Connecting with the user-generated Web: how group identification impacts online information sharing and evaluation

Information Communication and Society

Volumn 17, Issue 6, 2014, Pages 683-694

  Flanagin, Andrew J ^a   Hocevar, Kristin Page ^a   Samahito, Siriphan Nancy ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b Lewis PR   (United States)

Author keywords

credibility; group identification; motivation; online information pools; social identity; social media; user generated content

Indexed keywords

EID: 84898902126     PISSN: 1369118X     EISSN: 14684462     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/1369118X.2013.808361     Document Type: Article

References (52)

1. Atkinson, J. W., & Birch, D. (1970). The dynamics of action. Oxford: John Wiley.
2. Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173-1182. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173
3. Briggs, P., Burford, B., De Angeli, A., & Lynch, P. (2002). Trust in online advice. Social Science Computer Review, 20(3), 321-332. doi: 10.1177/089443930202000309
4. Brock, T. C. (1965). Communicator-recipient similarity and decision change. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1(6), 650-654. doi: 10.1037/h0022081
5. Bruns, A. (2008). Blogs, Wikipedia, second life and beyond - from production to produsage. New York, NY: Peter Lang.
6. Cheshire, C., & Antin, J. (2008). The social psychological effects of feedback on the production of Internet information pools. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13, 705-727. doi: 10.1111/j.1083-6101.2008.00416.x
7. Cheshire, C., & Antin, J. (2010). None of us is as lazy as all of us. Information, Communication & Society, 13(4), 537-555. doi: 10.1080/13691181003639858
8. Cho, H., Chen, M., & Chung, S. (2010). Testing an integrative theoretical model of knowledge-sharing behavior in the context of Wikipedia. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61(6), 1198-1212.
9. Cosley, D., Ludford, P., & Terveen, L. (2003, November 9-12). Studying the effect of similarity in online task-focused interactions. Proceedings of the 2003 ACM SIGGROUP conference, Sanibel Island, Florida.
10. Danielson, D. R. (2005). Web credibility. In C. Ghaoui (Ed.), Encyclopedia of human-computer interaction (pp. 713-721). Hersey, PA: Idea Group.
11. Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: An introduction to theory and research reading. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
12. Flanagin, A. J., & Metzger, M. J. (2007). The role of site features, user attributes, and information verification behaviors on the perceived credibility of web-based information. New Media & Society, 9(2), 319-342. doi: 10.1177/1461444807075015
13. Fogg, B. J., Soohoo, C., Danielson, D. R., Marable, L., Stanford, J., & Trauber, E. R. (2003). How do users evaluate the credibility of Web sites? A study with over 2500 participants. Proceedings of the 2003 conference on Designing for User Experiences, San Francisco, CA, pp. 1-15.
14. Fox, S. A., & Giles, H. (1996). 'Let the wheelchair through!': An intergroup approach to interability communication. In W. P. Robinson (Ed.), Social groups and identities: Developing the legacy of Henri Tajfel (pp. 215-248). Oxford: Butterworth Heinemann.
15. Fritch, J. W., & Cromwell, R. L. (2002). Delving deeper into evaluation: Exploring cognitive authority on the Internet. Reference Services Review, 30(3), 242-254. doi: 10.1108/00907320210435509
16. Garrett, R. K. (2009). Echo chambers online? Politically motivated selective exposure among Internet news users. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 14, 265-285. doi: 10.1111/j.1083-6101.2009.01440.x
17. Guadagno, R. E., Blascovich, J., Bailenson, J., & McCall, C. (2007). Virtual humans and persuasion: The effects of agency and behavioral realism. Media Psychology, 10, 1-22.
18. Hogg, M. A., & Hains, S. C. (1996). Intergroup relations and group solidarity: Effects of group identification and social beliefs on depersonalized attraction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(2), 295-309. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.70.2.295
19. Johnson, T. J., Bichard, S. L., & Zhang, W. (2009). Communication communities or 'cyberghettos?': A path analysis model examining factors that explain selective exposure to blogs. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 15(1), 60-82. doi: 10.1111/j.1083-6101.2009.01492.x
20. Karau, S. J., & Williams, K. D. (1993). Social loafing: A meta-analytic review and theoretical integration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65(4), 681-706. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.65.4.681
21. Karau, S. J., & Williams, K. D. (2001). Understanding individual motivation in groups: The collective effort model. In M. E. Turner (Ed.), Groups at work: Theory and research (pp. 113-141). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
22. Kerr, N. L., & Bruun, S. E. (1983). Dispensability of member effort and group motivation losses: Free-rider effects. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44(1), 78-94. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.44.1.78
23. Kim, H., Zheng, J. R., & Gupta, S. (2011). Examining knowledge contribution from the perspective of an online identity in blogging communities. Computers in Human Behavior, 27, 1760-1770. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2011.03.003
24. Knobloch-Westerwick, S., & Meng, J. (2009). Looking the other way: Selective exposure to attitude-consistent and counterattitudinal political information. Communication Research, 36(3), 426-448. doi: 10.1177/0093650209333030
25. Lampe, C., Walsh, R., Velasquez, A., & Ozkaya, E. (2010). Motivations to participate in online communities. Proceedings of CHI 2010, Atlanta, GA.
26. Lazarsfeld, P. F., Berelson, B., & Gaudet, H. (1944). The people's choice. New York, NY: Columbia Press.
