From Tmsp

Introduction

The following bibliography is a preliminary step into the investigation of Technology Mediated Social Participation. This domain involves many streams of literature which are almost impossible to isolate from each other. For example, how would one categorize a paper on motivation for participation in online education? Would it be motivation, participation, or online education? As a result, if you are looking for a specific topic I suggest searching the page in addition to looking under the general category label.

Admittedly, the bibliography is heavy on certain theoretical perspectives and certain approaches to this topic. A companion to this bibliography is available as a position paper on the TMSP East Coast Workshop section (http://tmsp.umd.edu/position%20papers/Marshall-TMSP.pdf). This paper explains the logic and the topical organization. If you have sources or streams of literature you would like to add to this bibliography please send me an e-mail (tmarshal [at] syr.edu) with the citation(s) (preferably in APA format) and I will do my best to incorporate them into this bibliography.The bibliography currently contains more than 700 references.

Todd Marshall

iSchool @ Syracuse University

Contents 1 ANALYSIS 1.1 Clustering 1.2 Graph Theory / Graphs / Graphing 1.3 Social Network Analysis / Network Analysis in General 1.4 Visualization of Networks / Sociograms 2 BEHAVIOR 2.1 Motivation / Adoption of Technology 2.2 Participation 2.2.1 Collaboration 2.2.2 Cooperation 2.2.3 Interaction / Dialogue 2.2.4 Lurking / Lurkers 2.2.5 Organizing / Self Organizing 2.2.6 Participation in General 3 DOMAINS 3.1 Citation Analysis / Research Networks 3.2 Citizen Science / Voluntary Research Networks 3.3 Collaborative Networks 3.4 Computer Mediated Communication 3.5 Crowds / Crowdsourcing 3.6 Disaster / Relief / Terrorism / Crime 3.7 Distance Education / Online Learning / CSCL 3.8 Economics / E-Commerce / Entrepreneurship / Innovation 3.9 Government / Politics / Elections 3.10 Knowledge Management / Knowledge Workers 3.11 Networks / Networked Society 3.12 Online Communities / Virtual Communities / Virtual Teams 3.13 Open Source Software Development / FLOSS 3.14 Participatory Networks 3.15 Religion / Religious Communities Online 3.16 Social Networks / Social Networking / Social Media 3.17 Tagging / User generated metadata 3.18 Work / Organizational Contexts 3.19 Youth / Generational Issues 4 SOFTWARE / WEBSITES 4.1 Design of Social and User Adaptive Systems 4.2 E-Mail 4.3 Newsgroups 4.4 Social Media Sites: Twitter/ Youtube / Facebook / Flickr 4.5 Web 2.0 / 3.0 4.6 Wikipedia / Wikis 5 THEORETICAL APPROACHES 5.1 Actor-Network Theory 5.2 Community of Practice 5.3 Constructivism 5.4 Conversation Theory 5.5 Ineraction of Actors 5.6 Sensemaking / Sense-Making 5.7 Structuration Theory 5.8 Other Theories

ANALYSIS

Clustering

• Girvan, M. and Newman, M. E. J. (2002). Community structure in social and biological networks. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci.USA 99, 7821–7826.
• Newman, M. (2006). Modularity and community structure in networks. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 103, 8577–8582.
• Newman, M. E. J. (2001). The structure of scientific collaboration networks, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 98, 404-409.
• Newman, M. E. J. (2003). The structure and function of complex networks, SIAM Review 45, 167-256.
• Newman, M. E. J. (2004). Detecting community structure in networks. Eur. Phys. J. B 38, 321–330.
• Newman, M. E. J. and Girvan, M. (2004).Finding and evaluating community structure in networks. Phys. 1Rev. E 69, 026113.

Graph Theory / Graphs / Graphing

• Adar, E. (2006). GUESS: A Language and Interface for Graph Exploration, Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human Factors in computing systems. Montreal, Canada.
• Coleman, M. K. and Parker, D. S. (1996). Aesthetics-based graph layout for human consumption. Software: Practice and Experience, 26(12):1415–1438.
• Davidson, R. and Harel, D. (1996). Drawing graphs nicely using simulated annealing. ACM Transactions on Graphics, 15(4):301–331.
• Di Battista, G., Eades, P., Tamassia, R., & Tollis, I. G. (1998). Graph drawing: algorithms for the visualization of graphs: Prentice Hall.
• Dunne, C. and Shneiderman, B. (2009). “Improving graph drawing readability by incorporating readability metrics: A software tool for network analysts,” University of Maryland, HCIL Tech Report HCIL-2009-13, May 2009. Available at: http://www.cs.umd.edu/Grad/scholarlypapers/papers/CodyDunneUpdate.pdf
• Dwyer, T., Koren, Y., and Marriott, K. (2006). IPSep-CoLa: An incremental procedure for separation constraint layout of graphs, IEEE Trans. Visualization and Computer Graphics 12(5): 821-828.
• Eades, P. and Sugiyama, K. (1990). How to draw a directed graph. Journal of Information Processing, 13(4):424–437.
• Formann, T. Hagerup, J. Haralambides, Kaufmann, M. Leighton, F. T. Symvonis, A. Welzl, E. and Woeginger, G. J. (1993). Drawing graphs in the plane with high resolution. SIAM Journal on Computing, 22(5):1035–1052.
• Fruchterman, T. M. J., & Reingold, E. M. (1991). Graph Drawing by Force-Directed Placement, Software: Practice and Experience, 21(11):1129–1164, 1991.
• Huang, W. and Eades, P. (2005). How people read graphs. In APVis ’05: Proc. 2005 Asia-Pacific Symposium on Information Visualisation, 51–58.
• Huang, W. Beyond Time and Error: A Cognitive Approach to the Evaluation of Graph Visualizations. PhD thesis, University of Sydney, 2007.
• Huang, W. Eades, P. and. Hong. S.H. (1008). Beyond time and error: a cognitive approach to the evaluation of graph drawings. In BELIV ’08: Proc. 2008 conference on BEyond time and errors: novel evaluation methods for Information Visualization, pp. 1–8, New York, NY.
• Huang, W., Hong, S.H. and Eades, P. (2006). Predicting graph reading performance: a cognitive approach. In APVis ’06: Proc. 2006 Asia-Pacific Symposium on Information Visualisation, pages 207–216.
• Leskovec, J., D. Chakrabarti, J. Kleinberg, C. Faloutsos, Z. Ghahramani. (2009). Kronecker Graphs: an approach to modeling networks. arXiv:0812.4905v2, 2009.
• Leskovec, J., Kleinberg, J., and Faloutsos, C. (2005). Graphs over Time: Densification Laws, Shrinking Diameters and Possible Explanations. Proc. 11th ACM SIGKDD Intl. Conf. on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, 2005.
• Lipton, R. J., North, S. C. and Sandberg, J. S. (1985). A method for drawing graphs. In SCG ’85: Proc. 1st Annual Symposium on Computational Geometry, pp. 153–160.
• McGrath, C., Blythe, J. and Krackhardt, D. (1997). The effect of spatial arrangement on judgments and errors in interpreting graphs. Social Networks, 19(3):223–242.
• Mutzel, P. (1997). An alternative method to crossing minimization on hierarchical graphs. In SIAM Journal on Optimization, volume 1190/1997 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 318–333, Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany: Springer.
• Purchase, H. C. (1998). The effects of graph layout. In OZCHI ’08: Proc.2008 Australasian Computer Human Interaction Conference, 80–86.
• Purchase, H. C. (2002). Metrics for graph drawing aesthetics. Journal of Visual Languages & Computing, 13:501–516.
• Purchase, H. C., Allder, J. A. and Carrington, D. (2002). Graph layout aesthetics in uml diagrams: User preferences. Journal of Graph Algorithms and Applications, 6(3):255–279.
• Purchase, H. C. and Leonard, D. (1996). Graph drawing aesthetic metrics. Technical Report 361, Key Centre for Software Technology, Dept. of Computer Science, University of Queensland.
• Purchase, H. C., Carrington, D. and Allder, J. A. (2002). Empirical evaluation of aesthetics-based graph layout. Empirical Software Engineering, 7(3):233–255.
• Purchase, H. C., Cohen, R. F. and James, M. (1996). Validating graph drawing aesthetics. In GD ’95: Proc. 3rd International Symposium on Graph Drawing, volume 1027/1996 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 435–446, Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany: Springer.
• Symvonis, A., Welzl, E. and Woeginger, G. J. (1990). Drawing graphs in the plane with high resolution. SIAM Journal on Computing, 22(5):1035–1052.
• van Ham, F. and Rogowitz, B. E. (2008). Perceptual organization in user-generated graph layouts. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 14(6):1333–1339.
• Ware, C., Purchase, H. C. Colpoys, L. and McGill, M. (2002). Cognitive measurements of graph aesthetics. Information Visualization, 1(2):103–110.

Social Network Analysis / Network Analysis in General

• For extensive lists of network analysis tools, please see Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_network_analysis_software) and a more complete list on the website of the International Network for Social Network Analysis (ISNA) at: http://www.insna.org/software/software_old.html.
• Barnes, J. and Hut, P. (1986). A hierarchical o(n log n) force-calculation algorithm. Nature, 324(6096):446–449.
• Bonsignore, E. M., Dunne, C., Rotman, D., Smith, M., Capone, T., Hansen, D. L., and Shnei-derman, B., First steps to NetViz Nirvana: Evaluating social network analysis with NodeXL, Proc. IEEE International Symposium on Social Intelligence and Networking (SIN-09) (2009).
• Ulrik, B., and Erlebach, T. (Eds.). (2005). Network Analysis: Methodological Foundations Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag.
• Butts, C. T. (2009). Revisiting the Foundations of Network Analysis. Science, 325, 414-416.
• Carrington, P., Scott, J. & Wasserman, S (eds.) (2005). Models and Methods in Social Network Analysis (Structural Analysis in the Social Sciences) Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
• de Nooy, W., Mrvar, A. and Batagelj, V. (2005). Exploratory Social Network Analysis with Pajek. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
• Freeman, L. C. (2004). Graphic Techniques for Exploring Social Network Data, in Models and Methods in Social Network Analysis, P. J. Carrington, J. Scott and S. Wasserman, eds., Cambridge Univ Press, Cambridge, UK.
• Freeman, L.C. (2004). The Development of Social Network Analysis: A Study in the Sociology of Science. North Charleston, SC: BookSurge, LLC.
• Hansen, D. L., Rotman, D., Bonsignore, E. M., Milic-Frayling, N., Mendes-Rodrigues, E., Smith, M., and Shneiderman, B., Do you know the way to SNA?: A process model for analyz-ing and visualizing social media data, Technical Report, University of Maryland (2009).
• Huisman, M. and Van Duijn, M. A. J. (2005). Software for Social Network Analysis. In P J. Carrington, J. Scott, & S. Wasserman (Editors), Models and Methods in Social Network Analysis (pp. 270–316). New York: Cambridge University Press. Available at http://stat.gamma.rug.nl/Software%20for%20Social%20Network%20Analysis%20CUP_ch13_Oct2003.pdf.
• Knoke, D and Yang, S. (2007). Social Network Analysis (Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
• Maloney-Krichmar, D. and J. Preece (2005) “A multilevel analysis of sociability, usability and community dynamics in an online health community,” ACM Transactions on Computer Human Interaction (12) 2, pp. 1-32.
• Newman, M. (2003). The structure and function of complex networks. SIAM Review 45, 167–256.
• Newman, M., Barabasi, A. L., and Watts, D. J. (Eds.). (2006). The structure and dynamics of networks. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
• Smith, M., Shneiderman, B., Milic-Frayling, N., Mendes-Rodrigues, E., Barash, V., Dunne, C., Capone, T., Perer, A., and Gleave, E., Analyzing (social media) networks with NodeXL, Proc. Communities & Technologies Conference (2009).
• Ulrik, B., and Erlebach, T. (Eds.). (2005). Network Analysis: Methodological Foundations Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag.
• Wasserman, S. & Faust, K. (1994) Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications (Structural Analysis in the Social Sciences) Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Visualization of Networks / Sociograms

• Aris, A. and Shneiderman, B., (2007). Designing semantic substrates for visual network exploration, Information Visualization Journal 6(4): 1-20.
• Batagelj, A. and Mrvar, A. (1998). Pajek - program for large network analysis. Connections, 21: (2) 47–57.
• Bederson, B. B., Shneiderman, B. (Eds.) (2003). The Craft of Information Visualization: Readings and Reflections. San Francisco: Morgan Kaufman.
• Hansen, D., Rotman, D., Bonsignore, E., Milic-Frayling, N., Rodrigues, E., Smith, M., et al. Do You Know the Way to SNA?: A Process Model for Analyzing and Visualizing Social Media Data. Available at http://hcil.cs.umd.edu/trs/2009-17/2009-17.pdf.
• Heer, J. and boyd, d. (2005). Vizster: Visualizing online social networks, IEEE Symposium on Information Visualization.
• Heer, J., Card, S. K., and Landay, J. (2005). A. prefuse: A toolkit for interactive information visualization, Proc. ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems.
• Herman, I. C. Society, G. Melanon, and M. S. Marshall. (2000). Graph visualization and navigation in information visualization: A survey. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 6:24–43, 2000. Available at http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1054972.1055031.
• Hoy, A. W. (2003). Visualizing understandings online: nontraditional pharmacy students’ experience with concept mapping.. The Ohio State University.
• Huang W. (2007). Using eye tracking to investigate graph layout effects. In APVis ’07: Proc. 2007 Asia-Pacific Symposium on Information Visualisation, 97–100.
• Huang, W., Hong, S.-H. and Eades, P. (2005). Layout effects: Comparison of sociogram drawing conventions. Technical Report 575, University of Sydney.
• Huang, W., Hong, S.-H. and Eades, P. (2006). How people read sociograms: a questionnaire study. In APVis ’06: Proc. 2006 Asia-Pacific Symposium on Information Visualisation, pages 199–206.
• Huang, W., Hong, S.-H. and Eades, P. (2006). Layout effects on sociogram perception. In GD ’05: Proc. 13th International Symposium on Graph Drawing, volume 3843/2006 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 262–273, Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany: Springer.
• Huang, W., Hong, S.-H. and Eades, P. (2007). Effects of sociogram drawing conventions and edge crossings in social network visualizations. Journal of Graph Algorithms and Applications, 11(2):397–429.
• Lassila, O., & Hendler, J. (2007). Embracing "Web 3.0". IEEE INTERNET COMPUTING, 11(3), 90-93.
• Lee, B., C. S. Parr, C. Plaisant, B. B. Bederson, V. D. Veksler, W., D. Gray and C. Kotfila (2006), TreePlus: Interactive exploration of networks with enhanced tree layouts, IEEE Trans. Visualization and Computer Graphics 12 (6): 1414-1426.
• Lee, B., Plaisant, C., Parr, C., Fekete, J.-D., and Henry, N. (2006) Task Taxonomy for Graph Visualization Proc. ACM BELIV '06, Proc. 2006 AVI workshop on Beyond time and errors: novel evaluation methods for Information Visualization. ACM,.81-85.
• Misue, K., Eades, P. Lai, W. and Sugiyama. K. (1995). Layout adjustment and the mental map. Journal of Visual Languages & Computing, 6(2):183–210.
• O'Madadhain, J., Fisher, D., Smyth, P., White, S., and Boey, Y.-B. (2005). Analysis and Visualization of Network Data using JUNG, Journal of Statistical Software, VV, 2005.
• Perer, A. and Shneiderman, B. (2006). Balancing systematic and flexible exploration of social networks, IEEE Symp. On Information Visualization and IEEE Trans. Visualization and Computer Graphics 12, 5 (October), 693-700.
• Perer, A. and Shneiderman, B. (2008). Integrating statistics and visualization: case studies of gaining clarity during exploratory data analysis. In CHI '08: Proc. SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 265-274, New York, NY, USA, 2008. ACM.
• Purchase, H. C. (1997). Which aesthetic has the greatest effect on human understanding? In GD ’97: Proc. 5th International Symposium on Graph Drawing, volume 1353/1997 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 248–261, Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany: Springer.
• Sedig, K. and Liang, H.-N. (2006). Interactivity of visual mathematical representations: Factors affecting learning and cognitive processes. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 7(2):179–212.
• Shneiderman, B. and Aris, A. (2006). Network visualization with semantic substrates, IEEE Symposium on Information Visualization and IEEE Trans .Visualization and Computer Graphics 12 (5): 733-740
• Sugiyama, K. (2002). Graph Drawing and Applications for Software and Knowledge Engineers, volume 11 of Series on Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering. World Scientific Publishing Company.
• Sugiyama, K., Tagawa, S. and Toda, M. (1981). Methods for visual understanding of hierarchical system structures. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, 11(2):109–125.
• Trier, M. (2005). IT-supported visualization of knowledge community structures. Paper presented at the 38th Hawaii international Conference on System Sciences.
• Viegas, F. B. and Wattenberg, M. (2006). Communication-minded visualization: A call to action. IBM Systems Journal, 45 (4):801-812
• Ware, C. (2004). Information visualization: perception for design. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., San Francisco, CA.
• Ware, C. (2008). Visual thinking for design, Morgan Kaufmann Series in Interactive Technologies. Morgan Kaufmann.
• Welser, Howard T., Eric Gleave, Danyel Fisher, and Marc Smith (2007). Visualizing the signatures of social roles in online discussion groups, The Journal of Social Structure. 8(2). Retrieved from http://www.cmu.edu/joss/content/articles/volume8/Welser/.
• Wetherell, C. and Shannon, A. (1979). Tidy drawings of trees. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, SE 5(5):514–520.

