Quality of information in academic E-mailing lists

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology

Volumn 60, Issue 9, 2009, Pages 1859-1870

  Matzat, Uwe ^a  

^a EINDHOVEN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARCHIVE DATA; EMBEDDEDNESS; HIGH QUALITY; MAILING LISTS; OFFLINE NETWORKS; QUALITY OF INFORMATION; RANDOM SAMPLE; SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY; UNIVERSITY RESEARCHERS; VIRTUAL GROUP;

RESEARCH;

EID: 69249102080     PISSN: 15322882     EISSN: 15322890     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/asi.21105     Document Type: Article

References (62)

1. Barab, S.A., & Scheckler, R. (2003). Designing system dualities: Characterizing a web-supported professional development community. The Information Society, 19, 237-256.
2. Berge, Z.L., & Collins, M. (1993). The founding and managing of IPCT-L: A listowners ' perspective. Interpersonal Computing and Technology, 1. Retrieved on November 27, 2007, from http://www.emoderators. com/ipct-j/1993/n2/berge.txt
3. Brosig, J., Weimann, J., & Ockenfels, A. (2002). The effect of communication media on cooperation. German Economic Review, 4, 217-241.
4. Brown, J.S., & Duguid, P. (1991). Organizational learning and communities of practice: Toward a unified view of working, learning, and innovation. Organization Science, 2, 40-57.
5. Case, D.O. (2007). Looking for information. A survey of research on information seeking, needs and behavior. San Diego: Academic Press.
6. Cohen, J. (1996 Computer mediated communication and publication productivity among faculty. Internet Research, 2/3, 41-63. (Pubitemid 126119158)
7. Conner, P.W. (1992). Networking in the humanities: Lessons from ANSAXNET. Computers and the Humanities, 26, 195-204.
8. Cothrel, J., & Williams, R. (1999). Online communities: Getting the most out of online discussion and collaboration. Knowledge Management Review, 1, 20-25.
9. Cress, U., Kimmerle, J., & Hesse, F.W. (2006). Information exchange with shared databases as a social dilemma. The effect of metaknowledge, bonus systems, and costs. Communication Research, 33, 370-390.
10. Eppler, M.J., & Mengis, J. (2004). The concept of information overload: A review of literature from organization science, accounting marketing, MIS, and related disciplines. The Information Society, 20, 325-344.
11. Fjermestad, J., & Hiltz, S.R. (2001). Group support systems: A descriptive evaluation of case and field studies. Journal of Management Information Systems, 17, 115-160.
12. Freeman, L.C. (1984). The impact of computer based communication on the social structure of an emerging scientific specialty. Social Networks, 6, 201-221.
13. Freeman, L.C., & Freeman, S.C. (1980). A semi-visible college: Structural effects on a social networks group. In M.M. Henderson & M.J. MacNaughton (Eds.), Electronic communication: Technology and impacts (pp. 77-85). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
14. Fry, J., & Talja, S. (2007 The intellectual and social organization of academic fields and the shaping of digital resources. Journal of Information Science, 33, 115-133. (Pubitemid 46411248)
15. Garton, L., Haythomwaite, C., & Wellman, B. (1997). Studying online social networks. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication, 3. Last retrieved on November 27, 2007, from http://www.blackwellsynergy.eom/doi/full/10.1111/j. 1083-6101.1997.tb00062.x
16. Goldstein, H. (1995). Multilevel statistical models. (2 ed.) London, Sydney, Auckland: Edward Arnold.
17. Harasim, L.M., & Winkelmans, T. (1990). Computer-mediated collaboration. A case study of an international online educational workshop. Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilization, 11, 382-409.
18. Harrison, T.M., & Stephen, T. (1996). Computer networking, communication, and scholarship. In T. M. Harrison & T. Stephen (Eds.), Computer networking and scholarly communication in the twenty-first-century university (pp. 3-36). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
19. Haythomwaite, C., & Wellman, B. (1998 Work, Friendship and Media Use for Information Exchange in a Networked Organization. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 41, 1101-1114. (Pubitemid 128599339)
20. Herring, S.C. (1999). The rhetorical dynamics of gender harassment on-line. The Information Society, 15, 151-167.
21. Hiltz, S.R. (1984). Online communities. A case study of the office of the future. Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
22. Hiltz, S.R., &Turoff, M. (1978). The network nation: Human communication via computer. Cambridge, Massachusetts & London, England: The MIT Press.
23. Johnson, C.M. (2001 A survey of current research on online communities of practice. Internet and Higher Education, 4, 45-60. (Pubitemid 33360152)
24. Kling, R., & Courtright, C. (2003 Group behavior and learning in electronic forums: A sociotechnical approach. The Information Society, 19, 221-235. (Pubitemid 36989661)
25. Kling, R., & McKim, G. (2000 Not just a matter of time: Field differences and the shaping of electronic media in supporting scientific communication. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 51, 1306-1320. (Pubitemid 32074830)
26. Koku, E., Nazer, N., & Wellman, B. (2001). Netting scholars: Online and offline. American Behavioral Scientist, 44, 1750-1772.
27. Lewenstein, B.V. (1995). Do public electronic bulletin boards help create scientific knowledge? The Cold Fusion Case. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 20, 123-149.
28. Lievrouw, L., Rogers, E.M., Lowe, C., & Nadel, E. (1987). Triangulation as a research strategy for identifying invisible colleges among biomedical scientists. Social Networks, 9, 217-248.
29. Markus, M.L. (1987). Toward a "critical mass" theory of interactive media. Communication Research, 14, 491-511.
