Factors that influence learners lurking in online

discussion environment Yingjie Liu

University of ConnecticutNERA, 2006

• Who are Lurkers?

• Why lurkers should be studied ?• Why lurkers lurk ? • What should we do in the

future ?

Importance

Morris and Ogan(1996)• “Who are they (lurkers)?”• “How big is the group?”• “Why do they remain lurkers?”• “ Is there something about the nature of the media

that prevent their participation?”

Rafaeli(1997)• “silent participant whom we can not speculate”• “unverbalized reaction”

Whittaker et al. (1998)• “Why do people contribute to certain discussions but

not others?”• “How long do people lurk before their first post?”

Catarci(2005)• “Teachers should not allow students to lurk”

Lurker

• Someone who "hangs around" online discussions, reading other people’s comments but not contributing. Being a lurker is a good way to check out a newsgroup, but eventually you should contribute something to the discussion.

http://www.maran.com/dictionary/l/lurker/

Copyright © 1995,1996 maranGraphics Inc.

Lurker

• Lurker does not participate in normal forum discourse, but he's out there...watching, reading every message.

• Generally, he is quite harmless. In fact, his silence usually reflects a natural reticence rather than any sinister motives. He is content to let the other people haul the conversational freight ...

• Occasionally, however, some mysterious impulse drives him to de-lurk and attack.

(http://www.politicsforum.org/images/flame_warriors/flame_57.php)

Attributes:LurkingWon’t take risksCareful of what they sayOverly cautious

Gloss:This mysterious creature, designated by

just one archetype, actually conceals

numerous character types. It is the nature

of the lurker to be unseen, and it is the

nature of ACT-KM to have a very high

proportion of lurkers (in the first half of

2004, 80% of the members never

contributed, and only 13% posted more

than once).

Lurker

© 2005 Patrick Lambe www.greenchameleon.com/thoughtpieces/archetypes.pdf

Lurker’s Characteristics

• “lurking”• “Not seen”• “Mysterious”• “Hang around”• “Not contribute”• “Not participate”• “harmless”• “watching, reading”

• From Chinese public community forum

Attribution Theory

Weiner(1986)• Students’ perceptions of the cause to their

success or failure based on their self-perceptions will influence their future expectancy behaviors

• Three dimension explanations are mostly common used by students to attribute to their failure or success:

- locus (internal cause or external cause to the person),

- stability (whether the cause changes or not along the time change),

- responsibility (Controllable or uncontrollable).

Top five Reasons why lurkers did not post (J. Preece, 2004) -[brackets indicate % of respondents (N=219)]

• Didn’t need to post• Just reading/browsing is enough (53.9)• No requirement to post (21.5)• Had no intention of posting (13.2)

• Need to find out more about the group before post• Still learning about the group (29.7)

• Thought I was being helpful by not posting• Nothing to offer (22.8)• Others have said it (18.7)

• Couldn’t make the software work• Not enough time (9.1)• Do not know how to post (7.8)• Too many messages (4.6)

• Didn’t like the group (poor dynamics/fit)• Shy about posting (28.3)• Want to remain anonymous (15.1)• Of no value to me (11.0)• Messages or group low quality (7.8)• Wrong group (7.3)• Long delay getting response (6.8)• Concern about aggressive responses (5.9)• Fear of commitment (4.1)• New members treated poorly (1.4)

• Other• Other reasons (1.4)

Why lurkers do not post Lurkers Responding

Nonnecke, B. & Preece, J. (2001)

(%)

Just reading/browsing is enoughStill learning about the groupShy about postingNothing to offerNo requirement to postOthers respond the way I would Other Want to remain anonymous Had no intention to post from the outset Of no value to meNot enough time to postDo not know how to post to this groupPoor quality of messages or group Wrong group for meLong delay in response to postingsConcern about aggressive or hostile responses There are too many messages alreadyIf I post, I am making a commitmentGroup treats new members badlyMy work does not allow posting

53.9 29.7 28.322.821.518.718.715.113.2 11 9.1 7.87.87.3 6.85.94.6 4.1 1.4

Learn or not？

Lurking = inactive ?