BEHAVIOR

Motivation / Adoption of Technology

• Antikainen, M., & Väätäjä, H. (2008, June 15-18). Rewarding in open innovation communities–How to motivate members? Paper presented at the XIX ISPIM Annual Conference. Open Innovation: Creating Products and Services through Collaboration, Tours, France.
• Ardichvili, A. (2008). Learning and Knowledge Sharing in Virtual Communities of Practice: Motivators, Barriers, and Enablers. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 10(4), 541.
• Ardichvili, A., Page, V., & Wentling, T. (2003). Motivation and barriers to participation in virtual knowledge-sharing communities of practice. Journal of Knowledge Management, 7(1), 64-77.
• Bandura, A., & Schunk, D. (1981). Cultivating competence, self-efficacy, and intrinsic interest through proximal self-motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 586-598.
• Batson, C. D., Ahmad, N., & Tsang, J. (2002). Four motives for community involvement. Journal for Social Issues, 58(3), 429-445.
• Beaudoin, C. E. (2008). Explaining the Relationship between Internet Use and Interpersonal Trust: Taking into Account Motivation and Information Overload. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(3), 550-568.
• Cheng, R. and J. Vassileva (2005) “User and community adaptive rewards mechanisms for sustainable online communities,” in L. Ardissonho, P. Brna and A. Mitrovic (eds.) LNAI 3538. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag, pp. 332-336.
• Cheng, R. and J. Vassileva (2006) “Design and evaluation of an adaptive incentive mechanism for sustained educational online communities,” User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction (16) 3-4, pp. 321-348.
• Choudrie, Y. K. (2005). Investigating the Research Approaches for Examining Technology Adoption Issues. Journal of Research Practice, 1(1).
• Clary, E. G., Snyder, M., Ridge, R. D., Copeland, J., Stukas, A. A., Haugen, J., et al. (1998). Understanding and assessing the motivations of volunteers: A functional approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 1516–1530.
• Crowston, K., & Fagnot, I. (2008). The motivational arc of massive virtual collaboration. Paper presented at the IFIP WG 9.5 Working Conference on Virtuality and Society: Massive Virtual Communities, Lüneberg, Germany, 1–2 July 2008.
• Daugherty, T., Lee, W. N., Gangadharbatla, H., Kim, K., & Outhavong, S. (2005). Organizational virtual communities: Exploring motivations behind online panel participation. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 10(4).
• Daugherty, T., W-N. Lee, H. Gangadharbatia, K. Kim, and S. Outhavong (2005) “Organizational virtual communities: Exploring motivations behind online panel participation,” Journal of Computer Mediated Communication (10) 4, Article 9.
• Hars, A. and S. Qu (2002) “Working for free - Motivations for participating in open-source projects,” International Journal of Electronic Commerce (6), pp. 25-39.
• Huffaker, D. and J. Lai (2007) “Motivating online expertise-sharing for informal learning: The influence of age and tenure in knowledge organizations,” in Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies, pp. 595-599.
• Huffaker, D., & Lai, J. (2006). Motivating expertise-sharing in online communities: Altruism or self-interest? IBM Research, Hawthorne, NY RC24114. http://www.davehuffaker.com/papers/HuffakerLai2006-Expertise-sharinginOnlineCommunities.pdf
• Hummel, H. G. K., D. Burgos, C. Tattersall, F. Brouns, H. Kurvers, and R. Koper, (2005) “Encouraging contributions in learning networks using incentive mechanisms,” Journal of Computer Assisted Learning (21), pp. 355-365.
• Karau, S. J. and K.D. Williams (1993) “Social loafing: A meta-analytic review and theoretical integration,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (65), pp. 681-706.
• Ling, K. N., G. Beenen, P. Ludford, X. Wang, K. Chang, D. Cosley, D. Frankowski, L. Terveen, A.M. Rahid, P. Resnick, and R. Kraut (2005) “Using social psychology to motivate contributions to online communities,” Journal of Computer Mediated Communication (10) 4, Article 10.
• Ling, K., Beenen, G., Ludford, P., Wang, X., Chang, K., Li, X., et al. (2005). Using social psychology to motivate contributions to online communities. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 10(4).
• Oreg, S. and O. Nov (2008) “Exploring motivations for contributing to open source initiatives: The roles of contribution context and personal values,” Computers in Human Behavior (24) 5, pp. 2055-2073.
• Osterloh, M., & Frey, B. S. (2000). Motivation, knowledge transfer, and organizational forms. Organization science, 538-550.
• Preece, J. and Shneiderman, B. (2009). The Reader-to-Leader Framework: Motivating technology-mediated social participation, AIS Transactions on Human-Computer Interaction 1, 1 (March 2009), 13-32. Available at http://aisel.aisnet.org/thci/vol1/iss1/5/.
• Rashid, A. M., K. Ling, R.D. Tassone, P. Resnick, R. Kraut, and J. Reidl (2006). Motivating participation by displaying the value of contribution,” in Proceedings of CHI 2006 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 955-958.
• Reeve, J. (2005) Understanding Motivation and Emotion. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
• Schwartz, S. H., & Howard, J. A. (1982). Helping and cooperation: A self-based motivational model. In V. J. Derlega & J. Grzelak (Eds.), Cooperation and Helping Behavior: Theories and Research (pp. 327–353). New York: Academic.
• Sun, H., & Zhang, P. (2006). The role of moderating factors in user technology acceptance. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 64(2), 53-78.
• Tedjamulia, S. J. J., Dean, D. L., Olsen, D. R., & Albrecht, C. C. (2005). Motivating content contributions to online communities: Toward a more comprehensive theory. Paper presented at the HICSS'05. 38th Annual Hawaii International Conference on Systems Sciences, Hawaii.
• Vassileva, J. (2003) “Motivating participation in peer to peer communities,” in P. Petta et al. (eds.) Engineering Societies in the Agents World III (ESAW 2002), Lecture Notes in Computer Science 2577, pp. 141-155.
• Vroom, V. H. (1964). Work and Motivation. New York: Wiley.
• Wang, Y. and D.R. Fesnmaier (2003) “Assessing motivation of contribution in online communities: An empirical investigation of an online travel community,” Electronic Markets 13, pp. 33-45.
• Wu, J-J. and A.S.L. Tsang (2008) “Factors affecting members’ trust belief and behaviour intention in virtual communities,” Behaviour and Information Technology (27) 2, pp. 115-125.
• Ye, S., Chen, H., & Jin, X. (2006). An Empirical Study of What Drives Users to Share Knowledge in Virtual Communities. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 4092, 563-575.
• Ye, Y. and K. Kishida (2003) “Toward an understanding of the motivation of open source software developers,” in Proceedings of 25th International Conference on Software Engineering, pp. 419-429.

Participation

Collaboration

• Clark, C., Herter, R. J., & Moss, P. A. (1998). Continuing the dialogue on collaboration. American Educational Research Journal, 785-791.
• Clark, C., Moss, P. A., Goering, S., Herter, R. J., Lamar, B., Leonard, D., et al. (1996). Collaboration as dialogue: Teachers and researchers engaged in conversation and professional development. American Educational Research Journal, 193-231.
• D Eredita, M. A., & Nilan, M. S. (2007). Conceptualizing Virtual Collaborative Work. INTERNATIONAL FEDERATION FOR INFORMATION PROCESSING-PUBLICATIONS-IFIP, 236, 21.
• Denning, P. J., & Yaholkovsky, P. (2008). Getting to" we". Communications of the ACM, 51(4), 19-24.
• Dooner, A. M., Mandzuk, D., & Clifton, R. A. (2008). Stages of collaboration and the realities of professional learning communities. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(3), 564-574.
• Gardner, D. B. (2005). Ten lessons in collaboration. Online Journal of Issues in Nursing, 10(1), 2.
• Gray, B. (1985). Conditions facilitating interorganizational collaboration. Human Relations, 38(10), 911.
• Gray, B. (1989). Collaborating: Finding common ground for multiparty problems. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass
• Gray, B., & Wood, D. J. (1991). Collaborative alliances: Moving from practice to theory. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 27(1), 3.
• Haythornthwaite, C. (2005). Introduction: computer-mediated collaborative practices. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 10(4).
• Henneman, E. A., Lee, J. L., & Cohen, J. I. (1995). Collaboration: a concept analysis. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 21(1), 103-109.
• Herbsleb, J. D., Mockus, A., Finholt, T. A., & Grinter, R. E. (2000). Distance, dependencies, and delay in a global collaboration.
• Holohan, A., & Garg, A. (2005). Collaboration online: The example of distributed computing. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 10(4).
• John-Steiner, V., Weber, R. J., & Minnis, M. (1998). The challenge of studying collaboration. American Educational Research Journal, 773-783.
• Legler, R., & Reischl, T. (2003). The relationship of key factors in the process of collaboration: A study of school-to-work coalitions. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 39(1), 53.
• Logsdon, J. M. (1991). Interests and interdependence in the formation of social problem-solving collaborations. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 27(1), 23.
• Pasquero, J. (1991). Supraorganizational collaboration: The Canadian environmental experiment. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 27(1), 38.
• Roberts, N. C., & Bradley, R. T. (1991). Stakeholder collaboration and innovation: A study of public policy initiation at the state level. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 27(2), 209.
• Sarker, S. (2005). Knowledge transfer and collaboration in distributed US-Thai teams. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 10(4).
• Sarker, S., Lau, F., & Sahay, S. (2000). Building an inductive theory of collaboration in virtual teams: An adapted grounded theory approach. Paper presented at the 33rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Hawaii.
• Serce, F. C., & Yildirim, S. (2006). A web-based synchronous collaborative review tool: a case study of an on-line graduate course. Journal of Educational Technology and Society, 9(2), 166.
• Thomson, A. M., Perry, J. L., & Miller, T. K. (2009). Conceptualizing and Measuring Collaboration. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 19(1), 23.
• Wood, D. J., & Gray, B. (1991). Toward a comprehensive theory of collaboration. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 27(2), 139.

Cooperation

• Axelrod, R. (2006) The Evolution of Cooperation, Revised edition. New York, NY: Perseus Books Group.
• Baggs, J. G. (1996). Critique of collaboration. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 23(2), 421-421.
• Hemetsberger, A. (2001) “Fostering cooperation on the Internet: Social exchange processes in innovative virtual consumer communities,” in Annual Conference of the Association for Consumer Research (ACR), Austin, Texas.

Interaction / Dialogue

• Cho, A. (2009). Ourselves and Our Interactions: The Ultimate Physics Problem? Science, 325, 406-408.
• Dubberly, H., & Pangaro, P. (2009). What is interaction? Are there different types? San Francisco, CA: Dubberly Design Office.
• Hugh, D., Paul, P., & Usman, H. (2009). What is interaction? Are there different types? Interactions, 16(1), 69-75.
• Leiner, D. J., & Quiring, O. (2008). What Interactivity Means to the User Essential Insights into and a Scale for Perceived Interactivity. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 14(1), 127-155.
• Literaturverz, S. (1999). Get acquainted in conversation: A study of initial interactions. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
• Locke, E. A., Alavi, M., & Wagner, J. A. (1997). Participation in decision making: An information exchange perspective. In G. R. Ferris (Ed.), Research in personnel and human resources management (Vol. 15, pp. 293-332). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
• Tannen, D. (1997). Involvement as Dialogue. In M. Macovski (Ed.), Dialogue and Critical Discourse: Language, Culture, Critical Theory (pp. 137-157). New York: Oxford University Press.
• Taylor, R. S. (1967). Question-negotiation and information-seeking in libraries. College and Research Libraries, 29, 178-194.
• Taylor, R. S., & Voigt, M. J. (1986). Value Added Processes in Information Systems: Greenwood Publishing Group Inc. Westport, CT, USA.
• Xie, H. (2008). Interactive Information Retrieval in Digital Environments. Hershey, PA: IGI Publishers.

Lurking / Lurkers

• Nonnecke, B. and J. Preece (2000) “Lurker demographics: Counting the silent,” in Proceedings of Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 73-80.
• Panciera, K., Priedhorsky, R., Erickson, T., and Terveen, L. (2010). “Lurking? Cyclopaths? A Quantitative Lifecycle Analysis of User Behavior in a Geowiki,” in Proceedings of Annual ACM  Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems.
• Preece, J., B. Nonnecke, and D. Andrews (2004) “The Top Five Reasons for Lurking: Improving Community Experiences for Everyone,” Computers in Human Behavior (20) 2, pp. 201-223.
• Yeow, A., S.L. Johnson, and S. Faraj (2006) “Lurking: Legitimate or illicit peripheral participation,” in Proceedings of Twenty-seventh International Conference on Information Systems, Milwaukee, WI.

Organizing / Self Organizing

• Anderson, M. H. (2006). How Can We Know What We Think Until We See What We Said?: A Citation and Citation Context Analysis of Karl Weick's The Social Psychology of Organizing. Organization Studies, 27(11), 1675.
• Bakken, T., & Hernes, T. (2006). Organizing is both a verb and a noun: Weick meets Whitehead. Organization Studies, 27(11), 1599.
• Cooren, F., Taylor, J., & Van Every, J. (2006). Introduction. Communicating as Organizing. Mahwah: L. Erlbaum, 1-16.
• Geoghegan, M. C. (2009). Design for a self-regenerating organisation. International Journal of General Systems, 38(2), 155-173.
• Hollick, M., de Meer, H., Schmitt, J. B., & Wüchner, P. (2008). Modeling of Self-Organizing Systems. PIK-Praxis der Informationsverarbeitung und Kommunikation, 31(1), 2-3.
• Orlikowski, W. J. (2002). Knowing in practice: Enacting a collective capability in distributed organizing. Organization science, 249-273.
• Pask, G. (1962). A proposed evolutionary model. In H. von Foerster and G. W. Zopf (ed.), Principles of Self-Organization. Pergamon Press, New York.
• Pask, G. (1996). Heinz von Foerster's Self Organization, the Progenitor of Conversation and Interaction Theories. Systems Research, 13(3), 349-362.
• Pask, G., & Von Foerster, H. (1960). A predictive model for self organizing systems. Illinois University at Urbana Electrical Engineering Research Report.
• Shirky, C. (2008) Here Comes Everybody: The Power of Organizing Without Organizations. New York, NY: The Penguin Press.
• Wiley, D. (2007). Online self-organizing social systems: Four years later. In R. Luppicini (Ed.), Online Learning Communities (pp. 289-298). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.

