Using metrics to describe the participative stances of members within discussion forums.
BACKGROUND
Researchers using forums and online focus groups need to ensure they are safe and need tools to make best use of the data. We explored the use of metrics that would allow better forum management and more effective analysis of participant contributions.


OBJECTIVE
To report retrospectively calculated metrics from self-harm discussion forums and to assess whether metrics add to other methods such as discourse analysis. We asked (1) which metrics are most useful to compare and manage forums, and (2) how metrics can be used to identify the participative stances of members to help manage discussion forums.


METHODS
We studied the use of metrics in discussion forums on self-harm. SharpTalk comprised five discussion forums, all using the same software but with different forum compositions. SharpTalk forums were similar to most moderated forums but combined support and general social chat with online focus groups discussing issues on self-harm. Routinely recorded time-stamp data were used to derive metrics of episodes, time online, pages read, and postings. We compared metrics from the forums with views from discussion threads and from moderators. We identified patterns of participants' online behavior by plotting scattergrams and identifying outliers and clusters within different metrics.


RESULTS
In comparing forums, important metrics seem to be number of participants, number of active participants, total time of all participants logged on in each 24 hours, and total number of postings by all participants in 24 hours. In examining participative stances, the important metrics were individuals' time logged per 24 hours, number of episodes, mean length of episodes, number of postings per 24 hours, and location within the forum of those postings. Metric scattergrams identified several participative stances: (1) the "caretaker," who was "always around," logged on for a much greater time than most other participants, posting but mainly in response to others and rarely initiating threads, (2) the "butterfly," who "flitted in and out," had a large number of short episodes, (3) two "discussants," who initiated many more discussion threads than anybody else and posted proportionately less in the support room, (4) "here for you," who posted frequently in the support room in response to other participants' threads, and (5) seven "people in distress," who posted many comments in the support room in comparison with their total postings and tended to post on their own threads.


CONCLUSIONS
Real-time metrics may be useful: (1) by offering additional ways of comparing different discussion forums helping with their management, and (2) by identifying participative stances of individuals so allowing better moderation and support of forums, and more effective use of the data collected. For this to happen, researchers need to publish metrics for their discussion forums and software developers need to offer more real-time metrics facilities.
Faculty of Health, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, United Kingdom. ray.jones@plymouth.ac.uk
Ray
R
Jones
Siobhan
S
Sharkey
Janet
J
Smithson
Tamsin
T
Ford
Tobit
T
Emmens
Elaine
E
Hewis
Bryony
B
Sheaves
Christabel
C
Owens
D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D003142:Communication; D019058:Community Networks; D003199:Computer Systems; D003299:Cooperative Behavior; D017144:Focus Groups / Q000379:methods*; D006801:Humans; D020407:Internet; D008875:Middle Aged; D009862:Online Systems; D012189:Retrospective Studies; D016728:Self-Injurious Behavior; D012944:Social Support; D012984:Software; D011795:Surveys and Questionnaires; D013997:Time Factors; D055815:Young Adult
J Med Internet Res. 2009 Mar 27;11(1):e11
19329408
Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 2010 Oct;100(1):16-23
20236725
Patient Educ Couns. 2007 Jun;66(3):263-9
17320336
J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs. 2002 Jul-Aug;31(4):418-27
12146931
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2009 Mar 03;9:15
19257883