Virtual community

In this section, the author reviews the literature on virtual community, social network sites, diffusion of innovation and social network analysis. The literature review provides the theoretical foundation for this research.

2.1Virtual community

Interpersonal channels allow a user assessing the potential benefits of using a new interactive technology. In essence, people use these channels to judge whether the technology has reached the point where it is useful because enough other people are using it. This is best perceived through the user’s social network.

Each user has an implicit measure of the number of influences they need in order to be convinced that a technology is worth adopting. Thus, social networks become crucial. People who are well-connected naturally have a greater exposure to new technologies, and may therefore be quicker about trying them out. Also, it has formed many kinds of virtual communities through the computer-mediated communication for people to exchange information or share their life.

Human scholar Mercer (1956) defined that community was the combination of living at a particular moment in a specific geographical location with related people, and these people would share their common culture.

Later, as information technology and network media advanced, it began to form a virtual community. As a result, many scholars of different research field have also begun to conduct virtual community-related research and define the virtual community. In Early times, Sandel (1982) proposed that virtual community was individuals who belong to a certain extent in the community composition of self-identity, and provide their members thinking, behavior and background from mutual exchange of their life. Cerulo et al. (1992) defined that a virtual community was through some electronic media (e.g. telephone, fax, television, radio or computer) for the ways of communication and contact with the group.

Tonteri et al. (2011) thought that sense of virtual community (SOVC) reflects the feeling that individual members have of belonging to an online social group, and increasing number of users and consumers today affiliate with each other through online channels in order to interact around shared interests and form virtual communities.

McKenna and Bargh (2000) pointed out the major effects of virtual life for self-identification, social contact and relationship building were:

(1) To enhance the degree of personal anonymity.

(2) To reduce the importance of roles of interpersonal relationship with the personal appearance.

(3) To reduce the space gap for the social interactive effects.

(4) To make individuals have stronger dominance for interpersonal interaction when across time and space

2.1.1 Definition of virtual community

Sandel (1982) pointed out individual belongs to a certain virtual community, and that composes self-identity of individuals and provides its members thinking, behavior and background of mutual exchange of life.

Virtual community was first used by Rheingold (1993), and it is defined as: a combination of society, and derive from enough people, emotion and interpersonal relationships on the virtual space in a long-term development.

Ferback and Thompson (1995) indicated virtual community is a kind of social relationship in a particular environment (such as: chat rooms) for contacting with others and discussing topics of common interest.

Romm et al. (1997) pointed out this kind of social network is a new social phenomenon, and members in the community have loyalty and commitment and can share with others and exchange ideas.

2.1.2 Characteristics and types of virtual community

About the characteristics of virtual communities, Lee et al. (2002) exhibited four characteristics to define virtual communities, including:

(1) To be created in the computer-mediated environment.

(2) To be conducted activities by the information technology.

(3) To be led by the participant or subject content.

(4)To be generated the relationship in the virtual community by communicating There are many kinds of classifications of virtual communities. Alder &

Christopher (1998) thought it can be simply divided into three parts, including geographical region, occupational category, personal interests.

Besides, Armstrong and Hagel (1997) focused their attention on the following four types of electronic communities by analyzing the marketing research, including:

(1) Communities of transaction

To facilitate the buying and selling of goods and services and provide information about these transactions. Participants are encouraged to interact to make informed purchase decisions. Participants are encouraged to interact with one another in order to engage in a specific transaction that can be informed by the input of other members of the community.

(2) Communities of interest

To bring together participants who interact extensively about specific topics of interest. Participants not only carry out transactions with one another, but their interactions are generally focused on a specific topic area.

(3) Communities of fantasy

To allow participants create new personalities, environments, or stories of fantasy. Here, individuals can take on the persona of an imaginative or factual being and act out roles like members of a spontaneous improvisational theater.

(4) Communities of Relationship

To center on intense personal experiences and generally adhere to masking identities and anonymity. Examples include cancer survivors and rape victims. Here, participants discuss the pain associated with these experiences, talk about how to deal with personal issues, and exchange information about medical research and treatments.

Further, Chaudhury et al. (2001) were based on the interactive point of view, and divided the virtual community into three types:

(1) You-Based Community:

The dialogues of virtual members are one on one, and there are strong dependence on each other, this type of virtual community mainly focuses on the relationship synchronized and messages exchange, such as community of dating site.

(2)They-Based Community:

This type of community is for third social groups, like clubs or neighbors for sharing each other's interest, and the main emphasizes on exchanging any interesting comments or ideas. The dialogues of virtual members are many on many and the interactive process is classified asynchronous mostly.

(3)It based Community:

In this type of community, members can register by login machines to receive messages, and the dialogue patterns are one on many. Members obtain the task-orientation of information members of the task-driven access to information primary, so they maintain the feeling among the members is weak relatively.

2.1.3 Roles

Many scholars have defined the roles of member in the virtual communities, and the roles are overlapping usually. In other words, a member may play different roles at the same time.

Guirguis et al. (2005) proposed different perspectives of role theory, including functionalist, symbolic interactionist, organizational, cognitive, and structural perspectives.

Figure 2-1 Functional, symbolic interactionist, organizational, and cognitive role theory perspectives

Source: Guirguis et.al (2005)

Armstrong and Hagel (1997) thought the roles of virtual community members and contribution are progressive development, and there are four main roles, including:

(1)Visitor：

The members are viewers when they just join the community, most people do not stay, and few people stay and only have low using rate. But the visitors can spread positive word and mouth to other network community and attract more visitors and thus become active members.

(2)Builder：

The visitors may become builders or users over time, and they will be the most enthusiastic and active to give their creative content with the power of community cohesion for the community, and they take the huge indirect value or the community.

(3)Users：

Sometimes they are also called lurker. They spend their time in the

community is more than the visitors, but do not give their creative content and participate in activities and services. Because of their effort in the community, the operators of social community can collect abundant information user habits from them.

(4)Purchaser:

In the commercial virtual community, this type of members is active to purchase products or services, and bring huge commissions and the considerable advertising revenues for the community.

Figure 2-2 Types of Virtual Community of Consumption Member Source: Kozinets(1999)

Figure 2-2 shows the types of virtual community of consumption member, and it is proposed by Kozinets (1999). There are two factors — relations with the consumption activity, and relations with the virtual community — are separate enough that they can guide our understanding of four distinct member

‘types,’ as shown in Figure 2. Rather than simply agglomerating all members of virtual communities into a single category, this approach allows much more

subtlety in targeting and approach.

1. Tourists:

Those who lack strong social ties to the group maintain only a superficial or passing interest in the consumption activity.

2. Minglers:

The people maintain strong social ties, but who are only perfunctorily interested in the central consumption activity.

3. Devotees:

The people are opposite to this: they maintain a strong interest in and enthusiasm for the consumption activity, but have few social attachments to the group.

4. Insiders:

The people have strong social ties and strong personal ties with the consumption activity.

From a marketing strategy perspective, it is the devotees and the insiders who tend to represent the most important targets for marketing. In addition, the virtual community itself may propagate the development of loyalty and heavy usage by culturally and socially reinforcing consumption. In this way, tourists and minglers can be socialized and ‘upgraded’ to insiders and devotees.

In general, a virtual community member will progress from being a visitor to an insider as she gains online experience and discovers groups whose consumption activities assuage her needs.

Because they are generally uninterested in building online social ties, devotees and tourists tend to use predominantly the factual informational mode of interaction. In this interaction mode, it is clear that they use online

communication as a means for the accomplishment of other ends.

Minglers and insiders tend to be far more social and relational in their group communication. To them, the social contact of online communication is in itself a valuable reinforcement. This social orientation focuses on longer-term personal gain either through cooperation with other community of consumption members or through the delineation and enforcement of communal standards.

Yang (2000) explored internet virtual community members to find the role of interaction and communication, totally classified seven roles in the virtual community.

Table 2-1 The characteristics and roles of the virtual community members

Characteristic

Member's leader High/ Medium High High 1. Advice supported 2. Experiences shared

Opinion responders High, medium Medium, low High 1.Advice supported 2. Experiences shared

Self-disclosurers Medium, low Low Low Expe riences shared

Experience sharers High, medium, low, passers-by

High, medium Medium 1. Advice supported 2. Experiences shared

Information Inquirers

Low,passers-by Medium, low Medium, low Information Inquired

Product promoters High, medium,

Interferers Low, passers-by Low Low Others

Source: Yang (2000)

2.1.4 Remarks

Clearly, the roles of the members in the community are not mutually exclusive. When consumers shop for goods and services, they often seek advices from others before they buy, and essentially blend the needs they met by communities of transaction with those who met by communities of interest.

However, currently, most of the communities target only one of the four needs.

In real life, each member may mix features of different types of members, so the virtual community members may not only belong to a particular type, but also play two or more roles possibly. The roles of the member converted can ascribe to the changes of the time, environments, or the cumulative experience and expertise,

In sum, there are high degree of interest and active opinion leaders involved, and a lower participation or tourist-type member in the virtual community. Opinion leaders are the primary participants, and are also the part of the important value source in the community. Visitors or tourists-type members accounted for the major proportions in the community, so the virtual community operator should understand the characteristics of different types of members, and the value of the contribution allow more members to transform high value-based members and bring more benefits for the community.