Participation in General

• Arnstein, S. R. (1969). A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 35(4), 216-224.
• Ashmos, D. P., Duchon, D., McDaniel Jr, R. R., & Huonker, J. W. (2002). What a Mess! Participation as a Simple Managerial Rule to Complexify Organizations. Journal of Management Studies, 39(2), 189-206.
• Barki, H., & Hartwick, J. (1994). Measuring user participation, user involvement, and user attitude. MIS Quarterly, 18(1), 59-82.
• Bento, R., Brownstein, B., Kemery, E., &; Zacur, S. R. (2005). A Taxonomy of Participation in Online Courses. Journal of College Teaching &; Learning, 2, 12.
• Berry, H. L., Rodgers, B., & Dear, K. B. G. (2007). Preliminary development and validation of an Australian community participation questionnaire: Types of participation and associations with distress in a coastal community. Social Science & Medicine, 64(8), 1719-1737.
• Brandzaeg, P. B. and J. Heim (2009) “Explaining participation in online communities,” in B. Whitworth and A. de Moor (eds.) Handbook of Research on Socio-Technical Design and Social Networking. Hershey, PA: IGI Global, pp. 167-182.
• Brodie, E., Cowling, E., Nissen, N. et al. (2009). Understanding participation: a literature review. Institue for Volunteering Research. Available at http://pathwaysthroughparticipation.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/Pathways-literature-review-final-version.pdf.
• Bucy, E. P., & Gregson, K. S. (2001). Media participation: A legitimizing mechanism of mass democracy. New Media & Society, 3(3), 357.
• Butler, B., L. Sproull, S. Kiesler, and R. Kraut (2002) “Community effort in online groups: Who does the work and why?” in S. Weisband, and L. Atwater (eds.) Leadership at a Distance. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. opensource.mit.edu/papers/butler.pdf (March 21, 2009).
• Drehmer, D. E., Belohlav, J. A., & Coye, R. W. (2000). An exploration of employee participation using a scaling approach. Group & Organization Management, 25(4), 397.
• Hartwick, J., & Barki, H. (1994). Explaining the role of user participation in information system use. MANAGEMENT SCIENCE, 40(4), 440-465.
• Hargittai, E. & Walejko, G. (2008). The Participation Divide: Content Creation and Sharing in the Digital Age. Information, Communication and Society. 11(2):239-256.
• Ho, S. (2002, Februaty 5-6, 2002). Encouraging on-line participation. Paper presented at the Eleventh Annual Teaching and Learning Forum, Perth, Australia.
• Hodges, D. C. (1998). Participation as dis-identification with/in a community of practice. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 5(4), 272-290.
• Hrastinski, S. (2008). What is online learner participation? A literature review. Computers & Education, 51(4), 1755-1765.
• Joyce, E. and R. Kraut (2006) “Predicting continued participation in newsgroups,” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication (11).
• Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation: Cambridge university press.
• Marie DeLucia, T. (2009). A case study of community participation in primary education in three rural village schools in Ethiopia. Unpublished Dissertation, George Washington University, District of Columbia.
• Malone, T. W. & Crowston, K. The interdisciplinary study of coordination. ACM Computing Surveys, 1994 (March), 26 (1), 87-119.
• Marko, M. S., Deborah, Y., & Ying, N. (2009). Bowling Online, Not Alone: Online Social Capital and Political Participation in Singapore. Journal, (2), 414-433. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2009.01447.x. doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2009.01447.x
• McLure, M., & Faraj, S. (2000). “It is what one does”: why people participate and help others in electronic communities of practice. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 9(2-3), 155-173.
• Padilla, M. A. S., Cabero, N. M., Parejo, S. P., & González, M. M. (2007). Approaches to participation: some neglected issues. Paper presented at the Fifth Critical Management Studies Conference.
• Perillo, S. (2008). Constructing participation practice: an ANT account. Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management: An International Journal, 3.
• Powell, M. C., & Colin, M. (2009). Participatory Paradoxes: Facilitating Citizen Engagement in Science and Technology From the Top-Down? Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 29(4), 325-342.
• Preece, J. (2009) “An Event-driven Community in Washington, DC: Forces that Influence Participation,” in M. Foth (ed.), Handbook of Research on Urban Informatics: The Practice and Promise of the Real-Time City. Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference, IGI Global, Chapter 6.
• Preece, J., & Schneiderman, B. (2009). The Reader-to-Leader Framework: Motivating Technology-Mediated Social Participation. AIS Transactions on Human-Computer Interaction, 1(1), 13-32.
• Rodgers, S., & Chen, Q. (2005). Internet community group participation: psychosocial benefits for women with breast cancer. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 10(4), 5.
• Schaefer, D. J. (2001). Dynamics of electronic public spheres: Verbing online participation. Unpublished Dissertation, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH.
• Simon, B., Loewy, M., Stürmer, S., Weber, U., Freytag, P., Habig, C., et al. (1998). Collective identification and social movement participation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 646–658.
• Uslaner, E. M. (2003). Civic Engagement in America: Why People Participate in Political and Social Life. College Park, MD: Department of Government and Politics, University of Maryland.
• Wasko, M. and S. Faraj (2000) “It is what one does: Why people participate and help others in electronic communities of practice,” Journal of Strategic Information Systems (9) 2-3, pp. 155-173.

DOMAINS

Citation Analysis / Research Networks

• Aris, A., Shneiderman, B., Qazvinian, V., and Radev, D., Visual overviews for discovering key papers and influences across research fronts, Journal of the American Society for Information Systems and Technology (to appear 2009).
• Börner, K., Chen, C., and Boyack, K. (2003). Visualizing knowledge domains, In Cronin, B. (Ed.), Annual Review of Information Science & Technology, Volume 37, Medford, NJ: Information Today, Inc./American Society for Information Science and Technology, Chapter 5, 179-255.
• Chen, C. (2006). CiteSpace II: Detecting and visualizing emerging trends and transient patterns in scientific literature. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57 (3), 359-377.
• Garfield, E. (2004). Historiographic Mapping of Knowledge Domains Literature. Journal of Information Science 30 (2): 119-145.
• Garfield, E., Pudovkin, A. I., and Istomin, V. I. (2003). Why do we need algorithmic historiography? Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology (JASIST) 54(5): 400–412.
• Ginsparg, P., Houle, P, Joachims, T, and Sul, J.-H. (2004). Mapping subsets of scholarly information, , Proc. National Academy of Sciences 2004, 101: 5236-5340.
• Henry, N., Goodell, H., Elmqvist, N., and Fekete, J.-D. (2007). 20 Years of Four HCI Conferences: A Visual Exploration, International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 23:3, 239-285, Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10447310701702402.
• Leicht, E. A., Clarkson, G., Shedden, K., and Newman, M. E. J. (2007). Large-scale structure of time evolving citation networks, European Physics J. B, 59: 75-83.
• Morris, S. A., Yen, G., Zheng, W., and Asnake, B. (2003). Time Line Visualization of Research Fronts. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology (JASIST) 54 (5): 413–422.
• Morris, S. and Martens, B. (2007). Mapping Research Specialties, Annual Review of Information Science 42, Chapter 6.
• Newman, Mark E. J. (2001). The structure of scientific collaboration networks. Proc. National Academy of Sciences, 98 (2):404–409.
• Shiffrin, R. M. and Börner, K. (2004). Mapping knowledge domains, Proc. National Academy of Sciences 2004, 101:5183-5185; doi:10.1073/pnas.0307852100.
• Small, H. (2005). Paradigms, citations, and maps of science: A personal history, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology (JASIST) 54(5): 394-399.

Citizen Science / Voluntary Research Networks

• Almirall, E. and Wareham, J. (2008). Living Labs and open innovation: roles and applicability. The Electronic Journal for Virtual Organizations and Networks, 10(3):21–46.
• Backstrand, K. (2003). Civic science for sustainability: reframing the role of experts, policy-makers and citizens in environmental governance. Global Environmental Politics, 3(4):24–41.
• Bhattacharjee, Y. (2005). Ornithology. Citizen scientists supplement work of Cornell research-ers. Science, 308(5727):1402–1403.
• Bonney, R. and LaBranche, M. (2004). Citizen science: Involving the public in research. ASTC Dimensions, page 13.
• Bonney, R., Ballard, H., Jordan, R., McCallie, E., Phillips, T., Shirk, J. and Wilderman, C.C. (2009). Public participation in scientific research: Defining the field and assessing its potential for informal science education. a caise inquiry group report. Technical report, Center for Ad-vancement of Informal Science Education (CAISE), Washington, DC, 2009.
• Bos, N., Zimmerman, A., Olson, J., Yew, J., Yerkie, J., Dahl, E. and Olson, G. (2007). From shared databases to communities of practice: A taxonomy of collaboratories. Journal of Com-puter-Mediated Communication, 12(2):652–672, 2007.
• Brewer, C. (2002). Outreach and partnership programs for conservation education where en-dangered species conservation and research occur. Conservation Biology, 16(1):4–6.
• Bruhn, L.C. and Soranno, P.A. (2005). Long Term (1974–2001) Volunteer Monitoring of Water Clarity Trends in Michigan Lakes and Their Relation to Ecoregion and Land Use/Cover. Lake and Reservoir Management, 21(1):10–23.
• Bucchi, M. (2009). Citizens Enter the Laboratory Whilst Scientists Take to the Streets. In Beyond Technocracy: Science, Politics and Citizens, pages 49–72. Springer.
• Canfield Jr., D.E., Brown, D., Bachmann, R.W. and Hoyer, M.V. (2002). Volunteer lake moni-toring: testing the reliability of data collected by the Florida LAKEWATCH program. Lake and Reservoir Management, 18(1):1–9.
• Clark, F. and Illman, D.L. (2002). Dimensions of civic science: Introductory essay. Science communication, 23(1):5.
• Cohn, J.P. (2008). Citizen science: Can volunteers do real research? BioScience, 58(3):192–107.
• Cooper, C.B., Dickinson, J., Phillips, T. and Bonney, R. (2007). Citizen science as a tool for conservation in residential ecosystems. Ecology and Society, 12(2).
• Danielsen, F., Burgess, N.D. and A. Balmford, A. (2005). Monitoring matters: examining the potential of locally-based approaches. Biodiversity and Conservation, 14(11):2507–2542.
• Danielsen, F., Burgess, N.D. and A. Balmford, A., Donald, P.F., Funder, M., Jones, J.P.G., Al-viola,P., Balete, D.S., Blomely, T. Brashares, J., et al. (2009). Local participation in natural re-source monitoring: a characterization of approaches. Conservation Biology, 23(1):31–42.
• Fernandez-Gimenez, M.E., Ballard, H.L. and Sturtevant, V.E. (2008). Adaptive management and social learning in collaborative and community-based monitoring: a study of five communi-ty-based forestry organizations in the western USA. Ecology and Society, 13(2):4.
• Finholt, T. A. (2002). Collaboratories. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology (ARIST), 36, 73-107.
• Finholt, T. A., & Olson, G. M. (1997). From laboratories to collaboratories: A new or-ganizational form for scientific collaboration. Psychological Science, 28-36.
• Firehock, K. and West, J. (1995). A brief history of volunteer biological water monitoring using macroinvertebrates. Journal of the North American Benthological Society, 14(1):197–202.
• Følstad, A. (2008). Towards a Living Lab for the development of online community services. The Electronic Journal for Virtual Organizations and Networks, 10:47–58, 2008.
• Fore,L.S., Paulsen, K. and O’Laughlin, K. (2001). Assessing the performance of volunteers in monitoring streams. Freshwater Biology, 46:109–123, 2001.
• Gallivan, M.J. (2001). Striking a balance between trust and control in a virtual organization: a content analysis of open source software case studies. Information Systems Journal, 11(4):277–304.
• Hayward, C., Simpson, L. and Wood, L. (2004). Still left out in the cold: problematising parti-cipatory research and development. Sociologia Ruralis, 44(1):95–108.
• Hesse, B.W. Of mice and mentors: Developing cyberinfrastructure to support transdisciplinary scientific collaboration. Am J Prev Med. (commentary accepted for publication).
• Intille, S.S., Larson, K., Beaudin, J.S., Nawyn, J., Tapia, E.M. and Kaushik, P. (2005). A living laboratory for the design and evaluation of ubiquitous computing technologies. In CHI’05 ex-tended abstracts on Human factors in computing systems, page 1944.
• Irwin, A. (1995). Citizen science: a study of people, expertise and sustainable development. Burns & Oates.
• Irwin, A. (2001). Constructing the scientific citizen: science and democracy in the biosciences. Public Understanding of Science, 10(1):1.
• Kanefsky, B., Barlow, N.G. and Gulick, V.C. (2001). Can Distributed Volunteers Accomplish Massive Data Analysis Tasks? Lunar and Planetary Science, 1.
• Lakshminarayanan, S. (2007). Using Citizens to Do Science Versus Citizens as Scientists. Ecology and Society, 12(2):2.
• Lawrence, A. (2006). ’no personal motive?’ volunteers, biodiversity, and the false dichotomies of participation. Ethics, Place & Environment, 9(3):279–298.
• Lee, T., Quinn, M.S. and Duke, D. (2006). Citizen, science, highways, and wildlife: using a web-based GIS to engage citizens in collecting wildlife information. Ecology and Society, 11(1):11.
• Lepczyk, C. A. (2005). Integrating published data and citizen science to describe bird diversity across a landscape. Journal of Applied Ecology, 42(4):672–677.
• Luke, D.A. (2005). Getting the big picture in community science: Methods that capture con-text. American Journal of Community Psychology, 35(3):185–200.
• Moore. E.A. and Koontz, T.M. (2003). Research Note A Typology of Collaborative Watershed Groups: Citizen-Based, Agency-Based, and Mixed Partnerships. Society and Natural Re-sources, 16(5):451–460.
• Niitamo, V.P., Kulkki, S., Eriksson, M. and Hribernik, K.A. (2006). State-of-the-art and good practice in the field of living labs. In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Con-current Enterprising: Innovative Products and Services through Collaborative Networks. Italy: Milan, pages 26–28.
• Paccagnella, L. (1997). Getting the seats of your pants dirty: Strategies for ethnographic re-search on virtual communities. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication, 3(1).
• Parr, C.S. 2007. Open-sourcing ecological data. BioScience 57: 309-310.
• Parr, C.S., R. Espinosa, T. Dewey, G. Hammond, P. Myers. 2005. Building a biodiversity content management system for research, education, and outreach. Data Science Journal 4:1-11. Available at http://www.cs.umd.edu/hcil/biodiversity/parr05dsj.pdf.
• Raddick, M. J., Bracey, G., Carney, K., Gyuk, G., Borne, K., Wallin, J., et al. Citizen Science: Status and Research Directions for the Coming Decade. Astro2010: The As-tronomy and Astrophysics Decadal Survey, Position Papers, no. 46. Available at: http://www8.nationalacademies.org/astro2010/DetailFileDisplay.aspx?id=454.
• Raddick, M.J., Bracey, G., Gay, P.L., Lintott, C.J., Murray, P., Schawinski, K., Szalay, A.S. and Vandenberg, J. (2009). Galaxy Zoo: Exploring the Motivations of Citizen Science Volunteers. Arxiv preprint arXiv:0909.2925.
• Savan, B., Morgan, A.J. and Gore, C. (2003). Volunteer environmental monitoring and the role of the universities: the case of Citizens’ Environment Watch. Environmental Management, 31(5):561– 568.
• Tebes, J.K. (2005). Community science, philosophy of science, and the practice of research. American Journal of Community Psychology, 35(3):213–230.
• Trumbull, D.J., Bonney, R., Bascom, D. and Cabral, A. (2000). Thinking scientifically during participation in a citizen-science project. Science Education, 84(2):265–275.
• Vaidyanathan, A., Krishnaji, N. and Kannan, K. P. (1979). People’s science movements. Eco-nomic and Political Weekly, 14(2):57–58.
• Wandersman, A. (2003). Community science: Bridging the gap between science and practice with community-centered models. American Journal of Community Psychology, 31(3):227–242.
• Wasko, M., Faraj, S. and Teigland,R. (2004). Collective action and knowledge contribution in electronic networks of practice. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 5(11-12):493–513.
• Wilderman, C. C. (2007). Models of community science: design lessons from the field. In C. McEver, R. Bonney, J. Dickinson, S. Kelling, K. Rosenberg, and J. L. Shirk, editors, Citizen Science Toolkit Conference, Cornell Laboratory of Ornithology, Ithaca, NY.

Collaborative Networks

• Camarinha-Matos, L. M., & Afsarmanesh, H. (2005). Collaborative networks: a new scientific discipline. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 16(4), 439-452.
• Camarinha-Matos, L. M., & Afsarmanesh, H. (2006). Towards a reference model for collaborative networked organizations. Paper presented at the BASYS’’06 - September 4-6, 2006, Niagara Falls, Canada.
• Rethemeyer, R. K. (2005). Conceptualizing and measuring collaborative networks. Public Administration Review, 65(1), 117-121.
• O'Leary, R., & Bingham, L. B. (2007). A Manager’s Guide to Resolving Conflicts in Collaborative Networks: IBM Center for the Business of Government.
• Singh, J. (2005). Collaborative Networks as Determinants of Knowledge Diffusion Patterns. MANAGEMENT SCIENCE, 51(5), 765-770.
• Uninova, U. A. (2006). Rough reference model for Collaborative Networks: Information Society: European Collaborative Networked Organizations Leadership initiative. Retrieved on April 15, 2009 from http://www.ve-forum.org/projects/284/Deliverables/D52.2_Final.pdf.

