IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v126y2021i10d10.1007_s11192-021-04135-2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Which questions are valuable in online Q&A communities? A question’s position in a knowledge network matters

Author

Listed:
  • Yanqing Shi

    (Nanjing Agriculture University)

  • Si Chen

    (Nanjing University of Information Science and Technology)

  • Lele Kang

    (Nanjing University)

Abstract

Online Q&A communities serve as important channels for diffusing knowledge. Questions, the main content in these forums, are not well investigated in the research literature. This study explores why some questions attract more attention in this context by emphasizing the knowledge network embedded in the questions. We examine how the characteristics of the question tags impact the popularity of the questions by collecting data from a programming-related Q&A site—Stack Overflow. We collected data for ten years, spanning the years 2008 to 2017, and included 6,833,276 users and 34,857,917 questions and answers in the analyses. The empirical analyses indicated that the frequency of the question tag is positively related to the popularity of the question. Additionally, the tag distance of the questions is curvilinearly related to the popularity of the questions in an inverted U-shape. Our study contributes to research discussions on how knowledge is diffused in an online community and further examines how these types of online forums efficiently promote knowledge sharing through the presentation of user’s questions.

Suggested Citation

  • Yanqing Shi & Si Chen & Lele Kang, 2021. "Which questions are valuable in online Q&A communities? A question’s position in a knowledge network matters," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(10), pages 8239-8258, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:126:y:2021:i:10:d:10.1007_s11192-021-04135-2
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-021-04135-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-021-04135-2
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-021-04135-2?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stirling, Andrew, 1994. "Diversity and ignorance in electricity supply investment : Addressing the solution rather than the problem," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 195-216, March.
    2. Kamal Badar & Julie M. Hite & Naeem Ashraf, 2015. "Knowledge network centrality, formal rank and research performance: evidence for curvilinear and interaction effects," Post-Print hal-02945454, HAL.
    3. Narda R. Quigley & Paul E. Tesluk & Edwin A. Locke & Kathryn M. Bartol, 2007. "A Multilevel Investigation of the Motivational Mechanisms Underlying Knowledge Sharing and Performance," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(1), pages 71-88, February.
    4. Gerald C. Kane & Jeremiah Johnson & Ann Majchrzak, 2014. "Emergent Life Cycle: The Tension Between Knowledge Change and Knowledge Retention in Open Online Coproduction Communities," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(12), pages 3026-3048, December.
    5. J. Alberto Espinosa & Sandra A. Slaughter & Robert E. Kraut & James D. Herbsleb, 2007. "Familiarity, Complexity, and Team Performance in Geographically Distributed Software Development," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(4), pages 613-630, August.
    6. Kamal Badar & Julie M. Hite & Naeem Ashraf, 2015. "Knowledge network centrality, formal rank and research performance: evidence for curvilinear and interaction effects," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(3), pages 1553-1576, December.
    7. Camille Roth & Paul Bourgine, 2006. "Lattice-based dynamic and overlapping taxonomies: The case of epistemic communities," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 69(2), pages 429-447, November.
    8. Katarina Larsen, 2008. "Knowledge network hubs and measures of research impact, science structure, and publication output in nanostructured solar cell research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 74(1), pages 123-142, January.
    9. Jo Thori Lind & Halvor Mehlum, 2010. "With or Without U? The Appropriate Test for a U‐Shaped Relationship," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 72(1), pages 109-118, February.
    10. Shan Jiang & Hsinchun Chen, 2019. "Examining patterns of scientific knowledge diffusion based on knowledge cyber infrastructure: a multi-dimensional network approach," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 121(3), pages 1599-1617, December.
    11. Quentin Jones & Gilad Ravid & Sheizaf Rafaeli, 2004. "Information Overload and the Message Dynamics of Online Interaction Spaces: A Theoretical Model and Empirical Exploration," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 15(2), pages 194-210, June.
    12. Ray Reagans, 2011. "Close Encounters: Analyzing How Social Similarity and Propinquity Contribute to Strong Network Connections," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(4), pages 835-849, August.
    13. Andy Stirling, 2007. "A General Framework for Analysing Diversity in Science, Technology and Society," SPRU Working Paper Series 156, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    14. Dahlander, Linus & Piezunka, Henning, 2014. "Open to suggestions: How organizations elicit suggestions through proactive and reactive attention," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(5), pages 812-827.
    15. Robert A. Burgelman, 1991. "Intraorganizational Ecology of Strategy Making and Organizational Adaptation: Theory and Field Research," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(3), pages 239-262, August.
    16. Lars Bo Jeppesen & Lars Frederiksen, 2006. "Why Do Users Contribute to Firm-Hosted User Communities? The Case of Computer-Controlled Music Instruments," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(1), pages 45-63, February.
    17. Richard F. J. Haans & Constant Pieters & Zi-Lin He, 2016. "Thinking about U: Theorizing and testing U- and inverted U-shaped relationships in strategy research," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(7), pages 1177-1195, July.
