University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Motivation for participating in virtual religious communities: developing social capital

(USC Thesis Other)

Motivation for participating in virtual religious communities: developing social capital

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

Motivation for Participating in Virtual Religious Communities: Developing Social Capital
by
Mia Knight Wright

Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
A dissertation submitted to the faculty
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Education

May 2022

© Copyright by Mia Knight Wright 2022
All Rights Reserved

The Committee for Mia Knight Wright certifies the approval of this Dissertation

Robert A. Filback, Ph.D.
Monica G. Williams, Ph.D.
Emmy J. Min, Ph.D., Committee Chair

Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
2022

iv

Abstract
This qualitative study explored social cognitive motivations for participation (N=9) to generate
social capital in two African American mega-churches Facebook groups. The research objective
was to understand how self-efficacy and outcome expectation motivate participation in virtual
religious communities, social capital development, and if cultural factors influence social capital
development. The study found that social self-efficacy influenced social trust, which affected
social capital, and consolidated the relationship between self-efficacy and social capital. Positive
affirmation increased self-efficacy and encouraged study participants to share frequently in the
SNS. The study also found that outcome expectation was integral in motivating activity in the
group. Outcome expectations such as gratification, reputation, ministry help, representing the
organization, and building community were indicators that encouraged users to participate. This
study found that social interactions in the Facebook group developed both bridging and bonding
social capital with access to embedded resources. Lastly, the study found that organizational
rules can impede social capital growth. Social capital develops through knowledge sharing,
shared norms, social support, and emotional connections. A viable aspect of American life,
social capital grows as individuals create network ties that enhance life's opportunities and
outcomes. Religious organizations historically served as sources of social capital. As the Internet
transforms religious engagement, churches must develop bridging social capital in virtual spaces
to sustain their influence, repertoire of shared resources, comprehensive capital, and credentials.
Keywords: social cognitive, self-efficacy, outcome expectation, social capital, reputation,
knowledge sharing, community, virtual community, religion online, digital religion, structural
social capital, relational social capital, bridging social capital, bonding social capital.

v

Dedication
To the memory of my late mother, Barbara N. Franklin Jackson, one who truly understood the
concepts of network, net-worth and social capital. Her commitment to connecting people and
helping each succeed was outstanding, impactful, and long-lasting.

To my family, Remus E. Wright, D. Min., sons, R. Elliott Wright, J.D., Evan J. Wright, M.D.,
and Minister Jeremy Wright, father, Eugene Knight, my aunt Dorothy F. Henderson, sister, Tara
D. Davis, nephews, Cameron D. Davis and George Anderson, and niece, Tenisha Vaden, I am
indebted for your grace, understanding and patience. Thank you for your love and support.

To my granddaughter Eliana, who asked about self-limiting beliefs, you are an inspiration, and I
know that great things are ahead of you.

To all my family, I thank you for your support throughout the years.

To my church family, thank you for embracing the geek in me.

vi

Acknowledgements
I want to thank my committee chair, Dr. Emmy Min, for her exceptional support and guidance in
this doctoral program. I also want to thank Dr. Robert Filback and Dr. Monica D. Williams.
Their insight gave credence to more meaningful discourse. Additionally, I would like to thank
Dr. Eric Canny. His foundational course laid the essential groundwork for more significant
discourse. Finally, in addition to the academic support, there were friends, colleagues, and a
powerful reading group of brilliant women who created a safe space to learn, share and grow.
Thank you, Araceli, Allilia, Eleanor, Jeannie Jo, Jessica K., and Jessica S., for your friendship,
encouragement, and support.

vii

Table of Contents
Abstract ........................................................................................................................................... iv
Dedication ........................................................................................................................................ v
Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................................ vi
Table of Contents ........................................................................................................................... vii
List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. xii
List of Figures .............................................................................................................................. xiii
Chapter One: Introduction to the Study ........................................................................................... 1
Context and Background of the Problem .................................................................................. 3
Purpose of the Project and Research Questions ........................................................................ 4
Stakeholders ......................................................................................................................... 5
Importance of the Study ............................................................................................................ 5
Overview of Theoretical Framework and Methodology ........................................................... 7
Justification ................................................................................................................................ 8
Methodology ........................................................................................................................ 8
Research Questions .................................................................................................................... 9
Definitions ................................................................................................................................. 9
Self-efficacy ....................................................................................................................... 10
Outcome Expectation ........................................................................................................ 10
Social Capital ..................................................................................................................... 10
Virtual Communities – Social Networking Sites (SNS) ................................................... 10
Organization of the Dissertation .............................................................................................. 11
Chapter Two: Literature Review ................................................................................................... 12
Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 12
Motivation Theory ................................................................................................................... 13
Social Cognitive Theory: Defining Self-Efficacy ................................................................... 14
Factors That Influence Self-Efficacy ................................................................................. 16
Social Cognitive Theory: Defining Outcome Expectation ...................................................... 17

