Understanding Ambiguity in Knowledge, Value and Institutional Structure: A Case Study of Chinese Open Network Community

α
Yao Jin
Yao Jin

Send Message

To: Author

Understanding Ambiguity in Knowledge, Value and Institutional Structure: A Case Study of Chinese Open Network Community

Article Fingerprint

ReserarchID

QC478

Understanding Ambiguity in Knowledge, Value and Institutional Structure: A Case Study of Chinese Open Network Community Banner

AI TAKEAWAY

Connecting with the Eternal Ground
  • English
  • Afrikaans
  • Albanian
  • Amharic
  • Arabic
  • Armenian
  • Azerbaijani
  • Basque
  • Belarusian
  • Bengali
  • Bosnian
  • Bulgarian
  • Catalan
  • Cebuano
  • Chichewa
  • Chinese (Simplified)
  • Chinese (Traditional)
  • Corsican
  • Croatian
  • Czech
  • Danish
  • Dutch
  • Esperanto
  • Estonian
  • Filipino
  • Finnish
  • French
  • Frisian
  • Galician
  • Georgian
  • German
  • Greek
  • Gujarati
  • Haitian Creole
  • Hausa
  • Hawaiian
  • Hebrew
  • Hindi
  • Hmong
  • Hungarian
  • Icelandic
  • Igbo
  • Indonesian
  • Irish
  • Italian
  • Japanese
  • Javanese
  • Kannada
  • Kazakh
  • Khmer
  • Korean
  • Kurdish (Kurmanji)
  • Kyrgyz
  • Lao
  • Latin
  • Latvian
  • Lithuanian
  • Luxembourgish
  • Macedonian
  • Malagasy
  • Malay
  • Malayalam
  • Maltese
  • Maori
  • Marathi
  • Mongolian
  • Myanmar (Burmese)
  • Nepali
  • Norwegian
  • Pashto
  • Persian
  • Polish
  • Portuguese
  • Punjabi
  • Romanian
  • Russian
  • Samoan
  • Scots Gaelic
  • Serbian
  • Sesotho
  • Shona
  • Sindhi
  • Sinhala
  • Slovak
  • Slovenian
  • Somali
  • Spanish
  • Sundanese
  • Swahili
  • Swedish
  • Tajik
  • Tamil
  • Telugu
  • Thai
  • Turkish
  • Ukrainian
  • Urdu
  • Uzbek
  • Vietnamese
  • Welsh
  • Xhosa
  • Yiddish
  • Yoruba
  • Zulu

Abstract

Being a space for organizations to realize their value, it is necessary to minimize the structural Uncertainty of the virtual world. The analysis shows structural problems are the internal logical starting point of ambiguity in the network community and the underlying cause of gradual accumulation and precipitation in social tension. Analyzing the structural stain from the dimension of knowledge, value, and institutional structure in the network community, multifarious ambiguity is found in Chinese network governance. A representative survey object is selected to understand Chinese network governance after COVID 2019. The paper choose The Changtze River Cloud community on TikTok as the survey unit to analyze the public space management satisfaction ratio. Through theoretical discussion and case study, specific countermeasures are proposed, such as broadening the channels of expression, constructing cultural diversity in virtual space, and establishing clear specification standardization.

Generating HTML Viewer...

