Capitalizing on the Net: Social Contact, Civic Engagement, and Sense of Community

The Internet in Everyday Life

Volumn , Issue , 2008, Pages 289-324

  Quan Haase, Anabel ^a   Wellman, Barry ^a   Witte, James C ^b   Hampton, Keith N ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

^b CLEMSON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ELECTRONIC MAIL; SOCIAL NETWORKING (ONLINE);

CIVIC ENGAGEMENT; NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC SOCIETY; ON-LINE COMMUNITIES; ONLINE ACTIVITIES; SENSE OF COMMUNITY; SOCIAL CAPITALS; TELEPHONE CONTACT; VOLUNTARY ORGANIZATIONS;

SURVEYS;

EID: 84957659770     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1002/9780470774298.ch10     Document Type: Chapter

References (78)

1. Baym, N. K. (1997). Interpreting soap operas and creating community. In S. Kiesler (ed.), Culture of the Internet (pp. 103-20). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
2. Brown, J. S. and Duguid, P. (2000). The social life of information. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
3. Castells, M. (1996). The rise of the network society. Oxford: Blackwell.
4. Chmielewski, T. and Wellman, B. (1999). Tracking geekus unixus: an explorers' report from the National Geographic website. SIGGROUP Bulletin, 20 (December), 26-8.
5. Curtis, J., Baer, D., and Grabb, E. (2001). Nations of joiners: explaining voluntary association membership in democratic societies. American Sociological Review, 66(6), 783-805.
6. Daft, R. L. and Lengel, R. H. (1986). Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural design. Management Science, 32(5), 554-71.
7. De Kerckhove, D. (1997). Connected intelligence: the arrival of the web society. Toronto: Somerville House.
8. DiMaggio, P., Hargittai, E., Neuman, R. W., and Robinson, J. P. (2001). The Internet's implications for society. Annual Review of Sociology, 27, 307-36.
9. Diani, M. and McAdam, D. (eds) (2002). Social movement analysis: the network perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
10. Eckstein, S. (2001). Community as gift-giving: collectivistic roots of volunteering. American Sociological Review 66(6), 829-51.
11. Fischer, C. (1982). To dwell among friends. Berkeley: University of California Press.
12. Fischer, C. (1992). America calling: a social history of the telephone to 1940. Berkeley: University of California Press.
13. Fischer, C. (2001). Bowling alone: What's the score? Paper presented to the American Sociological Association conference, Anaheim, August.
14. Flanagan, A. and Metzger, M. (2001). Internet use in the contemporary media environment. Human Computer Research, 27, 153-81.
15. Fong, E., Wellman, B., Wilkes, R., and Kew, M. (2001). The double digital divide. Ottawa: Office of Learning Technologies.
16. Gershuny, J. (2001). Web-use and net-nerds: a neo-functionalist analysis of the impact of information technology in the home. Institute for Social and Economic Research Working Paper 2001-1. Colchester, UK: University of Essex.
17. Granovetter, M. S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78, 1360-80.
18. Guest, A. and Wierzbicki, S. (1999). Social ties at the neighborhood level: two decades of GSS evidence. Urban Affairs Review, 35, 92-111.
19. Hampton, K. (2001). Living the wired life in the wired suburb: Netville, glocalization and civil society. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Toronto, Toronto.
20. Hampton, K. and Wellman, B. (2002). Neighboring in Netville: how the Internet helps connect people in a wired suburb. City and Community, 1 (Sept.) in press.
21. Hiltz, S. R. and Turoff, M. (1978). The network nation. Reading, MA: Addison- Wesley.
22. Horrigan, J. B., Lenard, T. M., and McGonegal, S. (2001). Cities online: urban development & the Internet. Washington, DC: The Progress and Freedom Foundation and The PEW Internet and American Life Project.
23. Howcroft, D. (1999). The hyperbolic age of information: an empirical study of Internet usage. Information, Communication and Society, 2(3), 277-99.
24. Johnson, T. and Kaye, B. (2000). Democracy's rebirth or demise? The influence of the Internet on political attitudes. In D. Schulz (ed.) It's show time! media, politics and popular culture (pp. 209-28). New York: Peter Lang.
25. Jones, Q., Ravid, G., and Rafaeili, S. (2002). An empirical exploration of mass interaction system dynamics: individual information overload and Usenet discourse. Proceedings of the Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, IEEE Press.
26. Kapor, M. (1993). Where is the digital highway really heading? Wired (July), 53-9.
27. Koku, E. and Wellman, B. (2003). Scholarly networks as learning communities: the case of TechNet. Forthcoming in S. Barab, R. Kling, and J. Gray (eds) Building online communities in the service of learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
28. Koku, E., Nazer, N., and Wellman, B. (2001). Netting scholars: online and offline. American Behavioral Scientist, 44, 1750-72.
29. Kraut, R., Patterson, M., Lundmark, V., Kiesler, S., Mukhopadhyay, T., and Scherlis, W. (1998). Internet paradox: a social technology that reduces social involvement and psychological well-being? American Psychologist, 53(9), 1017-31.
30. LaRose, R., Eastin, M. S., and Gregg, J. (2001). Reformulating the Internet paradox: social cognitive explanations of Internet use and depression. Journal of Online Behavior, 1(2). Available online at: http://www.behavior.net/JOB/v1n2/paradox.html
31. Lévy, P. (1997). Collective intelligence. New York: Plenum.
32. Lin, N. (2001). Social capital. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
33. Matei, S. and Ball-Rokeach, S. (2001). The Internet in the communication infrastructure of urban residential communities: macro or meso-linkage? Paper presented to the Association for Internet Research conference, Minneapolis, October.
34. Müller, C. (1999). Networks of 'personal communities' and 'group communities' in different online communication services. Proceedings of the Exploring Cyber Society: social, Political, Economic and Cultural Issues (pp. 1-14). University of Northumbria, Newcastle, UK.