Computer Mediated Communication

• Jirotka, M., Luff, P., & Gilbert, N. (1991, September 25-27). Participation frameworks for computer mediated communication.computer mediated communication. Paper presented at the Second European Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work, Amsterdam The Netherlands.
• Jonassen, D., Davidson, M., Collins, M., Campbell, J., & Haag, B. B. (1995). Constructivism and Computer-Mediated Communication in Distance Education. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF DISTANCE EDUCATION, 9, 6-26.
• Marty, P. F. (2005). Factors Influencing the Co-Evolution of Computer-Mediated Collaborative Practices and Systems: A Museum Case Study. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 10(4).
• Strijbos, J. W., Martens, R. L., Jochems, W. M. G., & Broers, N. J. (2004). The effect of functional roles on group efficiency: Using multilevel modeling and content analysis to investigate computer-supported collaboration in small groups. Small Group Research, 35(2), 195.
• Thurlow, C., Lengel, L. B., & Tomic, A. (2004). Computer Mediated Communication: Social Interaction and the Internet: Sage Publications Inc.

Crowds / Crowdsourcing

• Haythornthwaite, C.A. (2009). Crowds and Communities: Light and Heavyweight Models of Peer Production. In Proceedings of the Hawai’i International conference on Systems Sciences, 2009.
• Rheingold, H. (2002) Smart Mobs: The Next Social Revolution. Cambridge, MA: Basic Books.
• Surowiecki, J. (2004). The Wisdom of Crowds. New York, NY: Anchor Books.
• Viégas, F. B. and M. A. Smith (2004). “Newsgroup Crowds and Author Lines: Visualizing the Activity of Individuals in Conversational Cyberspaces,” in Proceedings of Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, (HICSS).

Disaster / Relief / Terrorism / Crime

• Bohannon, J. (2009). Counterterrorism's New Tool: 'Metanetwork' Analysis. Science, 325, 409-411.
• Goodall, John R., Wayne G. Lutters, and Anita Komlodi, “I Know My Network: Collaboration and Expertise in Intrusion Detection,” Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), CHI Letters, 6(3), ACM Press, 2004, pp. 342-345.
• Palen, L., Hiltz, S. R.and Liu, S. (2007). Citizen Participation in Emergency Preparedness and Response. Communications of the ACM special issue, March 2007, pp. 54-58.
• Palen, Leysia, Sarah Vieweg, Sophia Liu, Amanda Hughes (to appear 2009). Crisis in a Networked World: Features of Computer-Mediated Communication in the April 16, 2007 Virginia Tech Event. Social Science Computing Review, Sage,
• Qu, Y. P.F. Wu, and X. Wang (2009). “Online Community Response to Major Disaster: A Case Study of Tianya Forum in the 2008 China Earthquake,” in Proceedings of the 42nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS-42), Waikoloa, HI, January 5-8, 2009.
• Shklovski, Irina, Leysia Palen and Jeannette Sutton (2008). Finding Community Through Information and Communication Technology in Disaster Events. Proceedings of the ACM 2008 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW 2008), November, San Diego, pp. 127-136
• Shneiderman, B. and Preece, J., 911.gov, Science, 315, Issue 5814 (16 Feb 2007), 944.
• Simon Wiesenthal Center (2008) “iReport: Online Terror + Hate: The First Decade, Simon Wiesenthal Center, Los Angeles, CA,” fswc.ca/downloads/iReport.pdf (February 15, 2009).
• Starbird, Kate, Leysia Palen, Amanda Hughes and Sarah Vieweg (to appear 2010). Chatter on The Red: What Hazards Threat Reveals about the Social Life of Microblogged Information. Proceedings of the ACM 2010 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW 2010).
• Taylor, R. W., T.J. Caeti, K. Loper, E.J. Fritsch, and J. Liederbach (2006) Digital Crime and Digital Terrorism. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
• Torrey, C., M. Burk, M. Lee, A. Dey, S. Fussell, and S. Kiesler (2007) “Connected Giving: Ordinary people coordinating disaster relief on the Internet,” in Proceedings of 40th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS).
• Vieweg, Sarah, Leysia Palen, Sophia Liu, Amanda Hughes and Jeannette Sutton (2008). Collective Intelligence in Disaster: An Examination of the Phenomenon in the Aftermath of the 2007 Virginia Tech Shootings. Proceedings of the 2008 Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management Conference (ISCRAM 2008), Washington, D.C., pp. 44-54.
• Wu, P. F., Y. Qu, J. Preece, K. Fleischmann, J. Golbeck, P. Jaeger, and B. Shneiderman (2008) “Community Response Grid (CRG) for a University Campus: Design Requirements and Implications,” in Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management (ISCRAM 2008), Washington, DC.

Distance Education / Online Learning / CSCL

• Andriole, S. J. (1995). Asynchronous Learning Networks: Drexel. THE Journal, 23(3), 97-101.
• Bianco, M. B., & Carr-Chellman, A. A. (2007). Exploring qualitative methodologies in online learning environments. In R. Luppicini (Ed.), Online Learning Communities (pp. 299-318). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
• Blignaut, S., & Trollip, S. R. (2003). Developing a taxonomy of faculty participation in asynchronous learning environments--an exploratory investigation. Computers & Education, 41(2), 149-172.
• Bots, J., & Walker, R. (2004). Conversational e-learning: Theory and experiences for the delivery of Information Management training to postgraduate management accountants. Teaching & Learning: the Journal of Natural Inquiry & Reflective Practice, 25(1), 49-60.
• Bradwell, P. (2009). The Edgeless University. London: Demos.
• Browne, E. (2003). Conversations in cyberspace: A study of online learning. Open learning, 18(3), 245-259.
• Carmichael, D. E. (2001). An Educational Evaluation of WebCT A Case Study Using the Conversational Framework. Paper presented at the World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications, Chesapeake, VA.
• Collinson, V. (2008). Leading by learning: new directions in the twenty-first century. Journal of Educational Administration, 46(4), 443-460.
• Gunn, C. (2001). Effective Online Teaching How Far Do the Frameworks Go? Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education (ASCLITE) Conference, Melbourne, Australia.
• Herring, S. C., Barab, S. A., Kling, R., & Gray, J. H. (2004). Designing for virtual communities in the service of learning.
• Hiltz, S.R., Kim, E., and Shea, P. (2007). Faculty Motivators and De-motivators for Teaching Online: Results of Focus Group Interviews at One University. Proceedings, HICSS 2007. Washington DC, IEEE Computer Society.
• Hrastinski, S. (2008). A theory of online learning as online participation. Computers & Education.
• Hrastinski, S. (2008). What is online learner participation? A literature review. Computers & Education, 51(4), 1755-1765.
• Jones, A., & Preece, J. (2006). Online communities for teachers and lifelong learners: a framework for comparing similarities and identifying differences in communities of practice and communities of interest. International Journal of Learning Technology, 2(2), 112-137.
• Kasowitz, A., Bennett, B., & Lankes, R. D. (2000). Quality Standards for Digital Reference Consortia. Reference & User Services Quarterly, 39(4), 355-363.
• Kellogg, W.A. and Viehland, D.W. (Eds.) (1995). Special issue: Education and the Internet.Computers & Education, 24(3), April, 1995, pp. 141-255.
• Knight, A. (2003). Online Journalism Education: Reaching and teaching globalised media. ejournalist, 3(2), 1-11.
• Koschmann, T. (Ed.). (1996). CSCL theory and practice of an emerging paradigm. Mahway, NJ.: Erlbaum Associates.
• Laurillard, D. (2002). Rethinking university teaching: A conversational framework for the effective use of learning technologies. London: RutledgeFalmer.
• Laverack, G., & Dap, D. H. (2003). Transforming information, education and communication in Vietnam. Health Education, 103(6), 363-369.
• Melville, D. (2009). Higher education in a Web 2.0 world: report of an independent Committee of Inquiry into the impact on higher education of students' widespread use of Web 2.0 technologies.
• Merrick, K., Maher, M.L.: (2009) Motivated Learning from Interesting Events: Adaptive, Multitask Learning Agents for Complex Environments, Adaptive Behaviour, SAGE Publications, Peter M. Todd (Ed.), Vol 17(1):7-27.
• Merrick, K. and Maher, M.L. (2009). Motivated Reinforcement Learning: Curious Characters for Multiuser Games, Springer-Verlag:Berlin/Heidelberg.
• Meyer, K. A. (2006). The method (and madness) of evaluating online discussions. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 10(4), 83-97.
• Saltz, J. Passerini, K. and Hiltz, S.R. Visualizing Online Interaction to Increase Participation in Distance Learning Courses. IEEE Internet Computing, 11:3, May-June 2007, pp. 36- 44.
• Scott, B., Shurville, S., Maclean, P., & Cong, C. (2007). Cybernetic principles for learning design. Kybernetes, 36(9/10), 1497.
• Stahl, G., Koschmann, T., & Suthers, D. (2006). Computer-supported collaborative learning: An historical perspective. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (Vol. 2006). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
• Turoff, M. (1972). Delphi Conferencing: Computer-Based Conferencing with Anonymity, Technological Forecasting and Social Change 3, 159-204, 1972.
• Vonderwell, S., & Zachariah, S. (2005). Factors that Influence Participation in Online Learning. Journal of Research on Technology in education, 38(2), 18.
• Walters, P., & Kop, R. (2009). Heidegger, Digital Technology, and Postmodern Education: From Being in Cyberspace to Meeting on MySpace. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 29(4), 278.
• Yardi, S. (2008). "From Multimedia to Multiple Voices: Conflicts in Collaborative Learning Cultures." Informal Learning and Digital Media." Eds. Drotner, K., Jensen, H. and Schrøder, K. Cambridge Scholars: UK, 2008.
• Yardi, S (2008). "Whispering, Chatting, and Learning in a Classroom Backchannel." MacArthur Foundation Series on Digital Media and Learning - Digital Youth, Innovation, and the Unexpected (ed. Tara McPherson). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 143-164.

Economics / E-Commerce / Entrepreneurship / Innovation

• Ala-Mutka, K, Broster, D., Cachia, R., Centeno, C., Feijoo, C., Hache, A., Kluzer, S., Lindmark, S., Lusoli, W. Misuraca, G., Pascu, C., Punie, Y., and Valverde, J. The Impact of Social Computing on the EU Information Society and Economy. EUR 24063-EN. JRC Scientific and Technical Reports. European Commission. Available at http://ftp.jrc.es/EURdoc/JRC54327.pdf.
• Biggiero, L. (2001). Self-organizing processes in building entrepreneurial networks: a theoretical and empirical investigation. Human Systems Management, 20(3), 209-222.
• Brown, J. S., & Hagel, J. (2006). Creation nets: Getting the most from open innovation. McKinsey Quarterly, 2, 40. Available at http://www.johnseelybrown.com/creationnets.pdf.
• Hagel, J. and Brown, J.S. (2008). Creation Nets: Harnessing The Potential Of Open Innovation. Journal of Service Science–Fourth Quarter, 1(2). Retrieved March 15, 2009 from, http://www.johnseelybrown.com/creationnets.pdf.
• Henfridsson, O., & Holmström, H. (2002). Developing e-commerce in internetworked organizations: a case of customer involvement throughout the computer gaming value chain. ACM SIGMIS Database, 33(4), 38-50.
• Kollock, P. (1999) “The economies of online cooperation: Gifts and public goods in cyberspace,” in M. Smith and P. Kollock (eds.) Communities in Cyberspace. London: Routeledge, pp 220-239.
• Malone, T. W. & Laubacher, R. J. The Dawn of the E-lance Economy. Harvard Business Review, September – October 1998, 76 (5), 144-152.
• Resnick, Paul, Zeckhauser, Richard, Swanson, John, and Kate Lockwood. The Value of Reputation on eBay: A Controlled Experiment. Experimental Economics. Volume 9, Issue 2, Jun 2006, Page 79-101.
• Tapscott, D. and A.D. Williams (2007) Wikinomics: How Mass Collaboration Changes Everything. London, UK: Portfolio, Penguin Books.

Government / Politics / Elections

• Adamic. L. A. and Glance, N. (2005). The political blogosphere and the 2004 U.S. election: divided they blog. In LinkKDD ’05: Proc. 3rd International Workshop on Link Discovery, pages 36–43, New York, NY, USA, 2005. ACM.
• Chadwick, A., (2009). Web 2.0: New Challenges for the Study of E-Democracy in an Era of Informational Exuberance. J/S: Journal of Law and Policy For the Information Society, 5(1), 1-32.
• Goldschmidt, K. and Ochrieter, L. (2008). Communicating with Congress: How the Internet Has Changed Citizen Engagement. Congressional Management Foundation, Washington, D.C, 2008. Available at http://nposoapbox.s3.amazonaws.com/cmfweb/CWC_CitizenEngagement.pdf.
• Greengard, S. (2009) “The first Internet president,” Communications of the ACM (52) 2, pp. 16-18.
• Gueorguieva, V., (2008). Voters, MySpace, and YouTube: The Impact of Alternative Communication Channels on the 2006 Election Cycle and Beyond. Social Science Computer Review, 26(3), 288-300.
• Himelboim, I., E. Gleave, and M. Smith (2008) “Discussion catalysts in online political discussions: Content importers and conversation starters.” (Working paper).
• Horrigan, John, Garrett, Kelly and Resnick, Paul, "The Internet and Democratic Debate," Pew Internet and American Life Project, 10/27/04, 2004.
• Huijboom, N., van den Broek, T., Frissen, Kool, L., Kotterink, B., Nielson, M. M., Millard, J. (2009). Public Services 2.0: The Impact of Social Computing on Public Services. EUR 24080 EN. JRC Scientific and Technical Reports. European Commission. Available at http://ftp.jrc.es/EURdoc/JRC54203.pdf.
• Johnson, D. (2004). Congress Online. Routledge, New York, 2004.
• Karpf, D. 2009. Macaca moments reconsidered… YouTube effects or Netroots effects? Submitted for consideration for the YouTube and the 2008 Election Conference. Available at http://scholarworks.umass.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1000&context=jitpc2009#page=85.
• Lilleker, D.G. & Jackson, N., 2008. Politicians and Web 2.0: the current bandwagon or changing the mindset? Paper presented at Politics: Web 2.0: An International Conference, Royal Hollloway, UK. Available at: http://newpolcom.rhul.ac.uk/politics-web-20-paper-download/ [Accessed December 30, 2008].
• Noveck, B. (2009). Wiki Government: How Technology Can Make Government Better, Democracy Stronger, and Citizens More Powerful. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
• Schuler, D. and Day, P. (Eds.). (2004). Shaping the Network Society: The New Role of Civil Society in Cyberspace. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Available at http://mitpress.mit.edu/catalog/item/default.asp?tid=10144&ttype=2.
• Shneiderman, B., A National Initiative for Social Participation, Science 323 (March 13, 2009), 1426-1427.
• Williams, C.B. & Gulati, G.J. (2007). Social Networks in Political Campaigns: Facebook and the 2006 Midterm Elections. Paper presented at the 2007 Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Chicago, USA. Available at: http://www.bentley.edu/news-events/pdf/Facebook_APSA_2007_final.pdf.