References

49 Cites in Article
  1. Maria Alessio,Tommaso Braccini,Øystein Federici (2017). Tensions in Online Communities: The Case of a Mass Size e Participation Initiative.
  2. Aron Siegel,Jan Maarten Schraagen (2014). Team reflection makes resilience-related knowledge explicit through collaborative sense making: observation study at a rail post.
  3. Norin Arshed,Sara Carter,Colin Mason (2014). The ineffectiveness of entrepreneurship policy: is policy formulation to blame?.
  4. Michael Barrett,Eivor Oborn,Wanda Orlikowski (2016). Creating Value in Online Communities: The Sociomaterial Configuring of Strategy, Platform, and Stakeholder Engagement.
  5. Carla Wilkina,John Campbell,Stephen Moore,Jason Simpson (2018). Creating value in online communities through governance and stakeholder engagement.
  6. Chidiebere Ofoegbu,Mark New,Admire Nyamwanza,Dian Spear (2020). Understanding the current state of collaboration in the production and dissemination of adaptation knowledge in Namibia.
  7. Christian Severin Sauer,Thomas Roth-Berghofer (2014). Extracting knowledge from web communities and linked data for case-based reasoning systems.
  8. Claire Connolly,Knox (2013). Public Administrators' Use of Social Media Platforms: Overcoming the Legitimacy Dilemma?.
  9. Daniela Cristofoli,Josip Markovic,Marco Meneguzzo (2014). Governance, management and performance in public networks: How to be successful in shared-governance networks.
  10. Guan‐lin Chen,Shu‐chen Yang,Shung‐ming Tang (2013). Sense of virtual community and knowledge contribution in a P3 virtual community.
  11. Hilde Guda Van Noort,Eva Voorveld,Van Reijmersdal (2012). Interactivity in Brand Web Sites: Cognitive, Affective, and Behavioral Responses Explained by Consumers' Online Flow Experience.
  12. Ham Juyeon,Lee Jae-Nam,Kim Dan,J,Choi Byounggu (2015). Open Innovation Maturity Model for the Government: An Open System Perspective.
  13. Lei Huang,Amelia Clarke,Natalie Heldsinger,Wen Tian (2019). The communication role of social media in social marketing: a study of the community sustainability knowledge dissemination on LinkedIn and Twitter.
  14. Jae Kook,Lee,Jihyang Choi,Cheonsoo Kim,Yonghwan Kim (2014). Social Media, Network Heterogeneity, and Opinion Polarization.
  15. Jifeng Ma,Yaobin Lu,Sumeet Gupta (2019). User innovation evaluation: Empirical evidence from an online game community.
  16. Jingbei Wang,Naiding Yang (2019). Dynamics of collaboration network community and exploratory innovation: the moderation of knowledge networks.
  17. Jing Song,Jin Chen (2019). Entrepreneur social network, organizational legitimacy, and entrepreneurial enterprise resources bricolage.
  18. José Luis,Martí (2017). Pluralism and consensus in deliberative democracy.
  19. Julio Clempner,Alexander Poznyak (2019). Solving Transfer Pricing Involving Collaborative and Non-cooperative Equilibria in Nash and Stackelberg Games: Centralized-Decentralized Decision Making.
  20. Junfeng Chu,Yingming Wang,Xinwang Liu,Yicong Liu (2020). Social network community analysis based large-scale group decision making approach with incomplete fuzzy preference relations.
  21. Katrin Eling,Abbie Griffin,Fred Langerak (2014). Intuition in Fuzzy Front-End Decision-Making: A Conceptual Framework.
  22. G Kelly,G Mulgan,S Muers (2002). Creating Public Value: An Analytical Framework for Public Service Reform.
  23. Tetsuro Kobayashi (2010). Bridging Social Capital in Online Communities: Heterogeneity and Social Tolerance of Online Game Players in Japan.
  24. Lichen Zhen,Bei Yan,Jack Tang,Yuanfeixue Nan,Aimei Yang (2023). Social network dynamics, bots, and community-based online misinformation spread: Lessons from anti-refugee and COVID-19 misinformation cases.
  25. Songting Pang (2017). Viewing the strategic development of China’s industrial construction based on the experience of Germany.
  26. C Liu,W Shan,J Yu (2011). Shaping the interdisciplinary knowledge network of China: A network analysis based on citation data from 1981 to 2010.
  27. Luc Fransen (2015). The politics of meta-governance in transnational private sustainability governance.
  28. Luping Wang,Aimei Yang,Kjerstin Thorson (2021). Serial participants of social media climate discussion as a community of practice: a longitudinal network analysis.
  29. Zdeněk Plíva,Jindra Drábková,Jan Koprnický,Leoš Petržílka (2014). Guidelines for Writing Bachelor or Master Thesis.
  30. Mark Boukes (2019). Social network sites and acquiring current affairs knowledge: The impact of Twitter and Facebook usage on learning about the news.
  31. H Mark,Moor (2000). Managing for value: Organizational strategy in for-profit, nonprofit, and governmental organizations.
  32. P Norris (2001). Digital Divide: Civic Engagement. Information Poverty, and the Internet Worldwide.
  33. Janine O'flynn (2007). From New Public Management to Public Value: Paradigmatic Change and Managerial Implications.
  34. Peter Raeymaeckers,Caroline Vermeiren,Charlotte Noël,Stijn Van Puyvelde,Jurgen Willems (2017). The Governance of Public–Nonprofit Service Networks: A Comparison Between Three Types of Governance Roles.
  35. Peter Raeymaeckers (2020). The Governance of Public-Nonprofit Service Networks: A Comparison Between Three Types of Governance Roles.
  36. Punam Bedi,Chhavi Sharma (2016). Community detection in social networks.
  37. Robert Merton (1938). Social Structure and Anomie.
  38. E Rogers (2003). Diffusion of Innovation (5th).
  39. Stéphanie Dameron,Christophe Torset (2014). The Discursive Construction of Strategists' Subjectivities: Towards a Paradox Lens on Strategy.
  40. C Stohl,M Stohl,P Leonardi (2016). Managing opacity: Information visibility and transparency paradox in the digital age.
  41. Stefania Castello,Catherine Darker,Joanne Vance,Nadine Dougall,Linda Bauld,Catherine Hayes (2022). The We Can Quit2 Smoking Cessation Trial: Knowledge Exchange and Dissemination Following a Community-Based Participatory Research Approach.
  42. Maxim Sytch,Adam Tatarynowicz (2014). Exploring the Locus of Invention: The Dynamics of Network Communities and Firms' Invention Productivity.
  43. A Thomas,Bryer (2007). Toward a Relevant Agenda for a Responsive Public Administration.
  44. Umor Sarimah,Zakaria,Noor Sulaiman,Adwa (2020). Effectiveness of Follow-Up on Performance Auditing Issues in Practice: A Governance Network Perspective.
  45. Vindaya Senadheera,Matthew Warren,Shona Leitch (2017). Social media as an information system: improving the technological agility.
  46. Georgios Volker Stocker,William Smarag Dakis,Steven Lehr,Bauer (2017). The growing complexity of content delivery networks: Challenges and implications for the Internet ecosystem.
  47. Yefeng Ruan,Arjan Durresi (2016). A survey of trust management systems for online social communities – Trust modeling, trust inference and attacks.
  48. Yijia Jing,Yefei Hu (2017). From Service Contracting to Collaborative Governance: Evolution of Government–Nonprofit Relations.
  49. F Yuqing Ren,Sara Harper,Loren Drenner,Sara Terveen,John Kiesler,Robert Riedl,Kraut (2012). Building Member Attachment in Online Communities: Applying Theories of Group Identity and Interpersonal Bonds.