35. Nie, N. (2001). Sociability, interpersonal relations, and the Internet. American Behavioral Scientist, 45(3), 420-35.
36. Nie, N. and Sackman, H. (1970). The information utility and social choice. Montvale, NJ: AFIPS Press.
37. NTIA. (2000). Falling through the net: Toward digital inclusion, [Report]. National Telecommunications and Information Administration, US Department of Commerce, Economic and Statistics Administration. Available online at: http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/digitaldivide/
38. Orlikowski, W. and Barley, S. (2001). Technology and institutions. MIS Quarterly, 25, 145-65.
39. Pool, I. d. S. (ed.). (1977). The social impact of the telephone. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
40. Putnam, R. (1993). Making democracy work: civic traditions in modern Italy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
41. Putnam, R. (1996). The strange disappearance of civic America. The American Prospect, 24, 34-48.
42. Putnam, R. (2000). Bowling alone. New York: Simon & Schuster.
43. Reddick, A. (2000). The dual digital divide: the information highway in Canada, [Report]. The Public Interest Advocacy Centre, Human Resources Development Canada, Industry Canada. July. Available online at: http://olt-bta.hrdc-drhc.gc.ca/publicat/index.html
44. Rheingold, H. (1993). The virtual community. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
45. Rheingold, H. (2000). The virtual community (revised edn). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
46. Rogers, E. M. (1995). Diffusion of innovations. New York: Free Press.
47. Roper Center for Public Opinion Research. (2001). Roper social and political trends, [Online]. Available online at: http://www.ropercenter.uconn.edu
48. Schofer, E. and Fourcade-Gourinchas, M. (2001). The structural contexts of civic engagement: voluntary association membership in comparative perspective. American Sociological Review, 66(6), 806-28.
49. Schwartz, E. (1996). Netactivism: how citizens use the Internet. Sebastopol, CA: Songline.
50. Shapiro, C. and Varian, H. R. (1998). Information rules. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
51. Singh, S. (2001). Gender and the use of the Internet at home. New Media and Society, 3(4), 395-416.
52. Slouka, M. (1995). War of the worlds: cyberspace and the high-tech assault on reality. New York: Basic Books.
53. Smith, M. A. (1999). Counting on community. Paper presented to the CHI'99 conference, Pittsburgh, May.
54. Sproull, L. S. and Kiesler, S. B. (1991). Connections. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
55. Steiner, G. A. (1963). The people look at television. New York: Knopf.
56. Stoll, C. (1995). Silicon snake oil: second thoughts on the information highway. New York: Doubleday.
57. Sunstein, C. R. (2001). Republic.Com. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
58. Tarrow, S. (1999). Fishnets, Internets and catnets: Globalization and transnational collective action. In M. Hanagan, L. Moch, and W. TeBrake (eds), The past and future of collective action. New York: Russell Sage Foundation
59. Thorngate, W. (1990). Got a minute? Attentional limits revisited. Canadian Psychology, 31, 288-91.
60. Tilly, C. (1984). Big structures, large processes, huge comparisons. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
61. Tindall, D. (1994). Collective action in the rainforest. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Toronto, Toronto.
62. Tocqueville, A. de. (1835). Democracy in America. New York: Knopf.
63. Uslaner, E. M. (2000). Social capital and the net. Communications of the ACM, 43(12), 60-5.
64. Valente, T. W. (1995). Network models of the diffusion of innovations. Cresskill: Hampton Press.
65. Wei, R. and Leung, L. (2001). Impact of Internet use on traditional media, leisure and work: a path model approach. Paper presented to the International Communication Association, Washington, May.
66. Wellman, B. (1979). The community question. American Journal of Sociology, 84, 1201-31.
67. Wellman, B. (1999). The network community. In B. Wellman (ed.), Networks in the global village (pp. 1-48). Boulder, CO: Westview.
68. Wellman, B. (2001). Physical place and cyber-place. International Journal for Urban and Regional Research, 25, 227-52.
69. Wellman, B., Carrington, P., and Hall, A. (1988). Networks as personal communities. In B. Wellman, and S. D. Berkowitz (eds), Social structures: a network approach (pp. 130-84). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
70. Wellman, B. and Gulia, M. (1999). Net surfers don't ride alone. In B. Wellman (ed.), Networks in the global village (pp. 72-86). Boulder, CO: Westview.
71. Wellman, B. and Tindall, D. (1993). Reach out and touch some bodies: how telephone networks connect social networks. Progress in Communication Science, 12, 63-94.
72. Wellman, B. and Wortley, S. (1989). Brothers' keepers. Sociological Perspectives, 32, 273-306.
73. Wellman, B. and Wortley, S. (1990). Different strokes from different folks. American Journal of Sociology, 96, 558-88.
74. Wellman, B., Quan-Haase, A., Witte, J., and Hampton, K. (2001). Does the Internet increase, decrease, or supplement social capital? Social networks, participation, and community commitment. American Behavioral Scientist, 45(3), 437-56.
75. Wellman, B., Wilkes, R., Fong, E., Kew, M., and Chen, W. (2002). Fathoming the digital divide. Studies in Internet Communication: Theory and Practice, 19 (forthcoming).
76. Witte, J., Amoroso, L., and Howard, P. (2000). Method and representation in Internet-based survey tools. Social Science Computing Review, 18(2), 179-95.
77. Wuthnow, R. (1991). Acts of compassion: caring for others and helping ourselves. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
78. Wuthnow, R. (1998). Loose connections: joining together in America's fragmented communities. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.