Institutional and Entrepreneurial Engagement in Commons-Based Peer Production
Citation: Rong Wang, Giorgos Cheliotis (2016) Institutional and Entrepreneurial Engagement in Commons-Based Peer Production. International Journal of Communication (RSS)
Internet Archive Scholar (search for fulltext): Institutional and Entrepreneurial Engagement in Commons-Based Peer Production
Wikidata (metadata): Q35178297
Download: http://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/4248
Tagged:
Summary
Use network analysis to study the dynamics of online collective action at two collaborative music production sites, ccMixter and Kompoz. Density, reciprocity, and centralization were dependent variables. The independent variable was engagement, characterized as a mix of entrepreneurial ("participants have a high degree of autonomy and are not constrained by a central authority") and institutional ("members’ actions are steered toward a central organizational purpose, with individual members having little or no say over what that purpose will be").
ccMixter and Kompoz differ in engagement at both "macro" and "micro" levels: community contests strongly guided by site administrators vs none; ad-hoc one-off remixing by individuals vs teams strongly guided by team founders. ccMixter overall is more strongly characterized by the entrepreneurial mode and Kompoz the institutional mode.
Density, reciprocity, and centralization are shown for each site with descriptive statistics, based on data gathered, and compared to simulated graphs with the same attributes to compare whether observed attributes are relatively high or low.
(CUG and EGRM tests should be described here.)
Authors propose three hypotheses:
- H1: Density in the CBPP engagement network is positively associated with the degree of institutional engagement.
- H2: The degree of reciprocity in the CBPP engagement network is positively associated with the degree of institutional engagement.
- H3: The degree of centralization in the CBPP engagement network is positively associated with the degree of institutional engagement.
The Kompoz engagement network had a slightly denser structure than ccMixter's, "pointing in the direction of H1 without providing strong support for it."
The Kompoz network showed stronger reciprocity, providing some support for H2.
ccMixter showed stronger out-degree centralization, though H3 received some support from the sources of centralization found at each site, ie macro for ccMixter and micro for Kompoz, being where each has stronger institutional features.
Theoretical and Practical Relevance
Quote:
- Future study will examine both the mode of engagement and the mode of interaction in the collective action space to uncover how they influence each other to drive successful collective action. For example, a study could collect communication network data to measure features of two interaction modes through network attributes. Another might launch a survey launched to measure how users in each community perceive the community’s structure, the level of trust among peers, communication frequency, and perceived efficacy for both individuals and communities.
Discussion at https://www.facebook.com/rongwangnu/posts/10209829355035458