Funding

No external funding was declared for this work.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

No ethics committee approval was required for this article type.

Data Availability

Not applicable for this article.

How to Cite This Article

Yao Jin. 2026. \u201cUnderstanding Ambiguity in Knowledge, Value and Institutional Structure: A Case Study of Chinese Open Network Community\u201d. Unknown Journal GJHSS-C Volume 24 (GJHSS Volume 24 Issue C3): .

Download Citation

UnderstandingAmbiguityInKnowledge.
Issue Cover
GJHSS Volume 24 Issue C3
Pg. 23- 34
Journal Specifications
Keywords
Version of record

v1.2

Issue date

April 2, 2024

Language
en
Experiance in AR

Explore published articles in an immersive Augmented Reality environment. Our platform converts research papers into interactive 3D books, allowing readers to view and interact with content using AR and VR compatible devices.

Read in 3D

Your published article is automatically converted into a realistic 3D book. Flip through pages and read research papers in a more engaging and interactive format.

Article Matrices
Total Views: 983
Total Downloads: 48
2026 Trends
Related Research

Published Article

Being a space for organizations to realize their value, it is necessary to minimize the structural Uncertainty of the virtual world. The analysis shows structural problems are the internal logical starting point of ambiguity in the network community and the underlying cause of gradual accumulation and precipitation in social tension. Analyzing the structural stain from the dimension of knowledge, value, and institutional structure in the network community, multifarious ambiguity is found in Chinese network governance. A representative survey object is selected to understand Chinese network governance after COVID 2019. The paper choose The Changtze River Cloud community on TikTok as the survey unit to analyze the public space management satisfaction ratio. Through theoretical discussion and case study, specific countermeasures are proposed, such as broadening the channels of expression, constructing cultural diversity in virtual space, and establishing clear specification standardization.

Our website is actively being updated, and changes may occur frequently. Please clear your browser cache if needed. For feedback or error reporting, please email [email protected]

Request Access

Please fill out the form below to request access to this research paper. Your request will be reviewed by the editorial or author team.
X

Quote and Order Details

Contact Person

Invoice Address

Notes or Comments

This is the heading

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Ut elit tellus, luctus nec ullamcorper mattis, pulvinar dapibus leo.

High-quality academic research articles on global topics and journals.

Understanding Ambiguity in Knowledge, Value and Institutional Structure: A Case Study of Chinese Open Network Community

Yao Jin
Yao Jin

Research Journals