Knowledge Management / Knowledge Workers

• Adamic, L.A., Zhang, J., Bakshy, E., and Ackerman, M. (2008). Knowledge sharing and Yahoo Answers: Everyone knows something, Proc. World Wide Web Conference, http://.WWW2008.org.
• Bahrami, H., & Evans, S. (1997). Human resource leadership in knowledge-based entities: Shaping the context of work. Human Resource Management, 36(1), 23-28.
• Brown, J. S., & Duguid, P. (2001). Knowledge and Organization: A Social-Practice Perspective. Organization science, 12(2), 198-213.
• Burak, S., Schaffers, H., Kristensen, K., Hermann, L., & Slagter, R. (2007). Collaborative Knowledge Workers: Web Tools and Workplace Paradigms Enabling Enterprise Collaboration 2.0.
• Burton, C. L. (2002). Knowledge transfer in a corporate setting: A case study. Indiana University, Bloomington, IN.
• Garfield, S. (2006). Ten reasons why people don’t share their knowledge. KM Review, 9(2), 10-11.
• Hedlund, J., Forsythe, G. B., Horvath, J. A., Williams, W. M., Snook, S., & Sternberg, R. J. (2003). Identifying and assessing tacit knowledge: Understanding the practical intelligence of military leaders. The Leadership Quarterly, 14(2), 117-140.
• Hume, C., & Hume, M. (2008). The strategic role of knowledge management in nonprofit organisations. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 13(2).
• Lettieri, E., Borga, F., & Savoldelli, A. (2004). Knowledge management in non-profit organizations. Journal of Knowledge management, 8, 16-30.
• Lutters, Wayne G., Mark S. Ackerman, James Boster and David W. McDonald, “Mapping Knowledge Networks in Organizations: Creating a Knowledge Mapping Instrument,” Proceedings of the Americas Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS), AIS Press, 2000, pp. 2014-2018.
• Matzat, U. (2006). Knowledge Management in a Virtual Organization: Are embedded online communities of practice more successful than exclusively virtual ones? Eindhoven, Netherlands: Eindhoven University of Technology.
• McIntyre, J. (2003). Participatory design: The community of practice (COP) approach and its relevance to strategic knowledge management and ethical governance. Journal of Sociocybernetics, 4(1), 1-22.
• Nonaka, I. (1994). A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation. Organization science, 5(1), 14-37.
• Nonaka, I. (2005). Knowledge Management. New York: Routledge.
• Nonaka, I., & Konno, N. (1998). The Concept of "Ba": Building a Foundation for Knowledge Creation. California Management Review, 40(3), 40-54.
• Nonaka, I., Toyama, R., & Konno, N. (2000). SECI, Ba and leadership: a unified model of dynamic knowledge creation. Long range planning, 33(1), 5-34.
• Noriko Hara, Shachaf, P., Haigh, T., Mackey, T. P., Sandusky, R. J., & Davenport, E. (2006). Knowledge sharing in online communities of practice: Digital trends. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 43(1), 1-10.
• Oliver, S., & Kandadi, K. R. (2006). How to develop knowledge culture in organizations? A multiple case study of large distributed organizations. Journal of Knowledge Management, 10(4), 6.
• Pangaro, P. (1996). Cybernetics and Conversation. Monograph: Communication and Anticommunication, American Society of Cybernetics.
• Perer, A. and Shneiderman, B. (2008). Systematic yet flexible discovery: guiding domain experts through exploratory data analysis, Proc. 13th Int’l Conf. on Intelligent User Interfaces, 109-118, New York, NY, USA,. ACM.
• Petit, C. (2008). From Practice-based Knowledge to the Practice of Research: Revisiting Constructivist Research Works on Knowledge. Management Learning, 39(1), 73.
• Sharratt, M. and A. Usoro (2003) “Understanding knowledge sharing in online communities of practice,” Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management (1), pp. 187-196.
• Yang, J., Adamic L.A., and Ackerman M. S. (2008). Competing to Share Expertise: the Taskcn Knowledge Sharing Community. International Conference on Weblogs and Social Media (ICWSM), 2008. Available at: http://socialworldsresearch.org/?q=node/154.

Networks / Networked Society

• Barabási, A. (2009). Scale-Free Networks: A Decade and Beyond. Science, 325, 412-413.
• Barabási, A.L. (2003). Linked: How Everything Is Connected to Everything Else and What It Means. New York, NY: Penguin Group.
• Benkler, Y. (2005). The wealth of networks: How social production transforms markets and freedom. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
• Calvi, L. (2006). Virtual Individual Networks: A Case Study. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 4277, 208. http://www.davehuffaker.com/papers/HuffakerLai2006-Expertise-sharinginOnlineCommunities.pdf
• Castells, M. (1996). The Rise of the Network Society. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
• Christakis, N. and Fowler, J., (2009). Connected: The surprising power of our social networks and how they shape our lives. New York: Little, Brown.
• Fogg, B.J. (2002) Persuasive Technology: Using Computers to Change What We Think and Do. San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.
• Giglietto, F. (2007). Social semantics in a networked space: New perspectives for social sciences. Paper presented at the 7th International Conference of Sociocybernetics, Murcia, Spain.
• Hiltz, S. R. and Murray Turoff, M. (1993). The Network Nation: Human Communication Via Computer, revised edition, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1993.
• Kalil, T. (1996). Leveraging Cyberspace, IEEE Communications Magazine 34, 7, 82-86.
• Kleinberg, J. (2008). The convergence of social and technological networks. Communications of the ACM, 51(11):66-72.
• Li, C. and Bernoff, J. (2008) Groundswell: Winning in a World Transformed by Social Technologies. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Review.
• Monge, P.R. and Contractor, N. (2003) Theories of Communication Networks. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
• Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling Alone: Collapse and Revival of the American Community. New York, NY: Simon and Schuster.
• Schuler, D. (2008). Liberating Voices: A Pattern Language for Communication Revolution. MIT Press. Available at http://mitpress.mit.edu/catalog/item/default.asp?ttype=2&tid=11601.
• Watts, D.J. (2003). Six Degrees: The Science of a Connected Age (Open Market Edition) New York, NY: W.W. Norton & Company.

Online Communities / Virtual Communities / Virtual Teams

• Aigrain, P. (2003). The Individual and the Collective in Open Information Communities, 16th Bled Electronic Commerce Conference. Bled, Slovenia.
• Ardichvili, A., Maurer, M., Li, W., Wentling, T., & Stuedemann, R. (2006). Cultural influences on knowledge sharing through online communities of practice. Journal of Knowledge management, 10(1), 94-107.
• Butler, B.S. (2001). Membership size, communication activity, and sustainability: A resource-based model of online social structures. Information systems research, 12(4):346–362.
• Chin, P. O., & Cooke, D. (2004). Satisfaction and Coordination in Virtual Communities. In Proceedings of the Tenth Americas Conference on Information Systems, New York, New York.
• Chiu, C. M., Hsu, M. H., & Wang, E. T. G. (2006). Understanding knowledge sharing in virtual communities: an integration of social capital and social cognitive theories. Decision Support Systems, 42(3), 1872-1888.
• Cosley, D., D. Frankowski, S. Kiesler, L. Terveen, and J. Riedl (2005) “How oversight Improves member-maintained communities,” in Proceedings of ACM CHI 2005 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 11-20.
• Dubé, L., & Bourhis, A. (2004). “Structuring Spontaneity”: The Impact of Management Practices on the Success of Intentionally Formed Virtual Communities of Practice. Cahier du GReSI no, 4, 20.
• Dubé, L., Bourhis, A., & Jacob, R. (2006). Towards a typology of virtual communities of practice. Interdisciplinary Journal of Information, Knowledge, and Management, 1(1), 69–93.
• Handley, K., Sturdy, A., Fincham, R., Clark, T. A. R., Campus, S. K., & Lane, M. H. (2006). Within and beyond communities of practice: making sense of learning through participation, identity and practice. Journal of Management Studies, 43(3), 641-653.
• Hansen, D. L., M.S. Ackerman, P.J. Resnick, and S. Munson (2007) “Virtual Community Maintenance with a Repository,” in ASIST 2007 Conference Proceedings, Milwaukee, WI.
• Heath, C. and Luff, P. (2000) Technology in Action. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Kim, A. J. (2000) Community Building on the Web: Secret Strategies for Successful Online Communities. Berkeley, CA: Peachpit Press
• Herring, S. C., Barab, S. A., Kling, R., & Gray, J. H. (2004). Designing for virtual communities in the service of learning.
• Hinds, D., & Lee, R. M. (2008, January 7-10). Social network structure as a critical success condition for virtual communities. Paper presented at the 41st Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS’08), Hawaii.
• Huffaker, D., & Lai, J. (2006). Motivating expertise-sharing in online communities: Altruism or self-interest? IBM Research Support, November 2006. Available at http://www.davehuffaker.com/papers/HuffakerLai2006-Expertise-sharinginOnlineCommunities.pdf.
• Hummel, J., & Lechner, U. (2002). Social profiles of virtual communities. Paper presented at the 35th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS 2002), Hawaii.
• Hur, J. W., & Hara, N. (2007). Factors Cultivating Sustainable Online Communities for K-12 Teacher Professional Development. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 36(3), 245-268.
• Johnson, C. M. (2001). A survey of current research on online communities of practice. The internet and higher education, 4(1), 45-60.
• Kavanaugh, A., Carroll, J. M., Rosson, M. B., Zin, T. T., & Reese, D. D. (2005). Community networks: Where offline communities meet online. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 10(4), 442-464.
• Kolbitsch, J. and H. Maurer (2006) “The transformation of the Web: How emerging communities shape the information we consume,” Journal of Universal Computer Science (2).
• Lampe, C., Wash, R., Velasquez, A., & Ozkaya, E. (2010 - to be presented) Motivations to Participate in Online Communities. In the Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI) (Atlanta, GA 2010). Available at http://www.msu.edu/~lampecli/papers/pap1604_lampe.pdf.
• Lampel, J. and A. Bhalla (2007) “The role of status seeking in online communities: Giving the gift of experience,” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication (12) 2, Article 5.
• Leimeister, J. M., & Krcmar, H. (2005). Evaluation of a systematic design for a virtual patient community. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 10(4).
• Lin, H. F. (2008). Determinants of successful virtual communities: Contributions from system characteristics and social factors. Information & Management, 45(8), 522-527.
• Lipnack, J., & Stamps, J. (1997). Virtual teams: reaching across space, time, and organizations with technology: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. New York, NY, USA.
• Lutters, Wayne G. and Mark S. Ackerman, “Joining the Backstage: Locality and Centrality in an Online Community,” Information Technology and People, Emerald, (16:2), 2003, pp. 157-182.
• Majchrzak, A., Rice, R. E., Malhotra, A., King, N., & Ba, S. (2000). Technology adaptation: The case of a computer-supported inter-organizational virtual team. Mis Quarterly, 569-600.
• Mueller, J., Renzl, B., & Kaar, A. (2008). 'It's not my community'? insights from social identity theory explaining community-failure. International Journal of Learning and Change, 3(1), 23-37.
• Murillo, E. (2008). Searching the usenet network for virtual communities of practice: Using mixed method to identify the constructs of Wenger's theory. Information Research, 13(4).
• Murillo-Othon, E., & Spicer, D. P. (2007). Searching the Usenet network for Virtual Communities of Practice: Bradford University School of Management.
• Nilan, M. S., & D'Eredita, M. (2005). Organisations as virtual communities: a sense-making approach for uniting knowledge consumers and knowledge workers. International Journal of Web Based Communities, 1(3), 262-271.
• Nilan, M. S., Zakaria, N., & Guzman, I. (2004). Virtual Communities on the Web: Facilitating and Hindering Users' Cognitive Movement. Paper presented at the IADIS International Conference on Web Based Communities, Lisbon, Portugal.
• Noriko Hara, Shachaf, P., Haigh, T., Mackey, T. P., Sandusky, R. J., & Davenport, E. (2006). Knowledge sharing in online communities of practice: Digital trends. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 43(1), 1-10.
• Oh, K. T., & Lee, K. P. (2005). A Review of Frameworks for Online Community Design with Emphasis on Developing Online Community Construct. Paper presented at the International Design Congress.
• Preece, J. (1999) “Empathic communities: Balancing emotional and factual communication,” Interacting with Computers, The Interdisciplinary Journal of Human-Computer Interaction (12) 1, pp. 63-77.
• Preece, J. (2000). Online Communities: Designing Usability, Supporting Sociability. Chichester, UK: John Wiley and Sons.
• Preece, J., & Maloney-Krichmar, D. (2005). Online communities: Design, theory, and practice. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 10(4).
• Reimann, P. (2008). Communities of Practice. In H. H. Adelsberger, J. M. Pawlowski & D. G. Sampson (Eds.), Handbook on Information Technologies for Education and Training (pp. 277-293).
• Rheingold, H. (2000). The Virtual Community: Homesteading on the Electronic Frontier: MIT Press.
• Riverin, S., & Stacey, E. (2008). Sustaining an Online Community of Practice: A Case Study. Journal of Distance Education, 22(2), 43.
• Sarker, S., & Sahay, S. (2000). Understanding virtual team development: an interpretive study. Journal of the Association for Information Systems (Volume 3, 2002), 247(285), 285.
• Shen, K. N., & MKhalifa, M. (2009). Design for social presence in online communities: A multidimensional approach. AIS Transactions on Human-Computer Interaction, 1(2), 33-54.
• Smith, John B. (1994) Collective Intelligence in Computer-based Collaboration. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawerence Erlbaum Associates.
• Smith, M. and Kollock, P. (eds.) (1999) Communities in Cyberspace. London, UK: Routeledge.
• Vaast, E. (2004). O Brother, Where are Thou?: From Communities to Networks of Practice Through Intranet Use. Management Communication Quarterly, 18(1), 5.
• Van Winkelen, C., & Ramsell, P. (2003). Why aligning value is key to designing communities. Knowledge Management Review, 5(6), 12-15.
• Wasko, M., & Faraj, S. (2005). Why should I share? Examining social capital and knowledge contribution in electronic communities of practice. Mis Quarterly, 29(1), 35-57.
• Wenger, E. (2001). Support communities of practice: A survey of community-oriented technologies. San Juan, CA.
• Wise, A., & Duffy, T. M. (2008). Designing Online Conversations to Engage Local Practice: Implications of. In R. Luppicini (Ed.), Handbook of Conversation Design for Instructional Applications (pp. 177-202). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
• Ye, S., Chen, H., & Jin, X. (2006). An Empirical Study of What Drives Users to Share Knowledge in Virtual Communities. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 4092, 563-575.
• Yoo, Y. and M. Alavi (2004) “Emergent leadership in virtual teams: What do emergent leaders do?” Information and Organization 14, pp. 27-58.
• Zimmerman, A. and T.A. Finholt (2007) “Growing an infrastructure: The role of gateway organizations in cultivating new communities of users,” in Proceedings of GROUP’07, pp. 239-248.

Open Source Software Development / FLOSS

• Ankolekar, A., Herbsleb, J.D. and Sycara, K. (2003). Addressing Challenges to Open Source Collaboration With the Semantic Web. In Proceedings of Taking Stock of the Bazaar: The 3rd Workshop on Open Source Software Engineering, the 25th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE), Portland OR, USA, May 3-10 2003, pp 9-13.
• Bezroukov, N. (1999). Open source software development as a special type of academic research (critique of vulgar raymondism). First Monday, 4(10).
• Crowston, K., Wei, K., Li, Q. and Howison, J. (2006). Core and periphery in Free/Libre and Open Source software team communications. In Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, volume 39, page 118. IEEE.
• Dahlander, L., & Mckelvey, M. (2005). Who is not developing open source software? nonusers, users, and developers. Economics of Innovation and New Technology.
• Elliot, M. S., & Scacchi, W. (2003, 9-12 November). Free Software developers as an occupational community: Resolving conflicts and fostering collaboration. In Proceedings of Group’03, Sanibel Island, FL, USA.
• Free/Libre Open Source Software Research Project at the Syracuse University iSchool maintains a repository of a their FLOSS publications (http://floss.syr.edu/publications/) presentations (http://floss.syr.edu/Presentations/) and working papers (http://floss.syr.edu/StudyP/) at http://floss.syr.edu/.
• Freeman, S. (2007). The material and social dynamics of motivation: Contributions to Open Source language technology development. Science Studies, 20(2), 55–77.
• Ghosh, R. A. (2002, 14 October). Free/Libre and Open Source Software: Survey and Study. Report of the FLOSS Workshop on Advancing the Research Agenda on Free / Open Source Software. Retrieved 16 March, 2006, from http://www.infonomics.nl/FLOSS/report/workshopreport.htm
• Hann, I.-H., Roberts, J., & Slaughter, S. A. (2004). Why developers participate in open source software projects: An empirical investigation, Twenty-Fifth International Conference on Information Systems (pp. 821–830). Washington, DC.
• Hann, I.-H., Roberts, J., Slaughter, S., & Fielding, R. (2002). Economic incentives for participating in open source software projects. In Proceedings of the Twenty-Third International Conference on Information Systems.
• Hars, A. and S. Qu (2002) “Working for free - Motivations for participating in open-source projects,” International Journal of Electronic Commerce (6), pp. 25-39.
• Hemetsberger, A., & Reinhardt, C. (2006). Learning and knowledge-building in open-source communities: A social-experiential approach. Management Learning, 37(2), 187.
• Hertel, G. (2007). Motivating job design as a factor in open source governance. Journal of Management & Governance, 11, 129–137.
• Hertel, G., Niedner, S., & Herrmann, S. (2003). Motivation of software developers in Open Source projects: an Internet-based survey of contributors to the Linux kernel. Research Policy, 32, 1159–1177.
• Howison, J., Inoue, K., & Crowston, K. (2006). Social dynamics of FLOSS team communications. In Proceedings of The Second International Conference on Open Source Systems, Como, Italy.
• Kavanagh, J. F. (2004). Resistance as motivation for innovation: Open source software. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 13, 615–628.
• Lakhani, K. R., & Wolf, R. G. (2005). Why Hackers Do What They Do: Understanding Motivation and Effort in Free/Open Source Software Projects. In J. Feller, B. Fitzgerald, S. Hissam & K. R. Lakhani (Eds.), Perspectives on Free and Open Source Software. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
• Lerner, J., & Tirole, J. (2002). Some simple economics of Open Source. The Journal of Industrial Economics, 2(1), 197–234.
• Mockus, A., Fielding, R. T., & Herbsleb, J. D. (2000). A case study of Open Source Software development: The Apache server. In Proceedings of Proceedings of the International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE’2000).
• Sauer, R. M. (2007). Why develop open-source software? The role of non-pecuniary benefits, monetary rewards, and open-source licence type. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 23(4), 605–619.
• Ye, Y., & Kishida, K. (2003). Toward an understanding of the motivation of Open Source Software developers. In Proceedings of 2003 International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE2003), Portland, OR.
• Wiggins, A., Howison, J. and Crowston, K. (2009). Heartbeat: Measuring active user base and potential user interest in floss projects. In Open Source Ecosystems: Diverse Communities In-teracting, IFIP International Federation for Information Processing. Springer Boston.

