IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/svcbiz/v7y2013i4p687-711.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Determinants of collective intelligence quality: comparison between Wiki and Q&A services in English and Korean users

Author

Listed:
  • Jaehun Joo
  • Ismatilla Normatov

Abstract

Although web-enabled collective intelligence (CI) plays a critical role in organizational innovation and collaboration, the dubious quality of CI is still a substantial problem faced by many CI services. Thus, it is important to identify determinants of CI quality and to analyze the relationship between CI quality and its usefulness. One of the most successful services of web-enabled CI is Wikipedia accessible all over the world. Another type of CI service is Naver KnowledgeiN, a typical and popular CI site offering question and answer (Q&A) services in Korea. Wikipedia is a multilingual and web-based encyclopedia. Thus, it is necessary to study the influence relationships among CI quality, its determinants, and CI usefulness according to different CI type and languages. In this paper, we propose a new research model reflecting multi-dimensional factors related to CI quality from user’s perspective. To test a total of 15 hypotheses drawn from the research model, a total of 691 responses were collected from Wikipedia and KnowledgeiN users in South Korea and US. Expertise of contributors, community size, and diversity of contributors were identified as determinants of perceived CI quality. Perceived CI quality has significantly influenced on perceived CI usefulness from user’s perspective. CI type and different language partially play a role of moderators. The expertise of contributors plays a more important role in CI quality in the case of Q&A services such as KnowledgeiN compared to Wiki services such as Wikipedia. This implies that Q&A service requires more expertise and experiences in particular areas rather than the case of Wiki service to improve service quality. The relationship between community size and perceived CI quality was different according to CI type. The community size has a greater effect on CI quality in case of Wiki service than that of Q&A service. The number of contributors in Wikipedia is important because Wiki is an encyclopedia service which is edited and revised repeatedly from many contributors while the answer given in Naver KnowledgeiN cannot be edited by others. Finally, CI quality has a greater effect on its usefulness in case of Wiki service rather than Q&A service. In this paper, we suggested implications for practitioners and theorists. Copyright Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Suggested Citation

  • Jaehun Joo & Ismatilla Normatov, 2013. "Determinants of collective intelligence quality: comparison between Wiki and Q&A services in English and Korean users," Service Business, Springer;Pan-Pacific Business Association, vol. 7(4), pages 687-711, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:svcbiz:v:7:y:2013:i:4:p:687-711
    DOI: 10.1007/s11628-013-0183-0
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s11628-013-0183-0
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11628-013-0183-0?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. Besiki Stvilia & Michael B. Twidale & Linda C. Smith & Les Gasser, 2008. "Information quality work organization in wikipedia," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 59(6), pages 983-1001, April.
    2. Ewa S. Callahan & Susan C. Herring, 2011. "Cultural bias in Wikipedia content on famous persons," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 62(10), pages 1899-1915, October.
    3. Brendan Luyt & Daniel Tan, 2010. "Improving Wikipedia's credibility: References and citations in a sample of history articles," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 61(4), pages 715-722, April.
    4. Brendan Luyt & Daniel Tan, 2010. "Improving Wikipedia's credibility: References and citations in a sample of history articles," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 61(4), pages 715-722, April.
    5. Jan Leimeister, 2010. "Collective Intelligence," Business & Information Systems Engineering: The International Journal of WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK, Springer;Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V. (GI), vol. 2(4), pages 245-248, August.
    6. Andreas I. Nicolaou & D. Harrison McKnight, 2006. "Perceived Information Quality in Data Exchanges: Effects on Risk, Trust, and Intention to Use," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 17(4), pages 332-351, December.
    7. Viswanath Venkatesh & Fred D. Davis, 2000. "A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(2), pages 186-204, February.
    8. Scott E. Page, 2007. "Prologue to The Difference: How the Power of Diversity Creates Better Groups, Firms, Schools, and Societies," Introductory Chapters, in: The Difference: How the Power of Diversity Creates Better Groups, Firms, Schools, and Societies, Princeton University Press.
    9. Ewa S. Callahan & Susan C. Herring, 2011. "Cultural bias in Wikipedia content on famous persons," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 62(10), pages 1899-1915, October.
    10. Don Fallis, 2008. "Toward an epistemology of Wikipedia," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 59(10), pages 1662-1674, August.
    11. Noriko Hara & Pnina Shachaf & Khe Foon Hew, 2010. "Cross-cultural analysis of the Wikipedia community," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 61(10), pages 2097-2108, October.
    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. Corral de Zubielqui, Graciela & Fryges, Helmut & Jones, Janice, 2019. "Social media, open innovation & HRM: Implications for performance," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 334-347.
    2. Pedro Soto-Acosta & Daniel Perez-Gonzalez & Simona Popa, 2014. "Determinants of Web 2.0 technologies for knowledge sharing in SMEs," Service Business, Springer;Pan-Pacific Business Association, vol. 8(3), pages 425-438, September.
    3. Rajshree Panda & Deepa Kapoor, 2017. "Relationship between Information Systems Integration, Innovation and Consumer-Based Commitment Practices for Knowledge Sharing in Creating Power Brands," Tržište/Market, Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Zagreb, vol. 29(1), pages 59-74.
    4. Shardul Shankar & Vijayshri Tewari, 2023. "Impact of Collective Intelligence and Collective Emotional Intelligence on the Psychological Safety of the Organizations," Vision, , vol. 27(4), pages 458-473, August.
    5. Pedro Soto-Acosta & Simona Popa & Daniel Palacios-Marqués, 2017. "Social web knowledge sharing and innovation performance in knowledge-intensive manufacturing SMEs," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(2), pages 425-440, April.