viii

Social Cognitive Theory: Self-Efficacy and Outcome Expectation ........................................ 18
Self-Efficacy in Virtual Religious Communities ............................................................... 19
Defining Social Capital ........................................................................................................... 21
Social Capital as Capital .......................................................................................................... 23
Forms of Capital: Economic, Cultural, Social and Structural ........................................... 24
Bridging. Bonding Social Capital and Power .................................................................... 25
Value of Social Capital ............................................................................................................ 26
Social Capital Dimensions ....................................................................................................... 27
Structural Dimension of Social Capital ............................................................................. 27
Relational Dimension of Social Capital ............................................................................ 29
Cognitive Dimension of Social Capital ............................................................................. 30
Selfish Motivation and Trust ............................................................................................. 32
Benefits of Social Capital ........................................................................................................ 33
Embeddedness and Purposive Actions .............................................................................. 34
Social Capital Online ............................................................................................................... 35
Social Capital and Social Networking Sites ...................................................................... 36
Facebook Friends, Bridging, and Bonding Social Capital ................................................ 38
Social Capital and Facebook Business, a.k.a. Fan Pages .................................................. 40
Social Capital and Virtual Communities ........................................................................... 41
Social Capital and Religion ..................................................................................................... 43
Religion Online and in Social Networking Sites ............................................................... 46
Social Capital Theory and Social Cognitive Theory ............................................................... 48
Selfish Motivations and Trust ............................................................................................ 49
Conceptual Framework ............................................................................................................ 51
Summary .................................................................................................................................. 55
Chapter Three: Methodology ......................................................................................................... 58
Research Questions .................................................................................................................. 58
Overview of Design ................................................................................................................. 59
Research Design ...................................................................................................................... 59
Measuring Self-Efficacy .................................................................................................... 59
Measuring Outcome Expectation ...................................................................................... 60

ix

Measuring Social Capital ................................................................................................... 60
Methodology and Rationale ..................................................................................................... 61
Criteria For Selection ......................................................................................................... 62
Recruitment .................................................................................................................. 63
Incentives ..................................................................................................................... 65
Data Collection Methods ................................................................................................... 65
Theoretical Framework ............................................................................................................ 67
Research Setting ...................................................................................................................... 70
The Researcher ........................................................................................................................ 71
Stakeholder Group ................................................................................................................... 72
Data Sources ............................................................................................................................ 73
Method 1 ............................................................................................................................ 73
Method 2 ............................................................................................................................ 73
Method 3 ............................................................................................................................ 74
Participants ................................................................................................................. 74
Instrumentation ............................................................................................................ 75
Data Collection Procedures ........................................................................................ 77
Observation Protocol ......................................................................................................... 77
Interview Protocol ............................................................................................................. 79
Data Analysis ............................................................................................................... 79
Credibility and Dependability ................................................................................................. 80
Ethics ....................................................................................................................................... 81
Rational for IRB ................................................................................................................. 81
Underlying Ethics .............................................................................................................. 82
Limitations and Delimitations ........................................................................................... 83
Assumptions ....................................................................................................................... 85
Limitations and Threats to Validity ................................................................................... 85
Chapter Four: Findings .................................................................................................................. 86
Purpose and Research Questions ............................................................................................. 86
Findings ................................................................................................................................... 88
RQ1: How Did Motivation Theory Affect Participant Participation? ..................................... 89

