WHY DO THEY RETURN HELP? EXAMINING THE MOTIVES OF RECIPROCITY IN ONLINE COMMUNITIES

Online community administrators are attempting to encourage their users to contribute knowledge and resources in order to provide value to members and ensure sustainability. A large number of online communities fail mainly due to the reluctance of users to share knowledge in them. Many studies on this topic have highlighted the importance of reciprocity for knowledge contribution. However, it is unclear how reciprocity is developed and what influences its development. Motivated by this concern, this study focuses on investigating the antecedents of knowledge receivers’ reciprocity in online communities. It formulates and tests a theoretical model to explain reciprocity behaviour of knowledge receivers based on equity theory and Social Identity explanation of Deindividuation Effects (SIDE) model. Our proposed model is validated through a large-scale survey in an online forum for English language learning. The results reveal that indebtedness and community norm not only are key antecedents of intention to reciprocate but are also positively related to each other. The perceived anonymity of the online community not only has a positive effect on indebtedness and intention to reciprocate, but also has an interactive effect with community norm on intention to reciprocate. Theoretical and practical implications of this study are discussed.

[1]  Rolph E. Anderson,et al.  Nederlandse samenvatting en bewerking van 'Multivariate data analysis, 4th Edition, 1995' , 1998 .

[2]  Samer Faraj,et al.  Why Should I Share? Examining Social Capital and Knowledge Contribution in Electronic Networks of Practice , 2005, MIS Q..

[3]  R. Frank Falk,et al.  A Primer for Soft Modeling , 1992 .

[4]  Sara Kiesler,et al.  Social psychological aspects of computer-mediated communication , 1984 .

[5]  Bernard C. Y. Tan,et al.  Group Polarization and Computer-Mediated Communication: Effects of Communication Cues, Social Presence, and Anonymity , 2002, Inf. Syst. Res..

[6]  Jerald Greenberg,et al.  The Justice Concept in Social Psychology , 1982 .

[7]  Joel Cooper,et al.  Cognitive Dissonance: Fifty Years of a Classic Theory , 2007 .

[8]  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..

[9]  Wynne W. Chin.  The partial least squares approach for structural equation modeling. , 1998 .

[10]  E. Fehr,et al.  Cooperation and Punishment in Public Goods Experiments , 1999, SSRN Electronic Journal.

[11]  Robert W. Zmud,et al.  Behavioral Intention Formation in Knowledge Sharing: Examining the Roles of Extrinsic Motivators, Social-Psychological Factors, and Organizational Climate , 2005, MIS Q..

[12]  O. Johansson-Stenman,et al.  Anonymity, reciprocity, and conformity: Evidence from voluntary contributions to a national park in Costa Rica , 2008 .

[13]  Fabrizio Ferraro,et al.  Economics Language and Assumptions: How Theories Can Become Self-Fulfilling , 2003 .

[14]  Edward J. Zajac,et al.  DEFECTIONS FROM THE INNER CIRCLE: SOCIAL EXCHANGE, RECIPROCITY AND THE DIFFUSION OF BOARD INDEPENDENCE IN U.S. CORPORATIONS. , 1995 .

[15]  Paul A. Pavlou,et al.  Evidence of the Effect of Trust Building Technology in Electronic Markets: Price Premiums and Buyer Behavior , 2002, MIS Q..

[16]  J. Walther.  Computer-Mediated Communication , 1996 .

[17]  H. Harman.  Modern factor analysis , 1961 .

[18]  Alexander Ardichvili,et al.  Motivation and barriers to participation in virtual knowledge-sharing communities of practice , 2003, J. Knowl. Manag..

[19]  J. Nunnally.  Psychometric Theory (2nd ed), New York: McGraw-Hill. , 1978 .

[20]  Atreyi Kankanhalli,et al.  Contributing Knowledge to Electronic Knowledge Repositories: An Empirical Investigation , 2005, MIS Q..

[21]  R. Spears,et al.  Panacea or Panopticon? , 1994 .

[22]  M. Greenberg.  A Theory of Indebtedness , 1980 .

