1.
Conceptualisation of sense of (virtual) community
One of
the most prominent conceptualisations of sense of community was
introduced by McMillan and Chavis (1986). It was developed for
face-to-face communities and it includes components such as
- membership (feelings of emotional safety with a sense of belonging and identification),
- influence (exertion of one's influence on the community with reciprocal influence of the community on oneself),
- integration and fulfillment of needs (beeing supported and giving support, thereby reinforcing one to behave in a manner acceptable to the community),
- shared emotional connection (positive affect related to community membership, shared history).
People
asked about their SOC might give answers like these:
- Membership: „It is the diversity of people that makes this neighbourhood so unique. There are so many different flavors here and it is these flavors coming together that makes living here so valueable.“
- Influence: „I have the feeling that it really matters when I say something and that my opinion is taken seriously.“
- Integration and fulfillment of needs: „I'm drawn to this neighbourhood because we are all connected with one another. The size of our community allows me to see and deal with people that I know. When I need help doing maintenance work i.e. I can always ask a neighbour for help or advice.“
- Shared emotion connection: „I've been living here for more than twenty years and so do a lot of us in this area. We raised our kids together!“
Researchers
like Blanchard and Marcus (2004) extended the SOC-concept to virtual
communities, calling the result: sense of virtual community (SOVC).
They found similarities, including
- feelings of membership,
- integration of needs, and
- shared emotional connections,
as well
as differences:
- Members reported that recognizing others and relationships with specific other members were important to them.
- They did however not report feeling that they exerted influence on/were influenced by others.
2.
What are the benefits of SO(V)C? (cf. Pretty et al., 2007)
One way
of understanding sense of community is as a process in which
community members interact, draw parts of their identity from this
participation, give as well as receive social support, and by
contributing to the common good foster the development of SOC.
On the
other hand, sense of community is seen as some type of positive end
state and end in itself. And there are some impressive examples of
how SOC (SOVC) has a significant role in the health, well-being, and
mental health outcomes of populations and sub-groups.
A third
aspect is to see it as a predictor of other positive or negative -
outcomes. A strong SOC is associated with well functioning
communities that are supportive, even though one may not have
personal relationships with each individual member. Furthermore,
members may continue to have a SOC even though individuals come and
go. Hence, sense of community can be an illusive cognition and affect
which is not necessarily based on experiencing individual- level
transactions.
This is
particularly important for communities where members are not attached
to one another by personal bonds but where the member is attached to
the community as a whole This refers to the distinction of common
identity vs. common bond: The distiction is based on the member's
attachment either to the group as a whole [common identity] or to
particular members of the community [common bond] (cf. Ren et al.,
200?).
But
communities with a strong SOC may also develop a tendency to turn
inward, to exclude members that are different especially in times of
need.
3.
What are the antecedents of SOVC?
Blanchard
reported the results for a model she had tested in two studies in
which
- the identity of other members and themselves (-> membership)
- observing exhange of support within the community (-> reinforcement/integration of needs), and
- interacting with other members of the community outside of the virtual community via email
contributed
to the SOVC either directly and/or mediated by group norms. McMillan
& Chavis had already emphasised the importance of shared values
(= norms) for the exchange of support in a community:
"When
people who share values come together, they find that they have
similar needs, priorities, and goals, thus fostering the belief that
in joining together they might be better able to satisfy these needs
and obtain the reinforcement they seek. (...) The extent to which
individual values are shared among community members will determine
the ability of a community to organize and prioritize its
need-fulfillment activities. (...) A strong community is able to fit
people together so that people meet others’ needs while they meet
their own."
4.
How can I assess the SO(V)C of my community?
A
measure of sense of community is the Sense of Community Index (SCI:
Perkins, Florin, Rich, Wandersman & Chavis, 1990; Long &
Perkins, 2003). Several other questionnaires have been developed
mostly for residential community research (e.g. Sense of Community
Index 2). Blanchard developed a questionnaire for assessing the SOVC.
An alternative approach was taken by using the reparatory grid
technique, a quantitative, phenomenological approach originally
developed by Kelly (1955). This involves communities selecting their
own constructs for analysis, and residents’ ratings being based on
these elements.
So in
principle, you could take Blanchard's questionnaire, use a 5 or 7
point likert-type scale and ask your community. Let us suppose for a
moment you've done that and the mean value is 2.2. What does it tell
you? Not much, unless one knows the mean value of similar communities
or unless you have repeated the survey in your community several
times which will give you at least an information on the trend. To my
knowledge and unfortunately there is no reference database yet.
5.
How can I improve the SOVC of my community?
Possible
measures for the improvement of SOC can be categorised in line with
its determinants although there isn't always an exclusive 1:1
attribution. Please read Richard Millington's blogpost „How to use
transferable elements to develop a strong sense of community.“
(http://www.feverbee.com/2011/10/senseofcommunity.html).
___________________________________
References:
Blanchard,
Anita L. (2007) "Developing a sense of virtual community
measure. "CyberPsychology
& Behavior 10.6:
827-830.
Blanchard,
Anita L. (2008). Testing a model of sense of virtual
community. Computers
in Human Behavior 24: 2107–2123. See
also :
http://the-virtual-community-blog.blogspot.de/2013/03/the-sources-of-sense-of-virtual.html
McMillan,
David W. and Chavis David M. (1986). Sense of Community: A Definition
and Theory. Journal
of Community Psychology Volume 14, 6-23.
Ren,
Y., Kraut, R. , Kiesler, S. (200?). Identity
and bond theories to understand design decisions for online
communities.See also:
http://the-virtual-community-blog.blogspot.de/2013/03/the-effect-of-community-type-on-member.html
Pretty,
Grace, et al. (2007) "Psychological sense of community and its
relevance to well-being and everyday life in Australia." The
Australian Community Psychologist 19.2:
6-25.
Sense
of Community Index 2 (SCI-2):
http://www.communityscience.com/pdfs/Sense%20of%20Community%20Index-2(SCI-2).pdf
No comments:
Post a Comment