x

Social Cognitive Motivation Influenced Participant Behavior to Develop ............................. 89
Social Capital
Self-Efficacy Influenced Behavior and Action in Virtual Communities .................................. 90
Self-Efficacy Influenced Virtual Community Behaviors .......................................................... 90
Affirmation Increased Self-Efficacy ........................................................................... 94
Self-Efficacy Was Essential for Inspiration ............................................................................. 95
Prayers Were Pivotal ................................................................................................... 96
Impact of Leadership Position ..................................................................................... 99
Outcome Expectation Influenced Behavior and Action in Virtual Communities ................. 100
Feedback As Outcome Expectation ....................................................................................... 101
Feelings As Outcome Expectation ......................................................................................... 102
Acknowledged ........................................................................................................... 102
Gratitude .................................................................................................................... 103
Reputation As Outcome Expectation ..................................................................................... 104
Community As Outcome Expectation .................................................................................... 106
Intentional Outreach .................................................................................................. 106
Friends ....................................................................................................................... 107
Leadership ................................................................................................................. 108
Prayer and Help ......................................................................................................... 110
Summary Motivation .............................................................................................................. 112
RQ2: Determining How Behavior Developed Social Capital in Virtual Communities ........ 114
Structural Dimension ....................................................................................................... 114
Relational Dimension ...................................................................................................... 115
Cognitive Dimension ....................................................................................................... 117
Weak Ties Generated Bridging Social Capital ................................................................ 117
Trust Was Essential to Established Social Capital Dimensions ...................................... 119
Developing Trust ............................................................................................................. 119
Trust Was Foundational to Knowledge Sharing ............................................................. 120
Knowledge Sharing Developed Social Capital ............................................................... 121
Knowledge Sharing ................................................................................................... 122
Purposive Action .............................................................................................................. 123

xi

Measuring Social Capital ................................................................................................ 124
Facebook Use Intensity ................................................................................................... 126
Conclusion on Social Capital in the SNS ........................................................................ 127
RQ3: How do organizational attributes offline and online in the virtual community ........... 128
influence or impede the creation and actability of social capital’s embedded resources?
Organizational Rules Can Impact Social Capital Development ............................................ 128
Group Rules ........................................................................................................................... 129
Group Quality ........................................................................................................................ 130
Organizational Culture .......................................................................................................... 131
Group Social Capital Accessed ............................................................................................. 131
Conclusion on Findings ......................................................................................................... 132
Chapter Five ................................................................................................................................ 133
Discussion .............................................................................................................................. 133
Social Cognitive Beliefs Motivated Behaviors ............................................................... 135
Activities In the Social Network Site Developed Social Capital .................................... 137
Trust Essential to Develop Social Capital ....................................................................... 137
Implications for Practice ........................................................................................................ 138
Recommendations ................................................................................................................. 139
Future Research ..................................................................................................................... 142
Conclusion ............................................................................................................................. 143
References ................................................................................................................................... 146
Appendix ..................................................................................................................................... 161

xii

List of Tables
Table 1: Data Sources: Observations, Interviews, Documents, Digital Materials ........................ 66
Table 2: Participant Information .................................................................................................... 87
Table 3: Summary of Key Motivational Influences and Recommendations ............................... 141

xiii

List of Figures
Figure 1: Conceptual Framework for The Study ........................................................................... 55
Figure 2: Theoretical Framework for Social Cognitive Motivators to Increase Participation ...... 68
in the Virtual Community
Figure 3: Theoretical Framework for the Development of Social Capital from Virtual ............... 69
Community Behaviors
Figure 4: Conceptual Framework for Social Cognitive Motivators to Participate ........................ 70
in the Virtual Community, and Behaviors that Develop Social Capital
Figure 5: Prayer Request ............................................................................................................... 97
Figure 6: Facebook Post Insights ................................................................................................... 98
Figure 7: Resource Generator Professions Known in Group ...................................................... 127

1

Chapter One: Introduction to the Study
The historical contribution of the church to American social capital noted by popular
theorists such as Putnam (2000), Coleman (1988), and Wuthnow (2002) supported the idea that
religious involvement generated social capital. Putnam (2000) identified religious involvement
as a key source of social capital and remarkably proclaimed that churches were "arguably the
single most important repository of social capital in America" (p.66). Over several decades,
scholars debated social capital's definition and value. However, Putnam (2000) popularized the
idea with mainstream audiences in Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American
Community. Putnam (2000) quantified social capital as the network of resources that generated
norms, trust, and information and referred to its benefits collaboratively. Not all scholars agreed
that social capital's benefits were exclusive to social networks. Portes (1998) perceived social
capital as individualistic, with beneficial resources obtained through membership in socially
structured networks. Other scholars merged social capital's concepts to support individuals and
organizations' advancement, productivity, and future growth (Farr, 2004).
Since churches gather people from diverse backgrounds and professions, church
members may have access to individuals and networks, not usually attainable apart from their
church membership. Wuthnow proposed that religious institutions served as a place to formulate
diverse relationships that bridged social statuses (2002). Research affirmed the relationship
between religious involvement and social capital measures, such as volunteering, political
participation, civic skills comprehension, friendship, and network development (Wuthnow,
2002). The resources embedded in the networks are beneficial to the individual and the
organization to obtain goals and achieve purposive actions (Lin, 2000).
2