• Vicarious interaction in online discussion may be an important source of learning (Jiang & Ting,2000 ).

• Bandura(1977): People learn much by observing others behaviors

and form a consequence on later action. (No.1-Just reading/browsing is enough)

• Bandura(1986) : Learning and performance are different. People can learn through observation alone, which

could lead to learn even without showing their performance.

Learning or not ？.

(Catarci, 2005)

• There is no relationship exists between interactivity and learning results (Catarci, 2005).

• Mean course grade is better for high-visibility student than for no-visibility students (Beaudoin, 2002).•The lurkers feel they are still learning and benefiting from this low-profile approach to their online studies (Beaudoin, 2002).

Anonymous or not?

Public forum

• Want to remain anonymous (15.1) –in public forum

http://teaching.unr.edu/OTL/webct/studentres/disc/index.html

WebCT example

Gender, Age and Ethnicity

• Kovacic (2004) : -It’s difficult to summarize the influence of gender difference on online

participation, but females in general tend to be more active in the forum posting on average 66% more messages than their male counterparts.

-Also, the lurking level is significantly lower among female students. -Older students are more active in the forum and achieve better

marks.

• Mclean & Morrison(2000) -Age has no impact on participation in computer conference. -European learners are the most active participants in the discussion

forum when compared with other two ethnic groups (Asian and Maori &Pacific Islanders)

• Vladimir (2003) : - The significant difference in participation levels based on native

language may be masking other culture differences.

- Different cultures may exhibit diverse norms of participation in discussion, and some of the discussion material itself may be specific to the US, where the majority of users were based.

Education Level, Learning Styles

• Education Level - The differences in level of participation and academic performance

between those with and without tertiary education are not statistically significant (Kovacic, 2003)

- Learners with university degrees sent nearly three times the number of messages as did learners without degree(Mclean & Morrison, 2000)

• Learning Styles - Particular learner type (reflective, sensor, verbal and sequential) was the

most active participant in the forum scoring the highest course mark (Kovacic, 2003).

Interesting finding

• The effort of the instructor in terms of reading and writing posts is higher than that of the learner themselves( Tiziana, 2005).

• Each and every one of us has either lurked, is lurking or will lurk in the future. As one researcher said, “lurking is normal, it is the people who post who are abnormal” (Nonnecke,2003).

Thank You!

• Bandura, A. (1986). Social Foundations of Thought and Action. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.• Bandura, A. （ 1977). Social Learning Theory. New York: General Learning Press.• Beaudoin M (2002), Learning or Lurking? Tracking the "invisible" online student, The Internet and

Higher Education, 5, pp147-155.• Klemm, W. R. (1998). Eight ways to get students more engaged in on-line conferences. The Higher

Education Journal, 26(1), 62-64. • Kovacic(2003), Learning styles, sociodemographics and level of participation in a discussion forum ,

retrieved from http://ausweb.scu.edu.au/aw04/papers/refereed/kovacic/paper.html, September 29,2006

• Morris, M., & Ogan, C. (1996). The Internet as mass medium. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication,1(4).

• McLean, S., & Morrison, D. (2000). Sociodemographic characteristics of learners and participation in computer conferencing. Journal of Distance Education 15(2). Nonnecke, B., & Preece, J. (2000). Lurker Demographics. Paper presented at the2000Proceedings of CHI'2000, The Hague,

• Nonnecke, B. Lurking in email-based discussion lists.Ph.D. thesis: SCISM. London: South Bank University,

• Netherlands.Rafaeli, S., & Sudweeks, F. (1997). Networked interactivity. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication,2(4).

• Weiner, B. (1986).  An attributional theory of motivation and emotion.  New York:  Springer-Verlag.• Preece,J., Nonnecke, B., Andrews, D. (2004) The top 5 reasons for lurking: Improving community

experiences for everyone. Computers in Human Behavior, 2, 1• Holzinger. Lurking: An under-. estimated human-computer phe-. nomenon. IEEE MultiMedia,.

12(4):70–75, October/December. 2005. Whittaker, S., Terveen, L., Hill, W., & Cherny, L. (1998). The dynamics of mass interaction. Proc. CSCW 98