Evelyn Y. Ho,et al.  Everyday Health Communication Experiences of College Students , 2008, Journal of American college health : J of ACH.

[56]  S. Shyam Sundar,et al.  Using interface cues in online health community boards to change impressions and encourage user contribution , 2011, CHI.

[57]  C. Nass,et al.  Conceptualizing Sources in Online News , 2001 .

[58]  E. Deci,et al.  Facilitating internalization: the self-determination theory perspective. , 1994, Journal of personality.

[59]  Gilad Ravid,et al.  Information overload and the message dynamics of online interaction spaces: a theoretical model and empirical exploration , 2004, IEEE Engineering Management Review.

[60]  M. McLure Wasko,et al.  "It is what one does": why people participate and help others in electronic communities of practice , 2000, J. Strateg. Inf. Syst..

[61]  S. May,et al.  Do social support interventions (“buddy systems”) aid smoking cessation? A review , 2000, Tobacco control.

[62]  Neil S. Coulson,et al.  Empowering processes in online support groups among people living with HIV/AIDS: A comparative analysis of 'lurkers' and 'posters' , 2010, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[63]  Brian K. Thorn,et al.  Discretionary Databases: Theory, Data, and Implications , 1990 .

[64]  S. Chaiken.  Heuristic versus systematic information processing and the use of source versus message cues in persuasion. , 1980 .

[65]  J. Hackman,et al.  The Job Diagnostic Survey: An Instrument for the Diagnosis of Jobs and the Evaluation of Job Redesign Projects , 1974 .

[66]  David Gefen,et al.  Managing User Trust in B2C e-Services , 2003 .

[67]  A. Gouldner.  THE NORM OF RECIPROCITY: A PRELIMINARY STATEMENT * , 1960 .

[68]  M. Fishbein.  A Reasoned Action Approach to Health Promotion , 2008, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[69]  S. Harkins.  Social Loafing and Social Facilitation , 1987 .

[70]  S. Shyam Sundar,et al.  The Psychological Appeal of Personalized Content in Web Portals: Does Customization Affect Attitudes and Behavior? , 2006 .

[71]  Linda Bauld,et al.  The effectiveness of NHS smoking cessation services: a systematic review. , 2010, Journal of public health.

[72]  N. B. Cottrell,et al.  Social facilitation of dominant responses by the presence of an audicence and the mere presence of others. , 1968, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[73]  G. Leung,et al.  Seeing the wood amidst the trees. , 2010, Journal of public health.

[74]  W. Damon.  Peer education: The untapped potential , 1984 .

[75]  Richard E. Petty,et al.  The Effects of Group Size on Cognitive Effort and Evaluation , 1977 .

[76]  R. Cialdini.  Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion , 1993 .

[77]  John Gastil,et al.  Endorsements as Voting Cues: Heuristic and Systematic Processing in Initiative Elections1 , 2004 .

[78]  David R. Shaffer,et al.  Intervention in the library: The effect of increased responsibility on bystanders' willingness to prevent a theft. , 1975 .

[79]  Robert A. Eckhoff,et al.  David against Goliath? Group size and bystander effects in virtual knowledge sharing , 2008 .

[80]  James L. Peterson,et al.  Buddy systems , 1977, CACM.

[81]  Judy Chuan-Chuan Lin.  Online stickiness: its antecedents and effect on purchasing intention , 2007, Behav. Inf. Technol..

[82]  Sheizaf Rafaeli,et al.  Online auctions, messaging, communication and social facilitation: a simulation and experimental evidence , 2002, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..