Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Next Step: An Online Community for Delivering Human Services

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Social Media for Government Services

Abstract

With the expansion of the Internet, the number of online support groups has grown rapidly, and they have become a serious alternative to face-to-face meetings. Online support groups or communities allow their members to connect and share with others and get the support they need. In our work, in collaboration with a Government Department, we wanted to investigate whether these benefits could also occur in the public administration domain, in particular to support people in receipt of welfare payments. We designed and deployed an online community to support a specific group of welfare recipients. Our intent was to provide them with both informational and emotional support. In this paper, we present the design of the community, with a specific focus on the support it provided its members, together with a qualitative analysis of what happened during our trial. We observed that people found the targeted information and the emotional support they received in the online community useful and that they welcomed it. We also found that the community provided a way for participants to feel heard by the government.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    www.patientslikeme.com/.

  2. 2.

    www.dailystrength.org/support-groups.

  3. 3.

    www.babycenter.com.au/community.

  4. 4.

    http://www.athletenetwork.com/.

  5. 5.

    For example, the page for students, accessed May 7th, 2013. https://www.facebook.com/StudentUpdate.

  6. 6.

    While the original site www.katelundy.com.au/category/campaigns/publicsphere/ is no longer available, a full archive of the original website from when Kate Lundy was Senator for the ACT has been retained by The National Library of Australia through Pandora and is accessible at: pandora.nla.gov.au/pan/38983/20140908-1403/ www.katelundy.com.au/index.html—Accessed September 19th, 2015.

  7. 7.

    TANF: Temporary Assistance for Needy Families: http://www.tanf.us/ (retrieved September 15th, 2015).

  8. 8.

    Work for the Dole (Legislation introduced to Parliament 1997) https://employment.gov.au/work-dole (retrieved September 15th, 2015).

  9. 9.

    http://www.liferay.com/.

  10. 10.

    http://www.liferay.com/community/wiki/-/wiki/Main/Portal+Hook+Plugins.

  11. 11.

    http://www.liferay.com/documentation/liferay-portal/6.2/development/-/ai/leveraging-the-plugins-sdk-liferay-portal-6-2-dev-guide-02-en.

  12. 12.

    https://dev.liferay.com/develop/tutorials/-/knowledge_base/6-2/developing-jsp-portlets-using-liferay-mvc.

  13. 13.

    Nielsen Norman Group. http://www.nngroup.com/articles/participation-inequality/—Accessed September 14th, 2015.

  14. 14.

    All posts are reported verbatim.

  15. 15.

    http://provalisresearch.com/products/qualitative-data-analysis-software/.

  16. 16.

    We also observed 341 positive ratings, another form of support from members to each other.

  17. 17.

    We had a high level of inter-annotator agreement, ranging from 87 % to 100 % depending on the categories.

  18. 18.

    It is also worth mentioning that the moderators did not censor any posts. The only constraint placed on participants (explained in the Terms and Conditions) was not to be abusive towards anyone in the community (a participant or a moderator).

References

  1. Sensis. (2015). Available: https://www.sensis.com.au/content/dam/sas/PDFdirectory/Sensis_Social_Media_Report_2015.pdf

  2. Palen, L., Hiltz, S. R., & Liu, S. B. (2007). Online forums supporting grassroots participation in emergency preparedness and response. Communications of the ACM, 50, 54–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. AGIMO. (2008). Consulting with Government—Online. Australian Government, Department of Finance and Deregulation.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bødker, S., Colineau, N., Gandrup Borchorst, N., Korn, M., & Paris, C. (2011). International Reports on Socio-Informatics (IRSI) (Vol. 8). Proceedings of the 2011 Community and Technology (C&T 2011) Workshop on Government and Citizen Engagement. IISI—International Institute for Socio-Informatics Brisbane.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Granoveter, M. S. (1983). The strength of weak ties: A network theory re-visited. Sociological Theory, 1, 201–233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Skeels, M. M., Unruh, K. T., Powell, C., & Pratt, W. (2010). Catalyzing social support for breast cancer patients. In 28th International Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Atlanta, Georgia, USA, pp. 173–182.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Ma, M., & Agarwal, R. (2006, 18th July). With a little help from strangers: Social support and smoking cessation in online communities. Available: http://www.rhsmith.umd.edu/news/releases/2006/120406.aspx

