All Academic, Inc. Research Logo

Info/CitationFAQResearchAll Academic Inc.
Document

An Invisible Leverage in the Adoption of Online Social Support Community
Unformatted Document Text:  Running Head: Invisible Leverage in Adoption of Online Social Support Community 6 implies that more resources (i.e. social support from more participants) are available in the OSSC. Therefore, the increase in adoption further strengthens the OSSC’s relative advantage, and completes the loop between relative advantage and adoption (See Figure 1). This bi- directional causation concurs with Markus’ reciprocal interdependence (Markus, 1990). In her study of critical mass in interactive innovation, reciprocal interdependence refers that the benefits from each additional adoption of an interactive innovation increase not only for all future adopters, but also for each previous adopter. This reciprocal interdependence results in steeper S-curves than usual diffusion curves, which means an accelerated rate of adoption. This spiral process in interactive innovation, however, may occur in the adoption of OSSC in a different way. That is, more often, people start to build off-line relationships as a result of close online relationships (Parks, 1996). They may stop visiting their OSSC to meet each other. They use personal emails or meet in person after building sufficient rapport among them. As Turner et al. found (2001), people participate in OSSC only if they found themselves receiving insufficient social support from face-to-face relationships. Once they find someone satisfying their needs for social support in face-to-face personal networks or they feel no more need for social support (e.g. they are cured), they may discontinue participating in OSSC. Therefore, each participant’s increasing adoption temporarily contributes to maintaining the optimal level of relative advantage until they stop visiting their OSSC for some reasons. It is active adopters who remain in their OSSC in spite of all possible reasons for discontinuance that contribute to the increase in relative advantages of OSSC continuously (See Figure 1). Those who remain in their OSSC through the whole period may take a different role from when they started to join. They may remain because they still need social support from the OSSC or they change from “asking for support” to “giving support.” The solid arrows in Figure 1 indicate continuous contributions by active adopters, who are likely to change their roles from “asking” to “giving,” and the dotted arrows indicate temporal contributions by new participants whose role tend to be “asking.” Discontinuance or returning to lurking by participants who find a sudden increase of postings uncomfortable takes place following the gray arrow. Social Support and Network Structural Characteristics as Relative Advantages Potential adopters make their adoption decision if they perceive a particular OSSC as effective to achieve an ideal end-state (i.e. satisfied needs for social support). The present study

Authors: Yun, Haejin., Park, Songyi. and Kim, Hee-Jung.
first   previous   Page 6 of 37   next   last



background image
Running Head: Invisible Leverage in Adoption of Online Social Support Community
6
implies that more resources (i.e. social support from more participants) are available in the
OSSC. Therefore, the increase in adoption further strengthens the OSSC’s relative advantage,
and completes the loop between relative advantage and adoption (See Figure 1). This bi-
directional causation concurs with Markus’ reciprocal interdependence (Markus, 1990). In her
study of critical mass in interactive innovation, reciprocal interdependence refers that the
benefits from each additional adoption of an interactive innovation increase not only for all
future adopters, but also for each previous adopter. This reciprocal interdependence results in
steeper S-curves than usual diffusion curves, which means an accelerated rate of adoption.
This spiral process in interactive innovation, however, may occur in the adoption of
OSSC in a different way. That is, more often, people start to build off-line relationships as a
result of close online relationships (Parks, 1996). They may stop visiting their OSSC to meet
each other. They use personal emails or meet in person after building sufficient rapport among
them. As Turner et al. found (2001), people participate in OSSC only if they found themselves
receiving insufficient social support from face-to-face relationships. Once they find someone
satisfying their needs for social support in face-to-face personal networks or they feel no more
need for social support (e.g. they are cured), they may discontinue participating in OSSC.
Therefore, each participant’s increasing adoption temporarily contributes to maintaining the
optimal level of relative advantage until they stop visiting their OSSC for some reasons. It is
active adopters who remain in their OSSC in spite of all possible reasons for discontinuance that
contribute to the increase in relative advantages of OSSC continuously (See Figure 1). Those
who remain in their OSSC through the whole period may take a different role from when they
started to join. They may remain because they still need social support from the OSSC or they
change from “asking for support” to “giving support.” The solid arrows in Figure 1 indicate
continuous contributions by active adopters, who are likely to change their roles from “asking”
to “giving,” and the dotted arrows indicate temporal contributions by new participants whose
role tend to be “asking.” Discontinuance or returning to lurking by participants who find a
sudden increase of postings uncomfortable takes place following the gray arrow.
Social Support and Network Structural Characteristics as Relative Advantages
Potential adopters make their adoption decision if they perceive a particular OSSC as
effective to achieve an ideal end-state (i.e. satisfied needs for social support). The present study


Convention
Convention is an application service for managing large or small academic conferences, annual meetings, and other types of events!
Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf.
Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets!
Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more!
Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering.
Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more!
Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches!
Click here for more information.

first   previous   Page 6 of 37   next   last

©2012 All Academic, Inc.