Religious organizations historically served as sources for the development of social
capital, yet current religious ideologies and trends threaten the future of these organizations'
ability to source the capital. In the past two decades, church attendance and membership
declined, according to a 2019 Pew Report on religious trends (Jones, 2018). Pew reported that
50% of U.S. adults belonged to a house of worship, marking a 20% decline since 2000 (Jones,
2018). As recently as August 2020, The Pew Research Center documented that while nearly half
of usual church attendees had interchanged in-person attendance to online attendance during the
COVID-19 pandemic, 19% of those who usually attend church disclosed that they had not
attended nor viewed online (Gecewicz & Smith, 2020). Pre-pandemic membership and
attendance declines, coupled with church gathering restrictions due to COVID-19, reflected a
growing problem for sustainability and social capital development of religious institutions.
Campbell (2012) expressed that increased Internet use influenced religion online because
religious traditions had to be “adapted to fit within the technological structures and constraints of
the internet” (p.76). The shift from in-person to online worship and gathering reframed how
individuals and organizations emulated church traditions. Consequentially, the move to digital
realms challenged social capital development.
The interest in social capital in online social networks peaked over the last several
decades (Phua, 2017; Wellman et al., 2001) as studies incorporated social capital constructs in
digital religious spaces and explored the development of social networks, personal identity, and
community advancement (Campbell, 2010, 2012, 2013). As religious institutions evolved to
connect and engage parishioners in digital spaces, critical consideration of motivational factors
influencing online participation and building social capital will interest religious organizations.
3

Context and Background of the Problem
Social capital theorist, Pierre Bourdieu, suggested that social capital was the combined
comprehensive resources linked to inclusion, belonging to, or membership in a group (Bourdieu,
1986). Further, Bourdieu emphasized that mutual acquaintance and recognition within a strong
network generated social capital that sourced group members with an aggregate capital,
potential, or credentials and symbolically exchanged them in relational spaces (1986). Economist
Nan Lin stratified forms of capital and defined social capital as "resources embedded in a social
structure that are accessed and/or mobilized in purposive actions" (Lin, 2001, p. 29). The
resources obtained through social connections are critical to achieving goals for individuals,
social groups, organizations, and communities (Lin, 2001; Putnam, 2000). Hence, at its core, the
idea of social capital is that the resources available to people through their social interactions
generate benefits for individuals and groups to achieve goals.
The church is a voluntary affiliation consisting of people with diverse skills and
experiences who share faith in the same divine creator. Churches support a wide range of
activities beyond worship, and according to Hastings (2016), they serve as incubators for civic
skills. However, church attendance alone does not build social capital (Brown & Brown, 2003).
Churches must cultivate cultural aspects of influence (Brown & Brown, 2003; Chaves, 2011).
Nurturing to motivate volunteerism, encourage voting, and increase social services, amongst
other aspects, can raise social capital for churchgoers (Hastings, 2016; Schwadel et al., 2016). In
essence, social capital incorporates understandings of shared values. Trust and participation raise
capital levels in the network of churchgoers.
The African American church has historically been at the core of the Black community.
Beyond a place of inspiration, the church has served as a hub for the community, political
4

