Communicative genres as organising structures in online communities – of team players and storytellers
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In this paper, we examine the question of how participants in online communities enact organising structures. We conduct an empirical study based on interpretative and quantitative data and analysis, and argue that communicative genres fulfil the role of intangible organising structures in online communities. These structures are important in the absence of more formal or tangible structures. Furthermore, we take into account participants' position in the social network and find that distinct participant clusters use communicative genres quite differently. In particular, we distinguish four participant clusters using distinct genre repertoires: team players, who make short, advising messages; storytellers, who post less but longer and very social messages; utility posters, who share knowledge but neglect social interaction; and all‐round talents, who engage in various actions and have average messages, without blinking out in any activity. With this research, we provide an analytical tool that allows practitioners to assess community activities, and inform and evaluate strategies for change toward improved outcomes.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it