27. Ling, K., Beenen, G., Wang, X., Chang, K., Frankowski, D., Resnick, P., & Kraut, R. E. (2005). Using social psychology to motivate contributions to online communities. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication, 10(4). Retrieved from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol10/issue4/ling.html
28. Mackinnon, D. P., Lockwood, C. M., Hoffman, J. M., West, S. G., & Sheets, V. (2002). A comparison of methods to test mediation and other intervening variable effects. Psychological Methods, 7, 83-104. doi: 10.1037/1082-989X.7.1.83
29. Mackinnon, D. P., Lockwood, C. M., & Williams, J. (2004). Confidence limits for the indirect effect: Distribution of the product and resampling methods. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 39, 99-128. doi: 10.1207/s15327906mbr3901_4
30. Mathes, A. (2004). Folksonomies - cooperative classification and communication through shared metadata, Computer Mediated Communication, LIS590CMC (Doctoral seminar). Graduate School of Library and Information Science, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign.
31. McGarty, C., Haslam, S. A., Hutchinson, K. J., & Turner, J. C. (1994). The effects of salient group memberships on persuasion. Small Group Research, 25(2), 267-293. doi: 10.1177/1046496494252007
32. Metzger, M. J., Flanagin, A. J., Eyal, K., Lemus, D. R., & McCann, R. (2003). Credibility in the 21st century: Integrating perspectives on source, message, and media credibility in the contemporary media environment. In P. Kalbfleisch (Ed.), Communication yearbook 27 (pp. 293-335). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
33. Metzger, M. J., Flanagin, A. J., & Medders, R. (2010). Social and heuristic approaches to credibility evaluation online. Journal of Communication, 60(3), 413-439. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2010.01488.x
34. Nahapiet, J., & Ghoshal, S. (1998). Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organizational advantage. Academy of Management Review, 23(2), 242-266.
35. Nov, O., Anderson, D., & Arazy, O. (2010, April 26-30). Volunteer computing: A model of the factors determining contribution to community-based scientific research. Proceedings of the 19th international conference on World Wide Web (WWW '10), Raleigh, NC, pp. 741-750.
36. Ochoa, X., & Duval, E. (2008, April 22). Quantitative analysis of user-generated content on the web. Proceedings of the first international workshop on Understanding Web Evolution, Beijing, pp. 19-26.
37. Pedhazur, E. J. (1997). Multiple regression in behavioral research. Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace College.
38. Pew Research Center. (2012). What Internet users do online: Trend data (adults). Retrieved from http://pewinternet.org/Trend-Data-%28Adults%29/Online-Activites-Total.aspx
39. Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2004). SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behavior Research Models, Instruments, & Computers, 36(4), 717-731. doi: 10.3758/BF03206553
40. Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008a). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40(3), 879-891. doi: 10.3758/BRM.40.3.879
41. Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008b). Contemporary approaches to assessing mediation in communication research. In A. F. Hayes, M. D. Slater, & L. B. Snyder (Eds.), The Sage sourcebook of advanced data analysis methods for communication research (pp. 13-54). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
42. Rashid, A. M., Ling, K., Tassone, R. D., Resnick, P., Kraut, R., & Riedl, J. (2006, April 22-28). Motivating participation by displaying the value of contribution. Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human Factors in computing systems (CHI '06), Montreal.
43. Rieh, S. Y., & Danielson, D. R. (2007). Credibility: A multidisciplinary framework. In B. Cronin (Ed.), Annual review of information science and technology (Vol. 41, pp. 307-364). Medford, NJ: Information Today.
44. Sears, D. O., & Freedman, J. L. (1967). Selective exposure to information: A critical review. The Public Opinion Quarterly, 31(2), 194-213. doi: 10.1086/267513
45. Sillence, E., Briggs, P., Harris, P. R., & Fishwick, L. (2007). How do patients evaluate and make use of online health information? Social Science & Medicine, 64, 1853-1862. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2007.01.012
46. Sorrentino, R. M. (1996). The role of conscious thought in a theory of motivation and cognition: The uncertainty orientation paradigm. In P. M. Gollwitzer & J. A. Bargh (Eds.), The psychology of action: Linking cognition and motivation to behavior (pp. 619-644). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
47. Sundar, S. S. (2008). The MAIN model: A heuristic approach to understanding technology effects on credibility. In M. Metzger & A. Flanagin (Ed.), Digital media, youth, and credibility (pp. 73-100). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
48. Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In S. Worchel & W. G. Austin (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 2-24). Chicago, IL: Nelson-Hall.
49. Turner, J. C. (1975). Social comparison and social identity: Some prospects for intergroup behavior. European Journal of Social Psychology, 5(1), 5-34. doi: 10.1002/ejsp.2420050102
50. Turner, J. C. (1991). Social influence. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
51. Turner, J. C., & Haslam, S. A. (2001). Social identity, organizations, and leadership. In M. E. Turner (Ed.), Groups at work: Theory and research (pp. 25-65). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
52. Walthen, C. N., & Burkell, J. (2002). Believe it or not: Factors influencing credibility on the web. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 53(2), 134-144. doi: 10.1002/asi.10016