    18. William Ocasio, 1997. "Towards An Attention‐Based View Of The Firm," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(S1), pages 187-206, July.
    19. Paula E. Stephan, 2004. "Robert K. Merton's perspective on priority and the provision of the public good knowledge," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 60(1), pages 81-87, May.
    20. Jeffrey H. Dyer & Kentaro Nobeoka, 2000. "Creating and managing a high‐performance knowledge‐sharing network: the Toyota case," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(3), pages 345-367, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Wang, Cheng-Jun & Yan, Lihan & Cui, Haochuan, 2023. "Unpacking the essential tension of knowledge recombination: Analyzing the impact of knowledge spanning on citation impact and disruptive innovation," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 17(4).
    2. Haochuan Cui & Tiewei Li & Cheng-Jun Wang, 2023. "Climbing up the ladder of abstraction: how to span the boundaries of knowledge space in the online knowledge market?," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-12, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ricarda B. Bouncken & Martin Ratzmann & Jeffrey G. Covin, 2023. "Fluffy cuffs: SME’s innovation in alliances with buyer firms," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 61(3), pages 1231-1251, October.
    2. Xiaotian Yang, 2022. "Coopetition for innovation in R&D consortia: Moderating roles of size disparity and formal interaction," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 39(1), pages 79-102, March.
    3. Pollok, Patrick & Lüttgens, Dirk & Piller, Frank T., 2019. "Attracting solutions in crowdsourcing contests: The role of knowledge distance, identity disclosure, and seeker status," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 98-114.
    4. Liu, Meijun & Jaiswal, Ajay & Bu, Yi & Min, Chao & Yang, Sijie & Liu, Zhibo & Acuña, Daniel & Ding, Ying, 2022. "Team formation and team impact: The balance between team freshness and repeat collaboration," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(4).
    5. Gao, Yongqiang & Yang, Haibin & Zhang, Miaohan, 2021. "Too bad to fear, too good to dare? Performance feedback and corporate misconduct," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 1-11.
    6. Yan Yan & Jiancheng Guan, 2018. "How multiple networks help in creating knowledge: evidence from alternative energy patents," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(1), pages 51-77, April.
    7. Shukla, Dhirendra Mani & Mital, Amita & Qureshi, Israr & Wang, Taiyuan, 2020. "Valuation effects of alliance portfolio expansion speed and strength: Evidence from high-tech firms," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 370-383.
    8. Xie, Xuemei & Wang, Lijun & Zhang, Tao, 2023. "Involving online community customers in product innovation: The double-edged sword effect," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 123(C).
    9. Blankenburg Holm, Desirée & Drogendijk, Rian & Haq, Hammad ul, 2020. "An attention-based view on managing information processing channels in organizations," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 36(2).
    10. Violetta Bacon-Gerasymenko & Jonathan D. Arthurs & Sam Y. Cho, 2020. "How and When Investment Horizons Determine Venture Capital Firms’ Attention Breadth to Portfolio Companies," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 44(3), pages 475-503, May.
    11. Xie, Xuemei & Wu, Yonghui & Martínez, José Manuel Guaita, 2023. "More is not always better: Reconciling the dilemma of R&D collaboration in high-tech industries in transition economies," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    12. Vittoria G. Scalera & Alessandra Perri & T. J. Hannigan, 2018. "Knowledge connectedness within and across home country borders: Spatial heterogeneity and the technological scope of firm innovations," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 49(8), pages 990-1009, October.
    13. Qing Ke, 2023. "Interdisciplinary research and technological impact: evidence from biomedicine," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(4), pages 2035-2077, April.
    14. Ruling Zhang & Killian J. McCarthy & Xiao Wang, 2022. "Two's company, three's a crowd: The impact of corporate venture capital unit's investment partners on the corporate investor's innovation performance," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 43(4), pages 975-987, June.
    15. Helge Klapper & Markus Reitzig, 2018. "On the effects of authority on peer motivation: Learning from Wikipedia," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(8), pages 2178-2203, August.
    16. Carolina Rojas-Córdova & Amanda J. Williamson & Julio A. Pertuze & Gustavo Calvo, 2023. "Why one strategy does not fit all: a systematic review on exploration–exploitation in different organizational archetypes," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 17(7), pages 2251-2295, October.
    17. Ye, Silin & Zhou, Jing & Jiang, Yunwen & Liu, Xiaming, 2023. "Managers as the bridge: How cultural friction influences the integration of cross-border mergers and acquisitions," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 32(4).
    18. Marian-Gabriel Hâncean & Matjaž Perc & Jürgen Lerner, 2021. "The coauthorship networks of the most productive European researchers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(1), pages 201-224, January.
    19. Xiaodong Teng & Kun-Shan Wu & Lopin Kuo & Bao-Guang Chang, 2023. "Investigating the double-edged sword effect of environmental, social and governance practices on corporate risk-taking in the high-tech industry," Oeconomia Copernicana, Institute of Economic Research, vol. 14(2), pages 511-549, June.
    20. Zhou, Dan & Yan, Tingting & Zhao, Lilong & Guo, Jingjing, 2020. "Performance implications of servitization: Does a Manufacturer's service supply network matter?," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 219(C), pages 31-42.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:126:y:2021:i:10:d:10.1007_s11192-021-04135-2. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.