engagement, social, physiological, and health perspectives (Taylor, Chatters, & Levin, 2003). In
the church, participation in small groups that incorporate religion and socialization is
foundational to building personal and organizational social capital by bridging access levels
(Farr, 2004; Hastings, 2016; Wuthnow, 2002). However, when membership declines, small
group participation decreases, and thus access to social capital also decreases.
Like most churches, the two organizations in the research study have been beacon lights
in their community. Over the last 30 years, both organizations experienced prodigious
membership growth and meaningful community engagement. However, since 2017 new
membership growth has flattened. With an aging membership and tenured leadership, COVID-
19 pandemic hindrances, and a decline in religious affiliations, the churches must contest
national trends on a local level to remain relevant for future generations.
Purpose of the Project and Research Questions
Curating friendships and building networks offline versus online can entail different
dynamics (Chan & Cheng, 2004) and impact the ability to generate social capital for individuals
and the organization via digital connections. This study seeks to understand how participation in
social media sites and virtual communities builds social capital by defining the underlying
motivators and organizational support needed to build networks.
This study aims to determine how accessibility to and participation in constructed digital
religious spaces generate networks that foster mobility to create individual and organizational
social capital. This research aims to understand how people interpret experiences, construct their
worlds, and attribute meaning to their experiences. This study seeks to understand if online
participation in the social media sites and the digital groups of two African American church
congregations build social capital by identifying the underlying motivators to share knowledge.
5

It also seeks to understand if and how organizational culture, norms, protocols, and practices
may encourage or hinder the generation of social capital and its embedded resources.
Research questions will explore motivations, participation, and organizational influences.
The project will seek to understand how self-efficacy and outcome expectation impact a
participant's activity within the virtual church community and if activities exhibited within the
social network site contribute to developing social capital among the virtual community
members. It will explore whether organizational attributes offline and online influence or impede
social capital's embedded resources' creation and actability.
Stakeholders
For each organization, the stakeholders for this study are church members, and the
providers are the digital teams that report to the directors, the Executive Leadership Teams. The
directors’ goals are to provide online platforms to the stakeholders that support spiritual growth
and promote fellowship, enhancing commitment to the church’s mission and vision.
Importance of the Study
Religious institutions depend on loyal and active members to thrive. The relationship of
church membership entails the reciprocity of giving and receiving. Apart from the most critical
aspect of spiritual growth and development, individuals fellowship with others, forming a social
network construct. Composed of reciprocity, norms, values, and trust (Putnam, 2000), social
capital is measurable at the individual, group, organization, community, and society level. The
consensus of data supports that involvement and participation in groups as an integral aspect of
sociability builds individual and community capital (Bourdieu, 1985; Coleman, 1988; Lin,
2001). As individuals participated, their engagement and influence added value to organizational
social capital. In exchange, members gained valuable experiences, relationships, and networks,
6

increasing their capital. Individual and organizational social capital developed when people
connected and networked.
Across the United States, identity with religion and spirituality significantly impacted
church affiliation, evidenced by declining attendance and membership rates (Jones, 2018). Thus,
church attendance wavered even among people who identified as spiritual and religious. The
increase of spiritual independence in belief and practice created individualism, yet it isolated
people from traditional communities that embody social capital (Putnam, 2000). In addition to
membership and attendance challenges, constraints imposed upon the church for the safety and
wellbeing of its parishioners during the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in lowered in-person
attendance. Online broadcasting of church services online meetings for small groups presumably
generated new habits for many church attendees. Should the church remain a social capital hub
depends upon its faithful religious core's loyalty and influence to be present in belief and practice
and the church's outreach to engage current and new members in novel and non-traditional
religious spaces.
Brehm and Rahn (1997) specifically name churches as assets among institutions that give
rise to social capital. Likewise, Putnam (2000) acknowledged that religious organizations'
historical contribution was "essential to building social capital in the United States" (p. 409). He
further emphasized that rebuilding social capital in America will include six vital influential
facets in areas that include: youth and schools; the workplace; urban and metropolitan design;
religion; arts and culture; and politics and government (Putnam, 2000). The inclusion of religion
as one of the six domains of influence is important to this study. In a time of spiritual redefinition
in the United States, enjoining people who desire to connect with a religious community,
7

