Contextual design: defining customer-centered systems
Contextual design: defining customer-centered systems
Ask-an-expert services analysis
Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology
Communities in Cyberspace
Proceedings of the 2007 ACM SIGMIS CPR conference on Computer personnel research: The global information technology workforce
Internet-scale collection of human-reviewed data
Proceedings of the 16th international conference on World Wide Web
Predictors of answer quality in online Q&A sites
Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
Knowledge sharing and yahoo answers: everyone knows something
Proceedings of the 17th international conference on World Wide Web
Design lessons from the fastest q&a site in the west
Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
IP-QAT: in-product questions, answers, & tips
Proceedings of the 24th annual ACM symposium on User interface software and technology
Participation in an online mathematics community: differentiating motivations to add
Proceedings of the ACM 2012 conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work
A deniable and efficient question and answer service over ad hoc social networks
Information Retrieval
Should your MOOC forum use a reputation system?
Proceedings of the 17th ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work & social computing
Proceedings of the 17th ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work & social computing
Sharing Knowledge and Expertise: The CSCW View of Knowledge Management
Computer Supported Cooperative Work
| Hi-index | 0.01 |
Posing a question to an online question and answer community does not guarantee a response. Significant prior work has explored and identified members' motivations for contributing to communities of collective action (e.g., Yahoo! Answers); in contrast it is not well understood why members choose to not answer a question they have already read. To explore this issue, we surveyed 135 active members of Yahoo! Answers. We show that top and regular contributors experience the same reasons to not answer a question: subject nature and composition of the question; perception of how the questioner will receive, interpret and react to their response; and a belief that their response will lose its meaning and get lost in the crowd if too many responses have already been given. Informed by our results, we discuss opportunities to improve the efficacy of the question and answer process, and to encourage greater contributions through improved design.