Participatory Networks

• Daly, J. M., Jogerst, G. J., & Schmuch, G. A. (2007). APS Participatory Network Case Study Review. Social Work in Health Care, 46(1), 21.
• Lankes, R. D., & Marshall, T. E. (2006). Participatory Networks: The Library as Conversation. Paper presented at the CoLIS 6.
• Lankes, R. D., Silverstein, J., & Nicholson, S. (2007). Participatory Networks: Information Institute of Syracuse.
• Lankes, R. D., Silverstein, J., Nicholson, S., & Marshall, T. E. (2007). Participatory networks: the library as conversation. Information Technology and Libraries, 26(4), 17-33.
• Marshall, T. E. (2009). A new framework for examining knowledge management adoption for participatory networks. Paper presented at the KMAfrica 2009, Dakar, Senegal. Retrieved September 15, 2009, from http://www.isivivane.com/kmafrica/group.emerging.technologies.A.New.Framework.for.Examining.Knowledge.Management.Adoption.for.Participatory.Networks.

Religion / Religious Communities Online

• Baily, B. and Storch, T. (2007). The blogging church: sharing the story of your church through blogs. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.
• Bell, G. (2006). No more SMS from Jesus: Ubicomp, religion and techno-spiritual practices. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 4206, 141-158.
• Buadaeng, K. (2002). Khuba Movements and the Karen in Northern Thailand: Negotiating Sacred Space and Identity. Paper presented at the International Workshop on Cultural Diversity and Conservation in the Making of Mainland Southeast Asia and Southwestern China: Regional Dynamics in the Past and Present. from http://archives.acls.org/programs/crn/network/ebook_buadaeng_paper1.doc
• Campbell, H. (2006). Religion and the Internet. Communication Research Trends, 25(1), 3–24.
• Cantoni, L., & Zyga, S. (2007). The Use of Internet Communication by Catholic Congregations: A Quantitative Study. Journal of Media and Religion, 6(4), 291-309.
• Dawson, L. L., & Cowan, D. E. (2004). Religion Online: Finding Faith on the Internet. New York, NY: Routledge.
• Goh, P., Thaxter, P., & Simson, P. (2003). Building Communities of Mission Practice in CMS. London: Church Mission Society.
• Helland, C. (2002). Surfing for Salvation. Religion, 32(4), 293-302.
• Hermans, C. A. M. (2003). Participatory learning: religious education in a globalizing society. Leiden, Netherlands: Brill.
• Hutchings, T. (2007). Creating Church Online: A Case-Study Approach to Religious Experience. Studies in World Christianity, 13(3), 243-260.
• Johnson, D. T. (2005). Bringing the body into the church: Constructing health ministry in community. Unpublished Dissertation, University of Missouri-Columbia, Columbia, MO.
• Karaflogka, A. (2002). Religious Discourse and Cyberspace. Religion, 32(4), 279-291.
• Kaylor, B. (2008). Excommunicated identity: Sensemaking among pastors of disfellowshipped churches. Paper presented at the NCA 94th Annual Convention, November 20, 2008. from http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p259705_index.html
• Lee, W. (2006). Understanding the use of new media-technology in the 21st century local church: A case study of media use at Orlando Faith Assembly of God Church (Florida). Unpublished Dissertation, Regent University, Virginia Beach, VA.
• McKenna, K. Y. A., & West, K. J. (2007). Give me that online-time religion: The role of the internet in spiritual life. Computers in Human Behavior, 23(2), 942-954.
• van der Laan, J. M. (2009). How the Internet Shapes Religious Life, or the Medium Is Itself the Message. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 29(4), 272-277.

Social Networks / Social Networking / Social Media

• Ahlqvist, T., Bäck, A., Halonen, M., & Heinonen, S. (2008). Social Media Roadmaps: Exploring the futures triggered by social media. Vuorimiehentie, Finland: VTT Technical Research Center of Finland.
• Beer, D. (2008). Social network (ing) sites revisiting the story so far: A response to danah boyd Nicole Ellison. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(2), 516-529.
• Borremans, P. (2007). Clarifying IBM's strategic mission for social media. Strategic Communication Management, 11(3), 24.
• Boyd, & Ellison, N. B. (2007). Social Network Sites: Definition, History, and Scholarship. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(1), 210-230.
• Breslin, J., & Decker, S. (2007). The Future of Social Networks on the Internet: The Need for Semantics. IEEE Internet Computing, 11(6), 86-90.
• Cross, R.L., Parker, A. and Cross, R. (2004) The Hidden Power of Social Networks: Understanding How Work Really Gets Done in Organizations. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Press.
• Ellison, N. B., Steinfield, C., & Lampe, C. (2007). The Benefits of Facebook Friends: Social Capital and College Students Use of Online Social Network Sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12(4), 1143-1168.
• Hampton, K. (2003). Grieving For a Lost Network: Collective Action in a Wired Suburb (2003). The Information Society 19(5), 417-428.
• Hampton, K. (2009). Social Ties and Community in Urban Places [revised] (2009). In Harry Hiller (Ed.) Urban Sociology 2nd ed. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. 86-107.
• Hargittai, E. (2008). Whose space? Differences among users and non-users of social network sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(1), 276-297.
• Hinds, D., & Lee, R. M. (2008, January 7-10). Social network structure as a critical success condition for virtual communities. Paper presented at the 41st Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS’08), Hawaii.
• Joinson, A. N. (2008) “Looking at, looking up or keeping up with people? Motives and uses of Facebook,” in Proceedings of 26th Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 1027-1036.
• Kumar, R., Novak, J., and Tomkins, A. (2006). Structure and Evolution of Online Social Net-works. Proc. ACM SIGKD.
• P. A. Gloor, M. Paasivaara, D. Schoder, and P. Willems, “Finding collaborative innovation networks through correlating performance with social network structure,” International Journal of Production Research, vol. 46, no. 5, pp. 1357–1371, 2008.
• Paetau, M. (2003). Space and social order: The challenge of computer-mediated social networks. Journal of Sociocybernetics, 4(1), 23-36.
• Preece, J. (2001) “Sociability and usability: Twenty years of chatting online,” Behavior and Information Technology Journal (20) 5, pp. 347-356.
• Terveen, L. and McDonald, D. Social Matching: A Framework and Research Agenda. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 12, 3 401-434.
• Vespignani, A. (2009). Predicting the Behavior of Techno-Social Systems. Science, 325, 425-428.
• Wellman, B. and M. Gulia (1999) “The network basis for social support: A network is more than the sum of its ties,” in B. Wellman (ed.) Networks in the Global Village. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, pp. 83-118.
• Zywica, J., & Danowski, J. (2008). The Faces of Facebookers: Investigating Social Enhancement and Social Compensation Hypotheses; Predicting Facebook™ and Offline Popularity from Sociability and Self-Esteem, and Mapping the Meanings of Popularity with Semantic Networks. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 14(1), 1-34.

Tagging / User generated metadata

• Basu, B., Haym Hirsh, and William W. Cohen (1998). Recommendation as Classification: Using Social and Content-Based Information in Recommendation. Proceedings of the Fifteenth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI98). AAAI Press/MIT Press.
• Budiu, R., Pirolli, P., & Hong, L. (2009). Remembrance of things tagged: how tagging effort affects tag production and human memory. CHI (April 3-9). Available at: http://web.mac.com/peter.pirolli/Professional/About_Me_files/1119-pirolli.pdf.
• Nelson, L., Held, C., Pirolli, P., Hong, L., Schiano, D., & Chi, E. H. (2009). With a little help from my friends: examining the impact of social annotations in sensemaking tasks.
• Nov, O., M. Naaman, and C. Ye. (2008) “What drives content tagging: The case of photos on Flickr,” in Proceedings of 26th Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 1097-1100.
• Thom-Santelli, J., M.J. Muller, and D.R. Millen (2008) “Social tagging roles: Publishers, Evangelists, Leaders,” in Proceedings of 26th Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 1041-1044.
• Trant, J., D. Bearman, and S. Chun (2007) “The eye of the beholder: steve.museum and social tagging of museum collections,” in Proceedings of International Cultural Heritage Informatics Meeting (ICHIM07), Toronto, Ontario.

Work / Organizational Contexts

• Bryant, S. L., A. Forte, and A. Bruckman (2005). “Becoming Wikipedian: Transformation of participation in a collaborative online encyclopedia,” in Proceedings of ACM GROUP, ‘05, pp. 11-20.
• Burke, M. and R. Kraut (2008). “Taking up the mop: Identifying future wikipedia administrators,” in Proceedings of 26th Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 2008, pp. 3441-3446.
• Camarinha-Matos, L. M. (2008). Advances in collaborative networked organizations. Paper presented at the Innovation in Manufacturing Networks: Eighth IFIP International Conference on Information Technology for Balanced Automation Systems, June 23-25, 2008, Porto, Portugal.
• Carnevale, A. P. (1995). Enhancing skills in the new economy. In A. Howard (Ed.), The Changing Nature of Work (pp. 238–251). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
• Cho, H. K., Trier, M., & Kim, E. (2005). The use of instant messaging in working relationship development: A case study. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 10(4).
• Cross, R. and Thomas, R.J. (2009) Driving Results Through Social Networks: How Top Organizations Leverage Networks for Performance and Growth. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley and Sons.
• Ellison, N., Lampe, C., Steinfield, C., & Vitak, J. (in press). With a little help from my Friends: Social network sites and social capital. In Z. Papacharissi (Ed.), The networked self: Identity, community and culture on social network sites. New York: Routledge.
• Ganley, D. and Lampe, C. 2009. The ties that bind: Social network principles in online communities. Decis. Support Syst. 47, 3 (Jun. 2009), 266-274.
• Hiltz, S. R. (1984). Online Communities: A Case Study of the Office of the Future, Norwood NJ: Ablex.
• Joia, L. A. (2007). Web-based Corporate Training: Some Key Success Factors.
• Malone, T. W. The Future of Work: How the New Order of Business Will Shape Your Organization, Your Management Style, and Your Life. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press, 2004.
• Markus, M. L., Manville, B., & Agres, E. C. (2000). What makes a virtual organization work? Sloan Management Review, 42(1), 13–26.
• Nunamaker Jr., J. F., Briggs, R. O., Mittleman, D. D., Vogel, D. R., & Balthazard, P. A. (1996). Lessons from a dozen years of group support systems research: a discussion of lab and field findings. Journal of Management Information Systems, 13(3), 163-207.
• Orlikowski, W. J., & Baroudi, J. J. (1991). Studying Information Technology in Organizations: Research Approaches and Assumptions. Information Systems Research, 2(1), 1-28.
• Ortega, F., J.M. Gonzalez-Barahona, and R. Gregorio (2008). “On the inequality of contributions to Wikipedia,” in Proceedings of 41st Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. Piscataway, NJ: IEEE Press.
• Østerlund, C., & Carlile, P. (2005). Relations in practice: Sorting through practice theories on knowledge sharing in complex organizations. The Information Society, 21(2), 91-107.
• Penner, L. A. (2002). Dispositional and Organizational Influences on Sustained Volunteerism: An Interactionist Perspective. Journal of Social Issues, 58(3), 447-467.
• Quan-Haase, A., Cothrel, J., & Wellman, B. (2005). Instant messaging for collaboration: A case study of a high-tech firm. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 10(4), 120-121.
• Ropo, A., & Parviainen, J. (2001). Leadership and bodily knowledge in expert organizations: epistemological rethinking. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 17(1), 1-18.
• Scarbrough, H. (2003). Why your employees don't share what they know. Knowledge Management Review, 6(2), 16-19.
• Schneider, B., Smith, D. B., & Goldstein, H. W. (2000). Attraction-selection-attrition: Toward a person–environment psychology of organizations. In B. Walsh (Ed.), New Directions in Person-Environment Psychology. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• Shumate, M., & Lipp, J. (2008). Connective collective action online: An examination of the hyperlink network structure of an NGO issue network. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 14(1), 178-201.
• Thomas, J. B., Clark, S. M., & Gioia, D. A. (1993). Strategic sensemaking and organizational performance: Linkages among scanning, interpretation, action, and outcomes. Academy of Management Journal, 36(2), 239-270.
• Tsoukas, H. (1996). The Firm as a Distributed Knowledge System: A Constructionist Approach. Strategic Management Journal, 17, 11-25.
• Von Krogh, G., Roos, J., & Slocum, K. (1994). An essay on corporate epistemology. Strategic Management Journal, Secial Issue: Strategy for New Paradigms, 53-71.
• White, Kevin F. and Wayne G. Lutters, “Insightful Illusions: Requirements Gathering for Large-Scale Groupware Systems,” Proceedings of the ACM International Conference on Supporting Group Work, ACM Press, 2005, pp. 348-349.
• Yates, J. (1989) Control Through Communication: The Rise of System in American Management. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Youth / Generational Issues

• boyd, danah. “Why Youth (heart) Social Network Sites: The Role of Networked Publics in Teenage Social Life." Youth, Identity, and Digital Media. Edited by David Buckingham. The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation Series on Digital Media and Learning. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 2008. 119–142. doi: 10.1162/dmal.9780262524834.119.
• Ito, M., Horst, H., Bittanti, M., Boyd, D., Herr-Stephenson, B., Lange, P. G., et al. (2008). Living and learning with new media: Summary of findings from the digital youth project. Retrieved November, 23, 2008, from http://digitalyouth.ischool.berkeley.edu/files/report/digitalyouth-WhitePaper.pdf.
• Komlodi, A., W. Ho, J. Preece, A. Druin, E. Golub, J. Alburo, S. Liao, A. Elkis, and P. Resnick (2007) “Evaluating a cross-cultural children's online book community: Lessons learned for sociability, usability, and Cultural exchange,” Interacting with Computers (19), pp. 494-511.
• Lange, Patricia G. 2007. "Fostering Friendship Through Video Production: How Youth use YouTube to Enrich Local Interaction." Paper presented at the International Communication Association Conference, May 27, 2007, San Francisco, California. Available at http://www.patriciaglange.org/page4/assets/Lange%20ICA%202007%20Paper.pdf.
• Lenhart, A. (2009). “Adults and social network websites,” Pew Internet and American Life Project, Tech. Rep., Jan 14, 2009 from http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2009/Adults-and-Social-Network-Websites.aspx.
• Leurs, K. (2009). "Migrant youth & online hypertext: multiple modes of becoming/belonging." Presented at the 7th European Feminist Research Conference, June 6, Utrecht University, the Netherlands.
• Leurs, K. (2009). “Be(co)ming cyber Mocro’s: Digital Media, Migration and Glocalized Youth Cultures.” Presented at the Race, Ethnicity, and (New) Media Symposium, May 2, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX.
• Martinez, Katynka. 2008. “Digital Media and New Technology.” Pp. 94-100 in Girl Culture: An Encyclopedia, edited by C. A. Mitchell and J. Reid-Walsh. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.
• Thomassen, A. (2007). Design of the netgeneration. Kybernetes, 36(9/10), 1529-1542.