building and rebuilding social capital within religious organizations, and redefining access to
social capital within the organization is necessary for sustaining religious institutions.
Overview of Theoretical Framework and Methodology
The theoretical framework that will guide the study will consider how social cognitive
theories motivate virtual community behaviors that develop social capital. Clark & Estes
describe the three indices of motivated behavior as active choice, persistence, and mental effort
(2008). The study will consider how motivated behavior inspires individual engagement and
participation. The theory of self-efficacy, what a person believes about their ability to perform
the action, significantly influences cognitive, motivational, affective, and decisional processes of
human agency (Bandura, 1977; Bandura, 2012). The theory of outcome expectation, the belief
that a specific action will yield a certain result, also underlies motivation from an agentic
perspective and is significant to an individual's cognition or desire to act in a certain manner
(Bandura, 1990). Social cognitive theory aligned with social capital theory will give insight into
why individuals choose to express specific behaviors in the virtual community.
In light of church in-person attendance declines and the rise in online communities, the
study will consider behaviors expressed in the online virtual community. It will offer insight into
some actors' motivation to share knowledge, comment on posts, improve social ties and benefit
from participating in a social networking site formulated by the church. The third aspect of the
research will consider the organizational attributes that may effectively encourage or hinder
social interaction, engagement, trust, collective goals, or other social capital aspects. Culture,
protocols, and traditions, along with group communications, can inform if the organization
hinders the embedded resources for purposive actions (Lin, 2001).
8

Because social capital evolves by building networked relationships among persons in
groups, this theory will offer insight into the motivation to engage and build relational bonds and
thereby gain access to social capital. The key concept to be incorporated into the study will
assess social capital development and frame the perceived embedded benefits of social
connections and the resources critical to achieving goals for individuals, social groups,
organizations, and communities (Lin, N., 2001; Putnam 2000).
Justification
The social capital theory is appropriate for this study because its premise is that the
available resources to people through their social interactions generate benefits for individuals
and groups to achieve goals (Lin, 2001; Putnam 2000). To sustain its influence and repertoire of
shared resources, comprehensive capital, and credentials, the church must assess how to further
develop bridging social capital in digital spaces. The social scientists' research is practical,
compelling for change, and divulging in that the metanarrative is that research itself leads to
change (Tuck & Yang, 2014, p. 236).
A theory of change is a belief or perspective of adjusting, correcting, or improving a
situation. Fundamentally it is an applicable description and illustration of how and why the
desired change can happen in a particular context. In light of the changing religious landscape,
religious institutions must define how effective use of technology can emulate networks of
individuals to build organizations rich in social capital online, as it has successfully experienced
offline.
Methodology
The research objective is to understand how self-efficacy and outcome expectation can
motivate or hinder engagement in virtual religious communities and how individuals interpret
9

their experiences. According to Merriam and Tisdale (2016), if the questions' nature concerns
understanding participants' experiences, it calls for a qualitative design. Additionally, the
research will seek to understand the nature of developing social capital in a networked
community existing in the social network site, Meta Facebook Groups. A qualitative approach is
appropriate when a researcher seeks to understand relationships between variables (Creswell,
2003), such as culture, norms, protocols, and other factors that influence or hinder social capital's
natural production.
Research Questions
● RQ1: How do self-efficacy and outcome expectation impact a participant’s activity
within the virtual church community?
● RQ2: How do activities exhibited within the social network site contribute to
developing social capital among virtual community members?
● RQ3: How do organizational attributes offline and online in the virtual community
influence or impede the creation and actability of social capital’s embedded
resources?
Definitions
This paper will appraise how social capital cultivates in social networking sites,
particularly online virtual religious communities. Motivational factors can inform organizations
by understanding how self-efficacy and outcome expectation may influence individuals’
participation in virtual communities. Definitions for self-efficacy, outcome expectation, social
capital, and virtual communities are further defined to inform the study.
10

Self-efficacy
Self-efficacy “refers to beliefs in one’s capabilities to organize and execute the courses of
action required to produce given attainments” (Bandura, 1997, p.3). Self-efficacy specifically
refers to an individual’s belief in their capability to successfully achieve a goal or succeed in a
particular situation (Bandura, 1997).
Outcome expectation
Outcome expectation refers to a person’s belief that a particular outcome will result from
a specific action taken (Maddux et al., 1982).
Social capital
To say that the definition of social capital remains a ubiquitous reference to the power of
networked relationships would offer a disservice to the understanding of the construct. Although
no consensus on the exact terminology exists, social capital’s broad definition includes the
network of resources that generate norms, trust, and information (Putnam, 2000). Social capital’s
definition incorporates its benefit, the sum of the actual or potential resources distinctively
connected to the said network (Bourdieu, 1986). The literature review will provide a
comprehensive review of social capital’s terminology, nuances, and dimensions.
Virtual communities - Social Networking Sites (SNS)
Virtual communities are online social networks composed of like-minded individuals
who share common interests, goals, or practices (Helland, 2000, 2002). Individuals utilize the
social network site to share information and knowledge by engaging in social interactions. The
resources embedded in the network empower the virtual community’s existence with value and
potential resources (Chiu et al., 2006).
11

