This study explores lurking as a literacy practice and poses two questions: In what ways do so-called Facebook lurkers use neighborhood groups to engage in literacy practices? What gratifications are sought when individuals choose to lurk and engage in these literacy practices in Facebook neighborhood groups? A community mapping of the literacy practices of NYC suburban neighborhood Facebook groups was conducted by 203 participants, and 18 of those participants were interviewed. Through lurking, participants sought to gratify desires to (1) understand a divergent point of view, (2) verify information, (3) suppress the spread of information, (4) pivot to offline social action, (5) advance professionally, and (6) maintain quality of community life. The study also introduces the concepts of receptive reading, participatory restraint, and protective curation as ways of reading that individuals engage in while gratifying these desires.
AntinJCheshireC (2010) Readers are not free-riders: reading as a form of participation on Wikipedia. In: Proceedings of the 2010 ACM conference on computer-supported cooperative work. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1718918.1718942
2.
AsgharH (2015) Measuring information seeking through Facebook: scale development and initial evidence of Information Seeking in Facebook Scale (ISFS). Computers in Human Behavior52: 259–270.
3.
BartonDHamiltonM (2000) Literacy practices. In: BartonDHamiltonMIvanicR (eds) Situated Literacies: Reading and Writing in Context. London: Routledge, pp. 7–15.
CharmazK (2001) Grounded theory: objectivist and constructivist methods. In: DenzinNKLincolnYS (eds) Handbook of Qualitative Research. London: SAGE, pp. 509–536.
8.
CheungCMKLeeMKO (2009) Understanding the sustainability of a virtual community: model development and empirical test. Journal of Information Science35(3): 279–298.
DennenVP (2008) Pedagogical lurking: student engagement in non-posting discussion behavior. Computers in Human Behavior24(4): 1624–1633.
11.
DhirAChenGMChenS (2017) Why do we tag photographs on Facebook? Proposing a new gratifications scale. New Media & Society19(4): 502–521.
12.
DunsmoreKOrdoñez-JasisRHerreraG (2013) Welcoming their worlds: rethinking literacy instruction through community mapping. Language Arts90(5): 327–338.
13.
EdelmannNKrimmerRParycekP (2017) How online lurking contributes value to E-participation: a conceptual approach to evaluating the role of lurkers in e-participation. In: Fourth international conference on eDemocracy & eGovernment (ICEDEG), Quito, Ecuador, 19–21 April, pp. 86–93. Washington, DC: IEEE.
14.
EllisonNTriệuPSchoenebeckS, et al. (2020) Why we don’t click: interrogating the relationship between viewing and clicking in social media contexts by exploring the “non-click.”Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication25(6): 402–426.
15.
FramS (2013) The constant comparative analysis method outside of Grounded Theory. The Qualitative Report18(1): 1–25.
16.
FrancisJJJohnstonMRobertsonC, et al. (2010) What is an adequate sample size? Operationalising data saturation for theory-based interview studies. Psychology & Health25(10): 1229–1245.
17.
GlaserBGStraussAL (1967) The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Chicago, IL: Aldine.
18.
GroveR (1988) An analysis of the constant comparative method. Qualitative Studies in Education1(3): 273–279.
19.
GuestGBunceAJohnsonL (2006) How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field Methods18: 59–82.
20.
GuestGNameyEChenM (2020) A simple method to assess and report thematic saturation in qualitative research. PloS one15(5): e0232076. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0232076
21.
GülnarBBalciŞÇakirV (2010) Motivations of Facebook, YouTube and similar website users. Bilig54: 161–184.
22.
HoneychurchSBozkurtASinghL, et al. (2017) Learners on the periphery: lurkers as invisible learners. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-learning21(1): 192–211.
23.
JacksonTBrysonB (2018) Community mapping as a tool for developing culturally relevant pedagogy. The New Educator14: 109–128.
KellerP (2014) Community mapping. In: CoghlanDBrydon-MillerM (eds) The SAGE Encyclopedia of Action Research. New York: SAGE, pp. 147–147.
28.
KollockPSmithM (1996) Managing the virtual commons: cooperation and conflict in computer communities. In: HerringS (ed.) Computer Mediated Communication. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 109–128.
LeechNOnwuegbuzieA (2008) Qualitative data analysis: a compendium of techniques and a framework for selection for school psychology research and beyond. School Psychology Quarterly23(4): 587–604.
