Open Source Software User Communities: A Study of Participation in Linux User Groups

Abstract

We conceptualize participation in Linux user groups (LUGs) in terms of group-referent intentional actions and investigate cognitive (attitudes, perceived behavioral control, identification with the open source movement), affective (positive and negative anticipated emotions), and social (social identity) determinants of participation and its consequences on Linux-related behaviors of users. This survey-based study, conducted with 402 active LUG members representing 191 different LUGs from 23 countries and employing structural equation modeling methodology, supports the proposed model. Furthermore, we find that the Linux user's experience level moderates the extent of the LUG's social influence and its impact on the user's participation. We conclude with a consideration of the managerial and research implications of the study's findings.open source software, Linux, virtual communities, novice versus experienced users, social identity, we-intentions, anticipated emotions, model of goal-directed behavior

The Multiple In-group Identity Framework

“…For example, researchers have used subculture (Schouten & McAlexander, 1995), small group (Bagozzi & Dholakia, 2006a), user-group (Bagozzi & Dholakia, 2006b), nested sub-community (Brodsky & Marx, 2001), and fan group (Bernache-Assollant et al, 2011). The term subgroup delineates that an entity exists within a superordinate group (See Figure 1).…”

Filthy Lucre? Innovative Communities, Identity, and Commercialization

“…Working on open source, free software is more than an economic choice; it is also a philosophic approach. Free flow of information, and its formal expression in the open source movement, represents an idealistic statement about the nature of property and ownership, which, in turn, motivates the communities of open source developers (Bagozzi and Dholakia 2006). This perspective is not limited to open source developers, and has been found in other communities as well, such as among innovators or scientists whose goal is to increase their standing within a peer community (Jeppesen andFrederiksen 2006, Stern 2004).…”

“…These online communities create arenas where "knowledge collaboration can occur in unparalleled scale and scope" (Faraj et al 2011) and hence represent profoundly generative environments for new innovation. Indeed, one of the most studied examples of innovative online communities, Open Source Software (OSS) (Bagozzi and Dholakia 2006, Von Krogh and von Hippel 2006, Lerner and Tirole 2002, includes over 800,000 individuals and has produced software code that is both worth tens of billions of dollars and is critical to the vast majority of large corporations (Crowston et al 2012).…”

Os efeitos da participação em comunidades virtuais de marca no comportamento do consumidor: proposição e teste de um modelo teórico

“…Os primeiros estudos qualitativos sobre o tema buscaram definir o que é uma comunidade virtual de marca e quais são as suas principais características e implicações estratégicas (Kozinets, 2002;McAlexander et al, 2002;Muñiz & O'Guinn, 2001). Outros autores dedicaram-se a desenvolver e testar modelos teóricos sobre as relações entre os constructos formadores e resultantes das atividades em comunidades virtuais em geral e nas comunidades de marca em particular (Algesheimer et al, 2005;Bagozzi & Dholakia, 2002;Bagozzi & Dholakia, 2006a, 2006bBagozzi, Dholakia, & Mookerje, 2004;Dholakia et al, 2004). No Brasil, a partir dos últimos anos, alguns estudos, em sua maioria qualitativos, têm sido apresentados sobre o tema em congressos e eventos, a partir dos resultados e repercussões dos estudos internacionais (ver Fonseca, Gonçalves, Oliveira, & Tinoco, 2008;Freitas & Leão, 2009).…”