    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. Nicolas Jullien, 2012. "What We Know About Wikipedia: A Review of the Literature Analyzing the Project(s)," Post-Print hal-00857208, HAL.
    2. Kevin Crowston & Nicolas Jullien & Felipe Ortega, 2013. "Is Wikipedia Inefficient? Modelling Effort and Participation in Wikipedia," Post-Print hal-00947731, HAL.
    3. Cabrera-Sánchez, Juan-Pedro & Villarejo-Ramos, à ngel F., 2020. "Acceptance and use of big data techniques in services companies," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 52(C).
    4. Kamal Abubker Abrahim Sleiman & Lan Juanli & Hongzhen Lei & Ru Liu & Yuanxin Ouyang & Wenge Rong, 2021. "User Trust levels and Adoption of Mobile Payment Systems in China: An Empirical Analysis," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(4), pages 21582440211, November.
    5. Anna Kerkhof & Johannes Münster, 2021. "Detecting Coverage Bias in User-Generated Content," CESifo Working Paper Series 8844, CESifo.
    6. Amalia Mas-Bleda & Mike Thelwall, 2016. "Can alternative indicators overcome language biases in citation counts? A comparison of Spanish and UK research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(3), pages 2007-2030, December.
    7. José Gustavo Góngora-Goloubintseff, 2020. "The Falklands/Malvinas war taken to the Wikipedia realm: a multimodal discourse analysis of cross-lingual violations of the Neutral Point of View," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 6(1), pages 1-9, December.
    8. Talwar, Shalini & Dhir, Amandeep & Khalil, Ashraf & Mohan, Geetha & Islam, A.K.M. Najmul, 2020. "Point of adoption and beyond. Initial trust and mobile-payment continuation intention," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 55(C).
    9. Dwaipayan Roy & Sumit Bhatia & Prateek Jain, 2022. "Information asymmetry in Wikipedia across different languages: A statistical analysis," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 73(3), pages 347-361, March.
    10. Xiang Zheng & Jiajing Chen & Erjia Yan & Chaoqun Ni, 2023. "Gender and country biases in Wikipedia citations to scholarly publications," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 74(2), pages 219-233, February.
    11. Antonio Eleazar Serrano-López & Peter Ingwersen & Elias Sanz-Casado, 2017. "Wind power research in Wikipedia: Does Wikipedia demonstrate direct influence of research publications and can it be used as adequate source in research evaluation?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 112(3), pages 1471-1488, September.
    12. Kamal, Syeda Ayesha & Shafiq, Muhammad & Kakria, Priyanka, 2020. "Investigating acceptance of telemedicine services through an extended technology acceptance model (TAM)," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    13. Arnaud Gorgeon & E. Burton Swanson, 2011. "Web 2.0 according to Wikipedia: Capturing an organizing vision," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 62(10), pages 1916-1932, October.
    14. Anna Kerkhof & Johannes Münster, 2021. "Detecting coverage bias in user-generated content," ECONtribute Discussion Papers Series 057, University of Bonn and University of Cologne, Germany.
    15. Aida Pooladian & Ángel Borrego, 2017. "Methodological issues in measuring citations in Wikipedia: a case study in Library and Information Science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(1), pages 455-464, October.
    16. Saeideh Sharifi fard & Ezhar Tamam & Md Salleh Hj Hassan & Moniza Waheed & Zeinab Zaremohzzabieh, 2016. "Factors affecting Malaysian university students’ purchase intention in social networking sites," Cogent Business & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(1), pages 1182612-118, December.
    17. Chou, Jui-Sheng & Gusti Ayu Novi Yutami, I, 2014. "Smart meter adoption and deployment strategy for residential buildings in Indonesia," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 336-349.
    18. Philippe Cohard, 2020. "Information Systems Values: A Study of the Intranet in Three French Higher Education Institutions," Post-Print hal-02987225, HAL.
    19. Melih Engin & Fatih Gürses, 2019. "Adoption of Hospital Information Systems in Public Hospitals in Turkey: An Analysis with the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology Model," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 16(06), pages 1-19, October.
    20. Morosan, Cristian, 2016. "An empirical examination of U.S. travelers’ intentions to use biometric e-gates in airports," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 120-128.

    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:svcbiz:v:7:y:2013:i:4:p:687-711. 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.