  8. Sweetser, K. D., & Lariscy, W. (2008). Candidates make good friends: An analysis of candidates’ uses of facebook. International Journal of Strategic Communication, 2, 175–198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Vargas, J. A. (2008, Septembre 17th). Obama raised half a billion online. Available: http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2008/11/obama-raised-half-a-billion-on.html

  10. Williams, C., & Gulati, G. J. (2009). Facebook grows up: An empirical assessment of its role in the 2008 congressional elections. In Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Mascaro, C. M., & Goggins, S. P. (2011). Challenges for national civic engagement in the United States. International Reports on Socio-Informatics (IRSI) (Vol. 8). Proceedings of the 2011 Community and Technology (C&T 2011) Workshop on Government and Citizen Engagement. Bodker et al. (Eds).

    Google Scholar 

  12. Muhamad, R. (2011). Political blogging and the public sphere in Malaysia.  International Reports on Socio-Informatics (IRSI) (Vol. 8). Proceedings of the 2011 Community and Technology (C&T 2011) Workshop on Government and Citizen Engagement. Bodker et al. (Eds).

    Google Scholar 

  13. Toland, J. (2011). E-petitions in local government: The case of Wellington City Council. International Reports on Socio-Informatics (IRSI) (Vol. 8). Proceedings of the 2011 Community and Technology (C&T 2011) Workshop on Government and Citizen Engagement. Bodker et al. (Eds).15–22.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Cohen, S. (2004). Social relationship and health. The American Psychologist, 59, 676–684.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Maloney-Krichmar, D., & Preece, J. (2005). A multilevel analysis of sociability, usability, and community dynamics in an online health community. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 12, 201–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Shirky, C. (2008). Here comes health. Presented at the Health 2.0 Conference: User-Generated Healthcare, San Francisco, CA, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Smith, K. P., & Christakis, N. A. (2008). Social networks and health. Annual Review of Sociology, 34, 405–429.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Welbourne, J. L., Blanchard, A. L., & Boughton, M. D. (2009). Supportive communication, sense of virtual community and health outcomes in online infertility groups. In International Conference on Communities and Technologies (C&T’09), University Park, Pennsylvania, USA, pp. 31–38.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Baroni, A. (2011). Deliberation and empowerment in Rio de Janeiro’s favelas. International Reports on Socio-Informatics (IRSI) (Vol. 8). Proceedings of the 2011 Community and Technology (C&T 2011) Workshop on Government and Citizen Engagement. Bodker et al. (Eds).

    Google Scholar 

  20. Sawer, H. (2006). One fundamental value: Work for the dole participants’ views about work and mutual obligation. In Proceedings of the Road to Where? The Politics and Practice of Welfare to Work Conference, School of Social Work and Applied Human Sciences, University of Queensland, Brisbane.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Cameron, H. (2006). Single parent family under welfare-to-work. In Proceedings of the Road to Where? The Politics and Practice of Welfare to Work Conference, School of Social Work and Applied Human Sciences, University of Queensland, Brisbane.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Cox, E., & Priest, T. (2008, Dec 15, 2010). Welfare to work: At what cost to parenting? Report available at: http://www.women.nsw.gov.au/women_and_work/partnership_projects/welfare_to_work

  23. Cohen, S., & Hoberman, H. M. (1983). Positive events and social supports as buffers of life change stress1. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 13, 99–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Ganster, D. C., Fusilier, M. R., & Mayes, B. T. (1986). Role of social support in the experience of stress at work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 102–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Thoits, P. A. (1995). Stress, coping, and social support processes: Where are we? What next? Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 35, 53–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Dormann, C., & Zapf, D. (1999). Social support, social stressors at work, and depressive symptoms: Testing for main and moderating effects with structural equations in a three-wave longitudinal study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 874–884.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Colineau, N., Paris, C., & Dennett, A. (2011). Exploring the use of an online community in welfare transition programs. In 25th BCS Conference on Human-Computer Interaction, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, United Kingdom, pp. 455–460.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Colineau, N., Paris, C., & Dennett, A. (2011). Capitalising on the potential of online communities to help welfare recipients. In International Reports on Socio-Informatics (IRSI) (Vol. 8). Proceedings of the 2011 Community and Technology (C&T 2011) Workshop on Government and Citizen Engagement. Bodker et al. (Eds). pp. 59–65.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Bista, S. K., Colineau, N., Nepal, S., & Paris, C. (2012). The design of an online community for welfare recipients. In Proceedings of the 24th Australian Computer-Human Interaction Conference, Melbourne, Australia, pp. 38–41.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Colineau, N., Paris, C., & Nepal, S. (2013). Providing support through reflection and collaboration in online communities. In Proceedings of the 16th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing (CSCW), San Antonio, Texas, pp. 471–476.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Paris, C., Colineau, N., Nepal, S., Bista, S. K., & Beschorner, G. (2013). Ethical considerations in an online community: The balancing act. Ethics in Information Technology, Special Issue on Ethics of Social Networks for Special Needs Users, 15, 301–316.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Terveen, L., & McDonald, D. W. (2005). Social matching: A framework and research agenda. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI), 12, 401–434.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Colineau, N. (2012). A buddy matching program to help build an online support network. In OzCHI’12 Proceedings of the 24th Australian Computer-Human Interaction Conference Melbourne, pp. 85–88.