30. Matzat, U. (2001). Social networks and cooperation in electronic communities: A theoretical-empirical analysis of academic communication and internet discussion groups. Amsterdam: Thela Publishers.
31. Matzat, U. (2004a). Academic communication and internet discussion groups: Transfer of information or creation of social contacts? Social Networks, 26, 221-255.
32. Matzat, U. (2004b). The social embeddedness of academic online groups as a norm generating structure: A test of the coleman model on norm emergence. Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, 10, 205-226.
33. Matzat, U. (2009). The embeddedness of academic internet groups in social networks: Reputation gains as a stimulus for online discussion participation. International Sociology, 24, 63-92.
34. Matzat, U. (in press). Disciplinary differences in the use of internet discussion groups: Differential communication needs or trust problems? Journal of Information Science.
35. McCarty, W. (1992). Humanist: Lessons from a global electronic seminar. Computers and the Humanities, 26, 205-222.
36. McLure Wasko, M., & Faraj, S. (2000). "It is what one does": Why people participate and help others in electronic communities of practice. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 155-173.
37. Perry, C.A., & Rice, R.E. (1997). Scholarly communication and network influences in the hybrid problem area of developmental dyslexia: Influence of network structure on change in a hybrid problem area. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 49, 151-168.
38. Rafaeli, S., & LaRose, R.J. (1993). Electronic bulletin boards and "public goods" explanations of collaborative mass media. Communication Research, 20, 277-297.
39. Rice, R. (1982). Communication networking in computer-conferencing systems: A longitudinal study of group roles and system structure. In M. Burgoon (Ed.), Communication yearbook, 6, (pp. 925-944). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
40. Riegelsberger, J., Sasse, A.M., & McCarthy, J. (2003). The researcher's dilemma: Evaluating trust in computer mediated communications. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 58, 759-781.
41. Rieh, S.Y. (2002). Judgment of information quality and cognitive authority in the Web. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 53, 145-161.
42. Rojo, A., & Ragsdale, R.G. (1997a A process perspective on participation in scholarly electronic forums. Science Communication, 18, 320-341. (Pubitemid 127078061)
43. Rojo, A., & Ragsdale, R.G. (1997b Participation in electronic forums: Implications for the design and implementation of collaborative distributed multimedia. Telematics and Informatics, 83-96. (Pubitemid 127419462)
44. Ruben, B.D. (1992). The communication-information relationship in system-theoretic perspective. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 43, 15-27.
45. Sally, D. (1995). Conversation and cooperation in social dilemmas. A metaanalysis of experiments from 1958 to 1992. Rationality and Society, 7, 58-92.
46. Schlager, M.S., & Fusco, J. (2003). Teaching professional development, technology, and communities of practice: Are we putting the cart before the horse? The Information Society, 19, 203-220.
47. Snijders, T.A.B., & Boskers, R.J. (1999). Multilevel analysis: An introduction to basic and advanced multilevel modeling. London Sage.
48. Stegbauer, C., & Rausch, A. (2001). Die schweigende Mehrheit-"Lurker" in Internetbasierten Diskussionsforen [The silent majority-"Lurkers" in internet-based discussion forums], Zeitschrift fuer Soziologie, 30, 48-64.
49. Straus, S.G., & McGrath, J.E. (1994). Does the medium matter? The interaction of task type and technology on group performance and member reactions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 87-97.
50. Talja, S., Savolainen, R., & Maula, H. (2004 Field differences in the use and perceived usefulness of scholarly mailing lists. Information Research, 10, paper 200. Retrieved May 18, 2009, from http://InformationR.net/ir/ 10-l/paper200.html (Pubitemid 39583771)
51. Talja, S., Vakkari, P., Fry, J., &Wouters, P. (2007). Impact of research cultures on the use of digital library resources. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 58, 1674-1685.
52. Thorn, B.K., & Connolly, T. (1987). Discretionary data bases: A theory and some experimental findings. Communication Research, 14, 512-528.
53. Tombaugh, J.W. (1984). Evaluation of an international scientific computerbased conference. Journal of Social Issues, 129-144.
54. Traore, N., & Landry, R. (1997). On the determinants of scientists' collaboration. Science Communication, 18, 124-140.
55. Verburg, R.M. & De Ridder, J.A. (2003). Knowledge sharing under distributed circumstances. The Hague: NWO-MES.
56. Walsh, J.P., & Bayma, T. (1996). Computer networks and scientific work. Social Studies of Science, 661-703.
57. Walsh, J.P., Kucker, S., Maloney, N.G., & Gabbay, S. (2000 Connecting minds: Computer-mediated communication and scientific work. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 51, 1295-1305. (Pubitemid 32074829)
58. Wellman, B. (2001). Computer networks as social networks. Science, 293, 2031-2034.
59. Wenger, E.C. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
60. Wenger, B.C., & Snyder, W.M. (2000). Communities of practice: The organizational frontier. Harvard Business Review, 78, 139-145.
61. Whittaker, S., & Sidner, C. (1997). Email overload: Exploring personal information management of email. In S.B.Kiesler (Ed.), Culture of the Internet (pp. 277-295). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates, Inc.
62. Zelman, A., & Leydesdorff, L. (1999). Threaded email messages in selforganization and science & technology studies oriented mailing lists. Scientometrics, 48, 361-380.