[23]  Maureen A. Mathews,et al.  Looking at me, appreciating you: Self-focused attention distinguishes between gratitude and indebtedness , 2010 .

[24]  M. Nowak,et al.  Evolution of indirect reciprocity , 2005, Nature.

[25]  Alain Pinsonneault,et al.  Anonymity in Group Support Systems Research: A New Conceptualization, Measure, and Contingency Framework , 1997, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[26]  A. Joinson.  Self‐disclosure in computer‐mediated communication: The role of self‐awareness and visual anonymity , 2001 .

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

[28]  Robin Teigland,et al.  Collective Action and Knowledge Contribution in Electronic Networks of Practice , 2004, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[29]  T. Postmes,et al.  Breaching or Building Social Boundaries? , 1998 .

[30]  T. Postmes,et al.  Social Influence in Computer-Mediated Communication: The Effects of Anonymity on Group Behavior , 2001 .

[31]  Robin M. Kowalski,et al.  Impression management: A literature review and two-component model. , 1990 .

[32]  Serge-Christophe Kolm,et al.  Reciprocity: An Economics of Social Relations , 2008 .

[33]  Janet Fulk,et al.  Organizational Colleagues, Media Richness, and Electronic Mail , 1991 .

[34]  G. W. Walster,et al.  New directions in equity research. , 1973 .

[35]  C. Fornell,et al.  Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. , 1981 .

[36]  Andrea Chester,et al.  Online Teaching: Encouraging Collaboration through Anonymity , 2006, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[37]  M. Greenberg,et al.  Indebtedness: An adverse aspect of asking for and receiving help. , 1971 .

[38]  Izak Benbasat,et al.  Predicting Intention to Adopt Interorganizational Linkages: An Institutional Perspective , 2003, MIS Q..

[39]  芝 祐順,et al.  Modern Factor Analysis, HARRY H. HARMAN, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1960 , 1961 .

[40]  Russell L. Kolts,et al.  The debt of gratitude: Dissociating gratitude and indebtedness , 2006 .

[41]  Izak Benbasat,et al.  Development of an Instrument to Measure the Perceptions of Adopting an Information Technology Innovation , 1991, Inf. Syst. Res..

[42]  J. S. Adams,et al.  Inequity In Social Exchange , 1965 .

[43]  Ritu Agarwal,et al.  Through a Glass Darkly: Information Technology Design, Identity Verification, and Knowledge Contribution in Online Communities , 2007, Inf. Syst. Res..

[44]  Janet Fulk,et al.  Social construction of communication technology , 1993 .

[45]  Lee Sproull,et al.  What's Mine Is Ours, or Is It? A Study of Attitudes about Information Sharing , 1994, Inf. Syst. Res..

[46]  Rajiv Sabherwal,et al.  Usability and Sociability in Online Communities: A Comparative Study of Knowledge Seeking and Contribution , 2009, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[47]  Eric T. G. Wang,et al.  Understanding knowledge sharing in virtual communities: An integration of social capital and social cognitive theories , 2006, Decis. Support Syst..

[48]  Wallace A. Wood,et al.  Situational determinants of software piracy: An equity theory perspective , 1996 .

[49]  J. Scott,et al.  Internalization of norms;: A sociological theory of moral commitment , 1971 .

[50]  R. Spears,et al.  Paralanguage and social perception in computer‐mediated communication , 1992 .

[51]  J. Hagel,et al.  The Real Value of Online Communities , 2000 .

[52]  Chol Lee,et al.  Modifying an American Consumer Behavior Model for Consumers in Confucian Culture , 1991 .

[53]  R. H. Willis,et al.  Social Exchange: Advances In Theory And Research , 1981 .

[54]  J. Hair.  Multivariate data analysis , 1972 .

[55]  Jeremy N. Bailenson,et al.  The Unbearable Likeness of Being Digital: The Persistence of Nonverbal Social Norms in Online Virtual Environments , 2007, Cyberpsychology Behav. Soc. Netw..

[56]  I. Ajzen.  The theory of planned behavior , 1991 .