SOFTWARE / WEBSITES

Design of Social and User Adaptive Systems

• Bijker, W., Hughes, T.P. and Pinch, T. (1987) The Social Construction of Technological Systems. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
• Ebenreuter, N. (2007). The dynamics of design. Kybernetes, 36(9/10), 1318-1328
• Fischer, G. (2002). Beyond ’couch potatoes’: From consumers to designers and active contri-butors. First Monday, 7(12-2).
• Fischer, G. (2007) “Designing socio-technical environments in support of meta-design and social creativity,” in Proceedings of Conference on Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL '2007), pp. 1-10.
• Fischer, G., and E. Giaccardi (2006) “Meta-Design: A framework for the future of end user development,” in H. Lieberman, F. Paternò, & V. Wulf (eds.), End User Development — Empowering People to Flexibly Employ Advanced Information and Communication Technology. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 427-457.
• Gage, S. A. (2007). Constructing the user. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 24(3), 313-322.
• Germonprez, M., Hovorka, D., & Collopy, F. (2007). A theory of tailorable technology design. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 8(6), 351-367.
• Kim, A. J. (2000) Community Building on the Web: Secret Strategies for Successful Online Communities. Berkeley. CA: Peachpit Press.
• Krippendorff, K. (2007). The cybernetics of design and the design of cybernetics. Kybernetes, 36(9/10), 1381-1392.
• Lieberman, L., Paternò, F. & Wulf, V. (eds.) (2006). End User Development — Empowering People to Flexibly Employ Advanced Information and Communication Technology. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
• McCaffrey, D. P., Faerman, S. R., & Hart, D. W. (1995). The appeal and difficulties of participative systems. Organization science, 6(6), 603.
• Oppermann, R. (2005). From User-adaptive to Context-adaptive Information Systems (Von benutzeradaptiven zu kontextadaptiven Informationssystemen). i-com, 4(3/2005), 4-14.
• Porter, J. (2008). Designing for the Social Web. Berkeley, CA: New Riders.
• Rosson, M.B., Maass, S., and Kellogg, W.A. (1988). The designer as user: Building requirements for design tools from design practice. Communications of the ACM, 31, pp. 1288-1299.
• Shneiderman, B. and C. Plaisant (2009) Designing the User Interface: Strategies for Effective Human-Computer Interaction, Fifth Edition. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley.
• Whitworth, B. and de Moor, A. (eds.) (2009) Handbook of Research on Socio-Technical Design and Social Networking. Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
• Ye, Y. and G. Fischer (2007) “Designing for participation in socio-technical software systems,” in Proceedings of 4th International Conference on Universal Access in Human-Computer Interaction, Part I C., pp 312-321.
• Zhang, P. (2008a) “Toward a Positive Design Theory: Principles for Designing Motivating Information and Communication Technology,” in M. Avital, R. Bolland, and D. Cooperrider (eds.) Designing Information and Organizations with a Positive Lens: a volume of the Advances in Appreciative Inquiry series, Amsterdam: Elsevier, pp. 45-73.

E-Mail

• Carvalho, V. R., and Cohen, W. W. (2005). On the collective classification of email speech acts. Proc. SIGIR 2005, ACM Press, New York, 345-352.
• Ducheneaut, N. and Bellotti, V. (2001). Email as habitat: an exploration of embedded personal information management, Interactions, vol. 8, no. 5, Sept/Oct 2001, 30-38.
• Elsweiler, D., Baillie, M., and Ruthven, I. (2008). Exploring memory in email refinding. ACM Trans. Information Systems, 26(4), 1-36.
• Finholt, T., & Sproull, L. S. (1990). Electronic groups at work. Organization science, 1(1), 41-64.
• Leuski, A. (2004). Email is a stage: discovering people roles from email archives. Proc SIGIR 2004, ACM Press, New York, 502-503.
• Perer, A. and Smith, M. A. (2006). Contrasting portraits of email practices: visual approaches to reflection and analysis, Proc. International Conference on Advanced Visual Interfaces (AVI 2006), 389-395
• Perer, A., Shneiderman, B., and Oard, D. W. (2006). Using rhythms of relationships to understand e-mail archives. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57(14), 1936-1948.
• Tyler, J. R., Wilkinson, D. M., and Huberman, B. A. (2003). Email as Spectroscopy: Automated Discovery of Community Structure within Organizations, Communities and Technologies, 81-96.
• Venolia, G. and Neustaedter, C. (2003). Understanding Sequence and Reply Relationships within Email Conversations: A Mixed-Model Visualization, Proc. CHI 2003, ACM Press, New York, 361-368
• Viegas, F. B., Golder, S., and Donath, J. (2006). Visualizing email content: Portraying relationships from conversational histories, Proc. SIGCHI 2006, ACM Press, New York, 979-988.
• Whittaker, S. Bellotti, V., and Gwizdka, J. (2006). Email in Personal Information Management, Communications of the ACM, 49(1), 68-73.

Newsgroups

• D. Fisher, M. Smith, and H. T. Welser. (2006). You are who you talk to: Detecting roles in usenet newsgroups. In HICSS ’06: Proc. 39th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, page 59.2, Washington, DC, USA, Jan. 2006. IEEE Computer Society.
• Viégas, F. B. and M. A. Smith (2004). “Newsgroup Crowds and AuthorLines: Visualizing the Activity of Individuals in Conversational Cyberspaces,” in Proceedings of Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, (HICSS).
• Welser, Howard T., Eric Gleave, Danyel Fisher, and Marc Smith (2007). Visualizing the signatures of social roles in online discussion groups, The Journal of Social Structure. 8(2). http://www.cmu.edu/joss/content/articles/volume8/Welser/.

Social Media Sites: Twitter/ Youtube / Facebook / Flickr

• Crandall, D., Backstrom, L., Huttenlocher, D., and Kleinberg, J. (2009) Mapping the World's Photos. Proc. 18th International World Wide Web Conference, 2009.
• Reinhardt, W., Ebner, M., Beham, G., and C. Costa. (2009). How people are using twitter during conferences. Proc. 5th EduMedia conference, 2009.
• B. Huberman, D.M. Romero, and F. Wu. Social networks that matter: Twitter under the microscope. First Monday, 14 (1-5), 2009.
• Elin, G. (2004). Is a picture worth a thousand clicks? Challenges of adding semantic data to images.Available at http://interaction.ecs.soton.ac.uk/idsw04/idsw04_final/idsw04_posters/idsw04_photoAnnotate.pdf.
• Golbeck, J., Grimes, J., and Rogers, A. (2009). Twitter Use by the U.S. Congress, Technical Report, College of Information Studies, University of Maryland (2009).
• Honey, C. and Herring, S.C. (2009). Beyond microblogging: Conversation and collaboration via twitter. Proc.. 42nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 2009. HICSS '09, 1-10, 2009.
• Hughes, A. L. and Palen, L. (2009). Twitter adoption and use in mass convergence and emergency events. In Proc. 6th International ISCRAM Conference.
• Jansen, B. J., Zhang, M, Sobel, K, and Chowdury, A. (Forthcoming). Twitter Power: Tweets as Electronic Word of Mouth. Journal of the American Society for Information Sciences and Technology.
• Jansen, B.J., Zhang, M., Sobel, K., and Chowdury, A. (2009). Micro-blogging as online word of mouth branding., Proc. 27th International conference extended abstracts on Human factors in computing systems, 3859-3864, New York, NY, USA.
• Java, A., Song, X., Finin, T., and Tseng, B. (2007). Why we twitter: understanding microblogging usage and communities, Proc. 9th WebKDD and 1st SNA-KDD 2007 workshop on Web mining and social network analysis, 56-65. ACM New York, NY, USA.
• Joinson, A. N. (2008) “Looking at, looking up or keeping up with people? Motives and uses of Facebook,” in Proceedings of 26th Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 1027-1036.
• Krishnamurthy, B., Gill, P., and Arlitt, M. (2008). A few chirps about twitter., WOSP '08: Proc. 1st workshop on Online social networks, 19-24, New York, NY , USA, 2008.
• Lampe, C., & Ellison, N. (2010). Student athlete use of Facebook. In Proceedings of the 2010 Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW 2010). Available at http://www.msu.edu/~lampecli/papers/409n-lampe.pdf.
• Lampe, C., Ellison, N. and Steinfield, C. (2008) Changes in Participation and Perception of Facebook. ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work. November 8-12. San Diego CA. Available at http://www.msu.edu/~lampecli/papers/cscw_2008_facebook.htm.
• Lampe, C., Johnston, E. and Resnick, P., Follow the Reader: Filtering Comments on Slashdot. in Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI), (San Jose, CA, 2007), ACM Press. Available at http://www.msu.edu/~lampecli/papers/chi2007_slashdot.htm.
• Lange, P. G. (2008). Publicly private and privately public: Social networking on YouTube. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(1), 361-380.
• Lenhart, A. and Fox, S. (2009). Twitter and status updating. Pew Internet &American Life Project, 2009. Retrieved on May 23, 2009 from http://www.pewinternet.org/_/media//Files/Reports/2009/PIP%20Twitter%20Memo%20FINAL.pdf.
• Leskovec J., D. Huttenlocher, J. Kleinberg. (2010). Signed Networks in Social Media. ACM SIGCHI 28th ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI), 2010.
• Makice, K. (2009). Twitter API: up and Running. O'Reilly Media, Inc, Sebastopol.
• Rotman, D., Golbeck, J., and Preece, J., The community is where the rapport is -- on sense and structure in the youtube community, Proc. 4th Int’l Conference on Communities and Technologies (2009).
• Schleyer, T., Spallek, H., Butler, B. S., Subramanian, S., Weiss, D., Poythress, M. L., et al. (2008). Facebook for scientists: requirements and services for optimizing how scientific collaborations are established. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 10(3).
• Wellman, Barry and Berkowitz, S.D. (1988). Social Structures: A Network Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Zhao, D. and Rosson, M.B. (2009). How and why people twitter: the role that micro-blogging plays in informal communication at work, GROUP '09: Proc. ACM 2009 International conference on Supporting group work, 243-252, New York, NY, USA, 2009.

Web 2.0 / 3.0

• Beer, D., & Burrows, R. (2007). Sociology and, of and in Web 2.0: Some initial considerations. Sociological Research Online, 12(5).
• Chadwick, A., (2009). Web 2.0: New Challenges for the Study of E-Democracy in an Era of Informational Exuberance. J/S: Journal of Law and Policy For the Information Society, 5(1), 1-32.
• Cronk, H. (2007). Pushing Towards Web 3.0 Organizing Tools. Social Policy, 38(1), 27-34.
• Eysenbach, G. (2008). Medicine 2.0: social networking, collaboration, participation, apomediation, and openness. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 10(3).
• Giustini, D. (2007). Web 3.0 and medicine. British Medical Journal, 335(7633), 1273.
• Harrison, T. M., & Barthel, B. (2009). Wielding new media in Web 2.0: exploring the history of engagement with the collaborative construction of media products. New Media & Society, 11(1&2), 155-178.
• O’Reilly, T. (2005). What is Web 2.0. Design Patterns and Business Models for the Next Generation of Software, 30, 2005.
• Provoost, L. Web 3.0, 3.5 and 4.0. Retrieved from, http://leeprovoost.posterous.com/.
• Weick, K. E. (2003). Enacting an Environment: The Infrastructure of Organizing. Debating organization: point-counterpoint in organization studies. R. Westwood and S. Clegg. Maiden. In R. Westwood & S. R. Clegg (Eds.), Debating Organization - Point-counterpoint in organization studies (pp. 184-194). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.

Wikipedia / Wikis

• Andrus, D. C. (2005). The Wiki and the Blog: Toward a Complex Adaptive Intelligence Community. Studies in Intelligence, 49(3).
• Beschastnikh, I., T. Kriplean, D.W. McDonald (2008) “Wikipeidan self-governance in Action: Motivating the policy lens,” in Proceedings of International Conference on Weblogs and Social Media.
• Bryant, S. L., A. Forte, and A. Bruckman (2005) “Becoming Wikipedian: Transformation of participation in a collaborative online encyclopedia,” in Proceedings of ACM GROUP, ‘05, pp. 11-20.
• Bryant, S. L., Forte, A., & Bruckman, A. (2005). Becoming Wikipedian: Transformation of participation in a collaborative online encyclopedia In Proceedings of GROUP’05, November 6-9, 2005. Sanibel Island, FL.
• Burke, M. and R. Kraut (2008) “Taking up the mop: Identifying future wikipedia administrators,” in Proceedings of 26th Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 2008, pp. 3441-3446.
• Butler, B., E. Joyce, E, and J. Pike (2008) “Don’t look now, but we’ve created a bureaucracy: The nature and roles of policies and rules in Wikipedia,” in Proceedings of 26th Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 2008, pp. 1101-1110.
• Forte, A. and A. Bruckman (2008) “Scaling consensus: Increasing decentralization in Wikipedia governance,” in Proceedings of 41st Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS).
• Forte, A., & Bruckman, A. (2005). Why do people write for Wikipedia? Incentives to contribute to open-content publishing, GROUP 05 workshop: Sustaining community: The role and design of incentive mechanisms in online systems. Sanibel Island, FL.
• Forte, A., and A. Bruckman (2008) “Why do people write for wikipedia? Incentives to contribute to open-content publishing,” in Proceedings of 41st Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS).
• Halfaker, A., Kittur, A., Kraut, R. and Riedl, J. (2009). A jury of your peers: Quality, expe-rience and ownership in wikipedia. In ACM WikiSym, Orlando, Florida, October 2009.
• Hansen, D; Munson, S (2008). "Patient-Driven Content Creation: Effectively Introducing Wiki Repositories to Virtual Support Communities", Medicine 2.0, Toronto, Canada.
• Kittur, A. and R. Kraut (2008) “Harnessing the wisdom of crowds in wikipedia: quality through coordination,” in Proceedings of Computer Supported Cooperative Work, pp. 37-46.
• Kittur, A., B. Suh, B.A. Pendleton, and E.H. Chi (2007) “He says, she says: Conflict and coordination in Wikipedia,” in Proceedings of 25th Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 453-462.
• Kittur, A., E. Chi, B.A. Pendleton, B. Suh, and T. Mytkowicz (2008) “Power of the few vs. wisdom of the crowd: Wikipedia and the rise of the bourgeoisie,” in Proceedings of Alt.CHI2007, San Jose, CA.
• Kuznetsov, S. (2006). Motivations of contributors to Wikipedia. ACM SIGCAS Computers and Society, 36(2), 1.
• McDonald, D.W, Kriplean, T., and Beschastnikh, I. (2008). Articulations of WikiWork: Uncovering Valued Work in Wikipedia through Barnstars. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 2008. Available at http://dub.washington.edu/djangosite/media/papers/tmpZ77p1r.pdf.
• McDonald, D.W, Kriplean, T., and Beschastnikh, I. (2008). Wikipedian Self-Governance in action: Motivating the Policy Lens. International Conference on Weblogs and Social Media. Available at http://dub.washington.edu/djangosite/media/papers/icwsm08.pdf.
• Munson, S. (2008). "Motivating and Enabling Organizational Memory with a Workgroup Wiki," Proceedings of the 2008 International Symposium on Wikis, Porto, Portugal.
• Nov, O. (2007) “What motivates Wikipedians?” Communications of the ACM (50) 11, pp. 60-64.
• Ortega, F., J.M. Gonzalez-Barahona, and R. Gregorio (2008) “On the inequality of contributions to Wikipedia,” in Proceedings of 41st Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. Piscataway, NJ: IEEE Press.
• Pirolli, P., Wollny, E., & Suh, B. (2009). So you know you're getting the best possible information: a tool that increases Wikipedia credibility. CHI 2009, Boston, MA.
• Rainie, L. and B. Tancer (2007) “Wikipedia: When in doubt multitude seeks it out. Pew Internet & American Life Project.” Retreived May 17, 2008, from http://Pewresearch.org/pubs/460/wikipedia.
• Riehle, D. (2006). How and Why Wikipedia Works: An Interview with Angela Beesley, Elisabeth Bauer, and Kizu Naoko. In Proceedings of the 2006 International Symposium on Wikis (WikiSym '06).
• Schroer, J. and G. Hertel (2009) “Voluntary engagement in an open Web-based encyclopedia: From reading to contributing,” Media Psychology (12), pp. 96-120.
• Suh, B., E.H. Chi, A. Kittur, and B.A. Pendleton (2008) “Lifting the veil: Improving accountability and social transparency in Wikipedia with WikiDashboard,” in Proceedings of 26th Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp.1037-1040.
• Wikipedia has a complied list of scholarly articles and studies about itself: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_in_academic_studies and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academic_studies_about_Wikipedia.
• White, Kevin F. and Wayne G. Lutters. (2007). “Mid-weight Collaborative Remembering: Wikis in the Workplace,” ACM Symposium on Computer Human Interaction for Management of Information Technology (CHIMIT), ACM Press, 2007, CD-ROM, A-5.