    Google Scholar 

  34. McPherson, M., Lovin, L., & Cook, J. (2001). Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks. Annual Review of Sociology, 27, 415–444.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Nepal, S., Paris, C., Pour, P. A., Freyne, J., & Bista, S. K. (2015). Interaction based recommendations for online communities. ACM Transaction on Internet Technology (TOIT). 15 (2), article 6. June 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Colineau, N., Paris, C., & Nepal, S. (2013). Designing for reflection and collaboration to support a transition from welfare to work. In Proceedings of the 2013 conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), San Antonio, Texas, pp. 471–476.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Bunchball. (2010). Gamification 101: An introduction to the use of game dynamics to influence behaviour. Available: http://www.bunchball.com/gamification101

  38. Deterding, S., Sicart, M., Nacke, L., O’Hara, K., & Dixon, D. (2011). Gamification: Using game-design elements in non-gaming contexts. In PART 2 Proceedings of the 2011 Annual Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Vancouver, BC, Canada, pp. 2425–2428.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Zichermann, G., & Cunningham, C. (2011). Gamification by design: Implementing game mechanics in web and mobile apps. Canada: OReilly.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Schein, A. I., Popescul, A., Ungar, L. H., & Pennock, D. M. (2002). Methods and metrics for cold-start recommendations. In Proceedings of the 25th Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, Tampere, Finland, pp. 253–260.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Storm, C., & Storm, T. (1987). A taxonomic study of the vocabulary of emotions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 805–816.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Scott, W. A. (1955). Reliability of content analysis: The case of nominal scale coding. Public Opinion Quarterly.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Brooks, M. G., & Buckner, J. C. (1996). Work and welfare: Job histories, barriers to employment, and predictors of work among low-income single mothers. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 66, 526.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Oanziger, S., Corcoran, M., Danziger, S., Heflin, C., Kalil, A., Levine, J., Rosen, D., Seefeldt, K., Siefert, K., & Tolman, R. (2000). Barriers to the employment of welfare recipients. Prosperity for all?: The economic boom and African Americans, 245.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Meyers, M. K., Heintze, T., & Wolf, D. A. (2002). Child care subsidies and the employment of welfare recipients. Demography, 39, 165–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research has been partially funded under the Human Services Delivery Research Alliance (HSDRA) between the CSIRO and the Australian Government Department of Human Services. We would like to thank P. Aghaei Pour, B. Yan, S. Bista, and N. Colineau for their work on the project, all the staff at the Australian Government’s Department of Human Services for their support in this work, and all our Next Step community members for their invaluable participation and engagement.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. CSIRO Data61, Sydney, Australia

    Cécile Paris & Surya Nepal

Authors
  1. Cécile Paris
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Surya Nepal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Cécile Paris .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. CSIRO Data61, Marsfield, New South Wales, Australia

    Surya Nepal

  2. Services Flagship, CSIRO Data61, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia

    Cécile Paris

  3. RMIT University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

    Dimitrios Georgakopoulos

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Paris, C., Nepal, S. (2015). Next Step: An Online Community for Delivering Human Services. In: Nepal, S., Paris, C., Georgakopoulos, D. (eds) Social Media for Government Services. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-27237-5_9

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-27237-5_9

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-27235-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-27237-5

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics