The DOI matches its Crossref record; 113 of the 113 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Network Exchange Patterns in Online Communities
Abstract
Large-scale online communities rely on computer-mediated communication between participants, enabling them to sustain interactions and exchange on a scale hitherto unknown. Yet little research has focused on how these online communities sustain themselves and how their interactions are structured. In this paper, we theorize and empirically measure the network exchange patterns of long-duration sustainable online communities. We propose that participation dynamics follow specific forms of social exchange: direct reciprocity, indirect reciprocity, and preferential attachment. We integrate diverse findings about individual participation motivations by identifying how individual behavior manifests in network-level structures of online communities. We studied five online communities over 27 months and analyzed 38,483 interactions using exponential random graph (p*) models and mixed-effects analysis of covariance. In a test of competing models, we found that network exchange patterns in online community communication networks are characterized by direct reciprocity and indirect reciprocity patterns and, surprisingly, a tendency away from preferential attachment. Our findings undermine previous explanations that online exchange follows a power law distribution based on people wanting to connect to “popular” others in online communities. Our work contributes to theories of new organizational forms by identifying network exchange patterns that regulate participation and sustain online communities.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Emergence of Scaling in Random Networks
Barabási, A.-L., & Albert, R. (1999) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.286.5439.509 · Cited by 36,135
Bowling alone: the collapse and revival of American community
(2000) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.38-2454 · Cited by 28,789
Time Series Analysis: Forecasting and Control
Geurts, M., Box, G. E. P., & Jenkins, G. M. (1977) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.2307/3150485 · Cited by 19,186
The Structure and Function of Complex Networks
Newman, M. E. J. (2003) · SIAM Review · doi:10.1137/s003614450342480 · Cited by 18,719
Putnam, R. (2000) · doi:10.1145/358916.361990 · Cited by 17,114
(1990) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.27-6637 · Cited by 16,594
The Handbook of Social Psychology
Gravatt, A. E., Lindzey, G., & Aronson, F. (1969) · The Family Coordinator · doi:10.2307/582242 · Cited by 12,517
Breitung, J., & Hamilton, J. D. (1995) · Contemporary Sociology · doi:10.2307/2076916 · Cited by 10,966
Gamst, F. C. (1991) · Anthropology of Work Review · doi:10.1525/awr.1991.12.3.19 · Cited by 7,932
The Matthew Effect in Science: The reward and communication systems of science are considered.
Merton, R. K. (1968) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.159.3810.56 · Cited by 6,720
Cited by
The Creation of Social Value: Can An Online Health Community Reduce Rural–Urban Health Disparities?1
Goh, J. M., Gao, G. (., & Agarwal, R. (2016) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.25300/misq/2016/40.1.11 · Cited by 346
Open collaboration for innovation: Principles and performance
Levine, S. S., & Prietula, M. J. (2014) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.2013.0872 · Cited by 263
Knowledge transfer in organizations: The roles of members, tasks, tools, and networks
Argote, L., & Fahrenkopf, E. (2016) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2016.08.003 · Cited by 258
Platform governance matters: How platform gatekeeping affects knowledge sharing among complementors
Zhang, Y., Li, J., & Tong, T. W. (2022) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.3191 · Cited by 214
Microphones, not megaphones: Functional crowdworker voice regimes on digital work platforms
Gegenhuber, T., Ellmer, M., & Schüßler, E. (2021) · Human Relations · doi:10.1177/0018726720915761 · Cited by 115
Metadata
- Authors
- Faraj, S., & Johnson, S. L.
- Venue
- Organization Science
- Published
- 2011-12
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 1464-1480
- ISSN
- 1047-7039 (ISSN-L)
- 1526-5455
- OpenAlex
- W2005498212
- Cited by
- 347
- References
- 113
- FWCI
- 10.86
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Network Exchange Patterns in Online Communities. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1287/orsc.1100.0600
- The paper
- Faraj, S., & Johnson, S. L. (2011). Network Exchange Patterns in Online Communities. Organization Science. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1100.0600
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.