Organization of the Dissertation
This paper will be a five-chapter dissertation to understand motivators for generating
social capital in virtual religious communities. The opening chapter served as an introduction to
the project's context and purpose, the study's importance, and an overview of the theoretical
framework. It disclosed the research questions and provided definitions of terminology important
to the research. Chapter Two will provide an overview of the existing literature of self-cognitive
theory, social capital theory, definitions, and social capital benefits. Additionally, Chapter Two
will explore the nuances of social capital online and social capital and religion based upon the
existing literature. Chapter Two will review literature that considers social cognition and social
capital as emerging theories for virtual communities' participatory actions and share the
conceptual framework. Chapter Three will share the methodology and design of the proposed
research. It will consider the research design, methodology, data collection, sources, and the
proposed instrumentation. Further, Chapter Three will disclose the researcher's positionality and
ethical considerations for the study. The research results and the qualitative data analysis will be
in Chapter Four which will summarize the data to answer the research questions. Chapter Five
will disclose the interpretations, conclusions, and recommendations based upon current and
previous research.

12

Chapter Two: Literature Review
Introduction
Years of interest in social capital, its development, worth, and potential have intrigued the
United States as a nation. From early observations by Alex de Tocqueville to a greater
articulation of its idea by modern theorists such as Bourdieu, Coleman, Putnam, and others,
social capital has averted consensual definition. However, it has garnered the support of a
comprehensive concept to be further explored in the literature review. Despite Putnam's (2000)
reference to a collapsed American community, social capital remains a viable aspect of
American life as individuals create network ties that enhance life’s opportunities and outcomes.
The literature review will look at social capital theory's origins and its development by leading
scholars as a theory to improve an individual life's platforms. Further, a comprehensive
description of social capital dimensions will be considered and introduce how social capital
presents amongst individuals and within organizations.
In addition to unveiling social capital concepts, this literature review will provide the
reader with an overview of social cognitive theories as an additional frame for the study.
Bandura (1982) introduced in the research social cognitive theories of self-efficacy theory and
outcome expectation. The study will seek to understand the roles of self-efficacy and outcome
expectation as motivation for participation in virtual communities. It will provide a greater
understanding of how self-efficacy influences cognitive, motivational, affective, and decisional
human processes. It will seek to understand how and why self-efficacious individuals participate
in online communities, which may serve as sites to develop social capital (Chiu et al., 2006). The
research aims to understand how self-efficacy enables or debilitates actions that may engender
13

network ties foundational to social capital constructs (Granovetter, 1983). The literature review
will consider how outcome expectation might influence participants and to what degree.
The integration of social capital and social cognitive theories can give greater awareness
into the extent of networking. Chiu, Hsu, & Wang (2006) gained greater insight by incorporating
social networks, self-efficacy, and outcome expectation theories to understand knowledge
sharing in professional virtual communities. Although Putnam (2000) sensed that organizations
were losing membership and communities were losing influence, Campbell (2013) suggested
that the Internet was transforming social practices such as religious engagement and generating
spiritually motivated communities. Nahapiet and Ghoshal (1998) affirmed that organizations
were highly productive sites in the business sector to develop more significant social capital. The
modern church comprises networks of people who seek to improve their lives and those of other
parishioners, and more often, parishioners are online in the church community.
The study will seek to understand what social cognitive, motivational factors inspire the
development of social capital networks and relationships within virtual communities established
by two mega-churches. Considering the nuances of digital religion and virtual communities,
particular interest in how social cognitive theories can impact sharing in virtual religious
communities will show a lack of research in this relatively new arena. It offers an opportunity for
this and future research to uncover motivations for sharing in virtual religious communities.
Social networking sites, and virtual communities, particularly in business sectors, provide
primary locations for the literature review.
Motivation Theory
Motivation theories seek to discover what stimulates a person to take action towards
specific tasks (Pintrich 2003; Pintrich & Schunk, 2002). Pintrich (2003) referred to these actions
14

