User comments: motives and inhibitors to write and read
User comments: motives and inhibitors to write and read
复制标题
用户评论：写作和阅读的动机和阻碍因素
DOI：
10.1080/1369118x.2014.997268
复制
发表时间：
2015
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Christian Pfaffinger
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Nina Springer;Ines Engelmann;Christian Pfaffinger
用户评论将用户的观点嵌入到文章的上下文中，为读者提供形成意见的额外信息，这可能会增强审议过程。但这些是人们评论网络新闻并阅读这些评论的唯一原因吗？这项研究通过对德国近650名评论者、潜伏者和非用户的调查，考察了激励或抑制和限制这种参与的因素。从规范的角度来看，结果是矛盾的。结果表明，评论者参与新闻报道和与其他用户讨论的动机是社交互动动机。然而，数据表明，评论者并没有获得理想的认知满足感。据推测，他们的交流是出于社交目的，而不是出于故意。阅读评论既受认知动机的推动，也受娱乐动机的推动，但回归分析表明，娱乐维度−(通常被认为与深思熟虑过程无关)−更稳定。低水平的讨论不仅会增加评论的阅读频率，还会降低潜伏者的满意度。同样，非用户更是对低质量的讨论感到沮丧。他们认为这样的参与活动是浪费时间，不愿意注册。
User comments allow ‘annotative reporting’ by embedding users’ viewpoints within an article's context, providing readers with additional information to form opinions, which can potentially enhance deliberative processes. But are these the only reasons why people comment on online news and read these comments? This study examines factors that motivate, or demotivate and constrict, such participation by surveying nearly 650 commenters, lurkers, and non-users in Germany. From a normative perspective, the results are ambivalent. The results show that commenters are driven by social-interactive motives to participate in journalism, and to discuss with other users. However, the data suggest that commenters do not obtain cognitive gratifications to the desired extent. Presumably, their exchange is socially and not deliberatively motivated. Reading comments is fuelled by both cognitive and entertainment motives, but regression analyses show that the entertainment dimension − a dimension that is not usually considered to be linked to deliberation processes − is the more stable one. A low standard of discussions not only increases the frequency at which comments are read, but also reduces lurkers’ satisfaction. Similarly, non-users are even more frustrated by the low quality of discussions. They consider such participation activities to be a waste of time, and are not willing to register.