LimESipleyGMMohamedLS, et al. (2021) Declarations of interdependence: how media literacy practices are developed, negotiated, rejected, and exploited across social media platforms. AOIR Selected Papers of Internet Research. Epub ahead of print 15 September. DOI: 10.5210/spir.v2021i0.12298.
33.
LueMRemusW (2014) Uses and gratifications and acceptance of web-based information services: an integrated model. Computers in Human Behavior38: 281–295.
34.
McNeilJ (2020) Lurking: How a Person Became a User. New York: MCD.
35.
MalikADhirANieminenM (2015) Uses and gratifications of digital photo sharing on Facebook. Telematics and Informatics33(1): 129–138.
36.
MarkhamA (2013) Fieldwork in social media. Qualitative Communication Research2(4): 434–446.
37.
MarkhamABuchananE (2012) Ethical Decision-Making and Internet Research: Recommendations from the AoIR Ethics Working Committee (Version 2.0). Chicago, IL: AoIR.
38.
MenonDMeghanaH (2021) Unpacking the uses and gratifications of Facebook: a study among college teachers in India. Computers in Human Behavior Reports3: 100066.
39.
MorganMFischoffBBostromA, et al. (2002) Risk Communication: A Mental Models Approach. New York: Cambridge University Press.
40.
MullerM (2012) Lurking as personal trait or situational disposition? Lurking and contributing in enterprise social media. In: Proceedings of the ACM conference on computer supported cooperative work, Seattke, WA, 11–15 February, pp. 253–256. New York: ACM.
41.
NameyEGuestGMcKennaK, et al. (2016) Evaluating bang for the buck: a cost-effectiveness comparison between individual interviews and focus groups based on thematic saturation levels. American Journal of Evaluation37(3): 425–440.
42.
NeelanMFetterS (2010) Lurking: a challenge or a fruitful strategy? A comparison between lurkers and active participants in an online corporate community of practice. International Journal of Knowledge and Learning6(4): 269–284.
43.
NonneckeB (2000) Lurking in email based distribution lists. Doctoral Dissertation, London South Bank University, London.
NonneckeBPreeceJ (2003) Silent participants: getting to know lurkers better. In: LuegCFisherD (eds) From Usenet to Cowebs: Interacting with Social Information Spaces. New York: Springer, pp. 110–132.
PapacharissiZMendelsonA (2011) Toward a new(er) sociability: uses, gratifications and social capital on Facebook. In: PapathanassopoulosS (ed.) Media Perspectives for the 21st Century. London: Routledge. pp. 212–230.
48.
ParkNKeeKFValenzuelaS (2009) Being immersed in social networking environment: Facebook groups, uses and gratifications, and social outcomes. Cyberpsychology Behavior12: 729–733.
PopovacMFullwoodC (2019) The psychology of online lurking. In: Attrill-SmithAFullwoodCKeepM, et al. (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Cyberpsychology. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 285–305.
51.
Quan-HaaseAYoungAL (2010) Uses and gratifications of social media: a comparison of Facebook and instant messaging. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society30(5): 350–361.
52.
RidingsCGefenDArinzeB (2006) Psychological barriers: lurker and poster motivation and behavior in online communities. Communications for the Association of Information Systems18(1): 26.
53.
RosenblattLM (1994) The Reader, the Text, the Poem: The Transactional Theory of the Literary Work. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.
54.
RubinAM (1994) Media uses and effects: a uses-and-gratifications perspective. In: ZillmannJBryantD (eds) Media Effects: Advances in Theory and Research. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 417–436.
55.
SikkensESanMVSieckelinckS, et al. (2016) Participant recruitment through social media: lessons learned from a qualitative radicalization study using Facebook. Field Methods29(2): 130–139.
56.
SipleyGM (2020) “Lurker” literacies: living in/through neighborhood Facebook Groups. AoIR Selected Papers of Internet Research. Available at: https://doi.org/10.5210/spir.v2020i0.11331
57.
StreetB (2003) What’s “new” in new literacy studies?Current Issues in Comparative Education5(2): 77–91.
58.
SunNRauPPLMaL (2014) Understanding lurkers in online communities: a literature review. Computers in Human Behavior38: 100–117.
59.
WineburgSMcGrewS (2019) Lateral reading and the nature of expertise: reading less and learning more when evaluating digital information. Teachers College Record121(11): 1–40.
