Comments on: Social Networks And Group Formation

By: Social Networks And Group Formation: Theoretical Concepts to Leverage | Social Foraging | Scoop.it

Fri, 16 Nov 2012 09:56:05 +0000

[...] Humans suffer from information overload; there’s much more information on any given subject than a person is able to access. As a result, people are forced to depend upon each other for knowledge. Know-who information rather than know-what, know-how or know-why information has become most crucial. It involves knowing who has the needed information and being able to reach that person (Johnson et al. 2000). In this context, understanding the formation, evolution and utilization of online social networks becomes important. A social network is “a set of people (or organizations or other social entities) connected by a set of social relationships, such as friendship, co-working or information exchange.” (Garton et al., 1997) While the Internet contributes to the information overload, it also provides useful tools to effectively manage one’s social networks and through them gain access to the right pieces of information. [...]

By: dmitryubc

dmitryubc — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Nice summary of research on what is definitely an important topic for designers today.

The discussion of LinkedIn seems to be a bit off the mark though. The fact that LinkedIn does not distinguish between strong and weak ties is the rule, not the exception, as far as popular social networking applications go.

The claim that LinkedIn makes it difficult for you to connect with your weak ties is not factually correct, either. LinkedIn has provided the ability to connect to users with whom you don’t share connections for quite a while now (there’s even an option to indicate that you don’t know the person you’re inviting to connect!)

Nevertheless, a good read – I look forward to the rest of the series.

By: shivsingh

shivsingh — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Dmitry,

Thank you for your feedback. I’m not sure if I agree with you completely about LinkedIn letting you connect with weak ties. Only if sign up for one of the paid accounts, do you really have easy access to potential weak ties. Otherwise, the way you reach others is restricted and it was even more difficult to connect with them earlier.

In terms of whether LinkedIn is an exception versus the norm in being able to differ between strong and weak ties, Facebook presents a different story. By virtue of letting you categorize your Friends, you have a place in which to “keep” your weak ties. The Limited Profile view also helps with this. However, with Facebook I’d really like the ability to create my own categories into which I can put people. I’m told that Plaxo does this with the new version of their software.

Nevertheless, thanks for the thoughts and I don’t mean to simply slam LinkedIn. It does some things really well and I’m an active user myself.

By: rianvdm

rianvdm — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Great summary. I wrote a similar article yesterday about social network theory and social capital which you might find interesting: http://www.ux-sa.com/2007/09/social-capital-in-online-social.html

By: shivsingh

shivsingh — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Thanks for sharing, you’ll probably find the next two parts interesting as well then. In those I talk about group formation and workplace scenarios. I noticed that your article highlights different research. It just goes to show much is out there in terms of quality research.

By: javier

javier — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Great Job Shiv, I’ve been following this topic lately and this is a nice review, very clear, congrats.

By: mattcclarke

mattcclarke — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

_The more mechanisms that you provide for those sub-networks to flourish, greater the overall network growth._

That’s a good point: the IA of a social network does not need to emphasise a merging of everyone into the “giant component”. The disconnected sub-networks are important too.

On the other hand, I’m very sad for all those singletons. A singleton in a social network is an oxymoron. And yet that’s how we all start out: a newbie with no friends. Identifying singletons and assisting them to form connections is one of the most important processes for building the network. If a new user can’t do that easily, they don’t come back — and typically leave an unused account behind. Can the theory help IA’s to improve that process?

Matt.

By: ericscheid

ericscheid — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Something else to remember about encouraging the flourishing of disconnected sub-networks is that innovation and evolution is more likely to occur at the edges, in the isolated enclaves, away from the big groups and their pressure to conform. Once a group moves into the “giant component” then subtle forces come into play which eventually results in stagnation and decay … and then the only way the giant component can ever stay alive is by constantly devouring the fresh blood of disconnected sub-networks.

By: lancebjones

lancebjones — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Thanks for that excellent article.

Makes me wonder about the idea of “deriving value” from a network. You mention that weak ties are better at providing value to the individual than strong ties. Yet you cite Ning’s model, which would seem to encourage the creation of small, affinity-based, strong-tie communities. Will Ning users look to derive value in a different way?

Maybe there’s a distinction to be made between more utilitarian communities like LinkedIn [primarily for professional networking] and other, more purely social communities.

By: shivsingh

shivsingh — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Interesting thoughts. Ning does encourage the creation of small, strong-tie networks. But it also encourages you to use your account to join multiple networks on the Ning platform. And in that sense, its helping you find ways to connect with weak ties. So in a sense there are two levels of affinity – first to Ning and then to your specific social networks within Ning.

Good question about the utilitarian versus social distinction. One can argue that all networks are social but that may not necessarily be the case. Those categories could work.