THEORETICAL APPROACHES

Actor-Network Theory

• Bijker, W. and Law, J., (Eds.), (1994), Shaping technology / building society: studies in sociotechnical change, The MIT Press, Cambridge Ma.
• Callon, M., (1999), 'Actor-Network Theory - the market test', in Law, J. and Hassard, J., (Eds.), Actor Network Theory and After, Blackwell Publishers / The Sociological Review, Oxford, pp. 181-195.
• Carlson, W. B., (1994), 'Artifacts and frames of meaning: Thomas A. Edison, his managers, and the cultural construction of motion pictures', in Bijker, W. E. and Law, J., (Eds.), Shaping technology / building society: studies in sociotechnical change, The MIT Press, Cambridge Ma, pp. 175-198.
• Knights, D. and Noble, F., (1997), 'Networks and partnerships in the evolution of home banking', in McMaster, T., Mumford, E., Swanson, E. B., Warboys, B. and Wastell, D., (Eds.), Facilitating technology transfer through partnership: Learning from practice and research, Chapman and Hall, London, pp. 92-107.
• Latour, B. (1996). On actor-network theory. Soziale Welt, 47(4), 369-381.
• Latour, B. (2005) Reassembling the social: An introduction to Actor-Network-Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Latour, B., (1991), 'Technology is society made durable', in Law, J., (Eds.), A sociology of monsters: essays on power, technology and domination, Routledge, London, pp. 103-131.
• Latour, B., (1996), 'Social theory and the study of computerized work sites', in Orlikowski, W. J., Walsham, G., Jones, M. R. and DeGross, J. I., (Eds.), Information technology and changes in organizational work, Chapman & Hall, London, pp. 295-307.
• Law, J. and Bijker, W., (1994), 'Postscript: technology, stability, and social theory', in Bijker, W. E. and Law, J., (Eds.), Shaping technology / building society: studies in sociotechnical change, The MIT Press, Cambridge Ma, pp. 290-308.
• Valverde, M. (2007). Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network Theory. By Bruno Latour. Law &# 38; Society Review, 41(3), 744-746.

Community of Practice

• Barab, S. A., Barnett, M., & Squire, K. (2002). Developing an empirical account of a community of practice: characterizing the essential tensions. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 11(489–542).
• Bozarth, J. (2008). The usefulness of Wenger's framework in understanding a community of practice. North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC.
• Dubé, L., Bourhis, A., & Jacob, R. (2005). The impact of structuring characteristics on the launching of virtual communities of practice. Management, 18(2), 145-166.
• Duguid, P. (2005). “The art of knowing”: social and tacit dimensions of knowledge and the limits of the community of practice. The Information Society, 21(2), 109-118.
• Faraj, S. (2005). Why Should I share? Examining Social Capital and Knowledge Contribution in Electronic Networks of Practice. MIS Quarterly, 29(1), 35-57.
• Hamburg, I., Engert, S., & Anke, P. Communities of Practice and Web 2.0 to support learning in SMEs.
• Hildreth, P., Kimble, C., & Wright, P. (2000). Communities of practice in the distributed international environment. Journal of Knowledge management, 4(1), 27-37.
• Hodkinson, H., & Hodkinson, P. (2004). Rethinking the concept of community of practice in relation to schoolteachers' workplace learning. International Journal of Training and Development, 8(21–31).
• Isckia, T., & Tounkara, T. (2006). Community of Practice and Organizational Design. Paper presented at the Global Conference on Emergent Business Phenomena in the Digital Economy.
• Lave, J. and E. Wenger (1991) Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
• Li, L. C., Grimshaw, J. M., Nielsen, C., Judd, M., Coyte, P. C., & Graham, I. D. (2009). Evolution of Wenger's concept of community of practice. Implementation Science: IS, 4, 11.
• Lin, F., & Hsueh, C. (2006). Knowledge map creation and maintenance for virtual communities of practice. Information Processing and Management, 42(2), 551-568.
• McDonald, J., & Star, C. (2008, July 1-4, 2008). The challenges of building an academic community of practice: an Australian case study. Paper presented at the HERDSA 2008 International Conference: Engaging Communities, Rotorua, New Zealand.
• Merriam, S. B., Courtenay, B., & Baumgartner, L. (2003). On becoming a witch: Learning in a marginalized community of practice. Adult education quarterly, 53(3), 170.
• Storberg-Walker, J. (2008). Wenger's Communities of Practice Revisited: A (Failed?) Exercise in Applied Communities of Practice Theory-Building Research. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 10(4), 555.
• Wenger, E. (1998) Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning and Identity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
• Wenger, E. (1999). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. New York: Cambridge university press.
• Wenger, E. (2001). Support communities of practice: A survey of community-oriented technologies. San Juan, CA.
• Wenger, E. (2005). Communities of Practice in 21st-century Organizations: Guide to establishing and facilitating intentional communities of practice. Quebec: CEFRIO.
• Wenger, E. (2005). Communities of practice: A brief introduction.
• Wenger, E., & Snyder, W. M. (2000). Communities of practice: The organizational frontier. Harvard business review, 78(1), 139-146.
• Wenger, E., McDermott, R. A., & Snyder, W. (2002). Cultivating communities of practice: A guide to managing knowledge. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
• Wenger, E., White, N., Smith, J. D., & Rowe, K. (2005). Technology for communities. In E. Wenger (Ed.), Communities of Practice in 21st-century Organizations: Guide to establishing and facilitating intentional communities of practice. Quebec: CEFRIO.

Constructivism

• Duffy, T. M., & Jonassen, D. H. (1992). Constructivism and the technology of instruction: A conversation: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
• Hawkey, K. (2003). Social constructivism and asynchronous text-based discussion: A case study with trainee teachers. Education and Information Technologies, 8(2), 165-177.
• Talja, S., Tuominen, K., & Savolainen, R. (2005). ‘Isms’ in information science: constructivism, collectivism and constructionism. Journal of Documentation, 61(1), 79-101.

Conversation Theory

• Brier, S. (2008). Ranulph Glanville: The Cybernetician of Ignorance. Cybernetics And Human Knowing, 15(1), 81-90.
• Dubberly, H., & Pangaro, P. (2009). What is conversation? How can we design for effective conversation? San Francisco, CA: Dubberly Design Office.
• Fernández, M. (2008). Project MUSE Journals Leonardo Volume 41, Number 2, April 2008 Gordon Pask: Cybernetic Polymath. Leonardo, 41(2), 163-168.
• Fernandez, M. (2008). Video: Gordon Pask-Cybernetic Polymath. Available at http://193.171.60.44/dspace/bitstream/10002/332/1/Maria_Fernandez_refresh.pdf.
• Foerster, H. (2001). On Gordon Pask. Kybernetes, 5(6), 630-636.
• Ford, N. (2004). Creativity and convergence in information science research: The roles of objectivity and subjectivity, constraint, and control. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 55(13).
• Ford, N. (2004). Modeling cognitive processes in information seeking: From Popper to Pask. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 55(9), 769-782.
• Ford, N. (2005). “Conversational” information systems. Journal of Documentation, 61(3), 362-384.
• Glanville, R. (1993). Pask: a Slight Primer. SYSTEMS RESEARCH, 10, 213-218.
• Glanville, R. (2008). A Cybernetic Musing: All the 8s. Cybernetics & Human Knowing, 15(1), 75-80.
• Heinze, A., Procter, C., & Scott, B. (2007). Use of conversation theory to underpin blended learning. International Journal of Teaching and Case Studies, 1(1), 108-120.
• Hugh, D., & Paul, P. (2009). What is conversation, and how can we design for it? Interactions, 16(4), 22-28.
• Pangaro, P. (1987). An Examination and Confirmation of a Macro Theory of Conversations through a Realization of the Protologic LP by Microscopic Simulation. Unpublished Dissertation, Brunel University, Uxbridge, UK.
• Pangaro, P. (2008). Instruction for Design and Designs for Conversation. In R. Luppicini (Ed.), Handbook of Conversation Design for Instructional Applications (pp. 35-48). Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference.
• Pask, G. (1973). A Theory of Conversations and Individuals (Exemplified by the Learning Processes on CASTE). International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 5(4), 443-566.
• Pask, G. (1975). Conversation, Cognition and Learning: A Cybernetic Theory and Methodology: Elsevier Publishing Company.
• Pask, G. (1975). The Cybernetics of Human Learning and Performance: A Guide to Theory and Research. London: Hutchinson Educational.
• Pask, G. (1975). The cybernetics of human learning and performance: a guide to theory and research. London: Hutchinson Educational.
• Pask, G. (1975). The Representation of Knowables. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 7(1), 15-134.
• Pask, G. (1976). Conversation Theory: Applications in Education and Epistemology: Elsevier.
• Pask, G. (1976). Styles and strategies of learning. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 46, 128-148.
• Pask, G. (1979). Consciousness. Cybernetics and Systems, 9(3), 211-258.
• Pask, G. (1981). Organizational closure of potentially conscious systems. Autopoiesis: A Theory of Living Organization, 265-308.
• Pask, G. (1982). SAKI: 25 years of adaptive training into the microprocessor era. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 17, 69-74.
• Pickering, A. (2002). Cybernetics and the mangle: Ashby, Beer and Pask. Social studies of science, 32(3), 413.
• Pickering, A. (2007). Ontological Theatre Gordon Pask, Cybernetics, and the Arts. Cybernetics & Human Knowing, 14(4), 43-57.
• Scott, B. (2001). Gordon Pask's Conversation Theory: A Domain Independent Constructivist Model of Human Knowing. Foundations of Science, 6(4), 343-360.
• Shumack, K. (2007). Conversations with the self-knowledge creation for designing. Kybernetes, 36(9/10), 1515-1528.

Ineraction of Actors

• Green, N. (2004). Axioms from interactions of actors theory. Kybernetes, 33(9), 1433-1462.
• Pask, G. (1992). Interactions of Actors, Theory and Some Applications (Vol. 1): University of Amsterdam. Unpublished manuscript. Available at www.cybsoc.org/PasksIAT.PDF.

Sensemaking / Sense-Making

• Bansler, J., & Havn, E. (2006). Sensemaking in technology-use mediation: Adapting groupware technology in organizations. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 15(1), 55-91.
• Dervin, B. (1977). Useful Theory for Librarianship: Communication, Not Information. Drexel Library Quarterly, 13(3), 16-32.
• Dervin, B. (1983, May 1983). An overview of sense-making research: Concepts, methods, and results to date. Paper presented at the International Communications Association Annual Meeting, Dallas, TX.
• Dervin, B. (1999). On studying information seeking methodologically: the implications of connecting metatheory to method. Information Processing and Management, 35(6), 727-750.
• Dervin, B. (2003). Given a context by any other name: Metholdological tools for taming the unruly beast. In B. Dervin, L. Foreman-Wernet & E. Lauterbach (Eds.), Sense-Making Methodology Reader: Selected writings of Brenda Dervin (pp. 111-132). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
• Dervin, B., & Nilan, M. (1986). Information needs and uses. Annual review of information science and technology, 21, 3-33.
• Dervin, B., Fisher, K. E., Durrance, J., Ross, C., Savolainen, R., & Solomon, P. (2005). Reports of the demise of the" user" have been greatly exaggerated: Dervin's sense-making and the methodological resuscitation of the user-looking backwards, looking forward. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 42(1).
• DiMicco, J. M., & Millen, D. R. (2008). People Sensemaking with Social Networking Sites. Paper presentae at the sensemaking Workship, CHI 2008, April 5-10, Florence Italy. Available at http://dmrussell.googlepages.com/DiMicco-people-sensemaking-CHI08-fin.pdf.
• Eisenberg, E. M. (2006). Karl Weick and the aesthetics of contingency. Organization Studies, 27(11), 1693.
• Faraj, S., Kwon, D., & Watts, S. (2004). Contested artifact: technology sensemaking, actor networks, and the shaping of the Web browser. Information Technology & People, 17(2), 186-209.
• Frost, P., & Morgan, G. (1983). Symbols and sensemaking: The realization of a framework. In L. R. Pondy, P. J. Frost, G. Morgan & T. C. Danderidge (Eds.), Organizational symbolism (pp. 207-237). Greenwhich, CT: JAI.
• Gasson, S. (2005). The dynamics of sensemaking, knowledge, and expertise in collaborative, boundary-spanning design. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 10(4), 14.
• Gioia, D. A. (2006). On Weick: an appreciation. Organization Studies, 27(11), 1709-1721.
• Gioia, D. A., Thomas, J. B., Clark, S. M., & Chittipeddi, K. (1994). Symbolism and strategic change in academia: The dynamics of sensemaking and influence. Organization science, 5(3), 363.
• Kaylor, B. (2008). Excommunicated identity: Sensemaking among pastors of disfellowshipped churches. Paper presented at the NCA 94th Annual Convention, November 20, 2008. from http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p259705_index.html
• Mew, L. Q. L. (2009). Online Social Networking: A task-person-technology fit perspective. Unpublished Dissertation, George Washington University, District of Columbia.
• Muhren, W. J., Van Den Eede, G., & Van de Walle, B. (2008, May 2008). Sensemaking as a Methodology for ISCRAM Research: Information Processing in an Ongoing Crisis. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 5th ISCRAM Conference, Washington DC.
• Naumer, C. M., Fisher, K. E., & Dervin, B. Sense-Making: A Methodological Perspective.
• Sutcliffe, K. M., Brown, A. D., & Putnam, L. L. (2006). Introduction to the Special Issue: 'Making Sense of Organizing: in Honor of Karl Weick'. Organization Studies, 27(11), 1573-1578.
• Weber, K., & Glynn, M. A. (2006). Making sense with institutions: context, thought and action in Karl Weick's theory. Organization Studies, 27(11), 1639.
• Weick, K. E. (1993). The collapse of sensemaking in organizations: The Mann Gulch disaster. Administrative Science Quarterly, 628-652.
• Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations: Sage Publications Inc.
• Weick, K. E. (2005). Managing the Unexpected: Complexity as Distributed Sensemaking. In R. R. McDaniel Jr. & D. J. Driebe (Eds.), Uncertainty and Surprise in Complex Systems (pp. 51-65). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
• Weick, K. E. (2006). Faith, evidence, and action: Better guesses in an unknowable world. Organization Studies, 27(11), 1723-1736.
• Weick, K. E. (2007). The generative properties of richness. The Academy of Management Journal (AMJ), 50(1), 14-19.
• Weick, K. E., & Roberts, K. H. (1993). Collective mind in organizations: Heedful interrelating on flight decks. Administrative Science Quarterly, 357-381.
• Weick, K. E., & Sutcliffe, K. M. (2001). Managing the unexpected: Assuring high performance in an age of complexity: Jossey-Bass San Francisco.
• Weick, K. E., & Sutcliffe, K. M., & Obstfeld, D. (2005). Organizing and the process of sensemaking. Organization science, 16(4), 409.

Structuration Theory

• Giddens, A. (1979). Central problems in social theory: Action, structure, and contradiction in social analysis: University of California Press.
• Giddens, A. (1986). The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration: University of California press.

Other Theories

• Figueroa, E. (1994). Sociolinguistic metatheory. Oxford, UK: Pergamon.
• Flores, R. A. (2002). Modelling Agent Conversations for Action. University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta.
• Olson, G. M., Malone, T. W., and Smith, J. B. (Eds.) Coordination Theory and Collaboration Technology. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, 2001.