as energization for movement, given that the individual’s desires intentionally drove the
direction of movement. According to Clark and Estes, three motivated behavior indices are
active choice, persistence, and mental effort (2008, pp. 80-81). Defined by the pursuit of a goal,
active choice transposes intention into action. This action may meet with obstacles or challenges
that can distract an individual; however, persistence is critical to complete a task. Ultimately,
active choice and persistence must be intertwined adequately with an invested mental effort
(Clark & Estes, 2008).
This study will capitalize upon both social capital theory and social cognitive theory as a
frame to investigate how motivating factors influence the commitment to and participation in
virtual social networking sites for church members. It will seek to identify actions that energize
movement (Pintrich, 2003) and motivators that power knowledge sharing gives insight into
member connectivity and virtual communities’ participation (Chiu et al., 2006). This study will
consider what motivating factors are evident in the virtual church community. It will consider
how self-efficacy, an aspect of social cognitive theory, serves as a determinant for quantitative
and qualitative participation, knowledge sharing, communication, and response to calls to actions
promoted within the group. Further, it will determine what role outcome expectation play in
motivating behaviors to access the networks’ embedded resources.
Social Cognitive Theory: Defining Self-Efficacy
The concept of self-efficacy was introduced in 1977 by social scientist Albert Bandura to
refer to a persons’ belief regarding their ability to perform a certain task needed to accomplish a
certain goal (Bandura, 1977). Self-efficacy does not indicate a persons’ ability to perform an
action in so much as it relates to their beliefs about their ability to perform the action. It is what
15

one believes that one can or cannot do with one’s ability (Maddux et al., 1982). This belief is
essential for inspiration, motivation, performance accomplishment, and emotional well-being
(Bandura, 1997, 2006). Self-efficacy also carries forth the idea that individuals can be
self-initiating agents for change in their lives and the lives of others (Maddux & Kleinman,
2016).
Essentially, what a person believes they can or cannot accomplish is moderated by their
beliefs (Bandura, 2012). Beliefs moderate pessimistic or optimistic attitudes towards task
accomplishment and self-enabling or self-debilitating actions. Self-efficacy beliefs significantly
influence cognitive, motivational, affective, and decisional processes of human agency (Bandura,
2012). A higher self-efficacious person will be more likely to hold positive beliefs about specific
goals and life domains, motivating them to undertake activities and persevere through hardships
(Bandura, 1977, Maddux et al., 1982). Stronger self-efficacy beliefs are associated with positive
outcomes. Likewise, weaker self-efficacy beliefs are associated with poor outcomes (Maddux et
al., 1982). People with higher self-efficacies have increased motivation to perform in the areas
where they have stronger self-efficacies (Bandura & Locke, 2003).
Apart from other similar concepts such as perceived skill, predictive behavior, causal
attributions, self-esteem, or even motive, self-efficacy holds its own standard in the framework
of social cognition (Maddux et al., 1982). Self-efficacy entails the notion of what individuals
believe they can do with their skills under certain conditions. It is less informed by what they
will do and focuses on what they believe they can do (Bandura, 1997; Maddux et al., 1982). Self-
efficacy is different from self-esteem, although self-efficacy beliefs may inform self-esteem.
Defined as what one believes about themselves, self-esteem’s influence is generally limited to
16

specific domains (Maddux et al., 1982). Moreover, self-efficacy is different from outcome
expectation. Bandura (1997) suggested that self-efficacy beliefs are not outcome expectancies as
the outcome expectancy is the belief that a specific behavior may lead to a specific outcome in a
specific situation (Maddux et al., 1982).
Factors That Influence Self-Efficacy
According to Bandura (1997), five determinants influence self-efficacy beliefs:
Performance experiences, vicarious performances, verbal persuasion, imaginal performances,
and affective states and physical sensations. To a degree, each element influences and affects a
person’s self-efficacy belief (Bandura, 1997). Performance relates one’s past positive or negative
experience with a particular goal to future attainment. A successful or failed experience towards
a valued goal impacts what an individual believes regarding their future ability to succeed
(Bandura, 1997).
Visualization and imagination are also key influencers. An individual’s ability to see
others’ success in similarly appropriate circumstances and imagine themselves with the same
success can influence one’s beliefs (Bandura, 1997). These vicarious performances enhance
one’s beliefs in their ability to succeed by seeing others like themselves succeed. A person’s
ability to imagine success or failure in a particular activity is a driver for self-efficacy beliefs.
Bandura (1997) believed that imaginal performances would determine how well or how poorly
an individual can visualize themselves.
Words have significant consequential effects on self-efficacy beliefs. Affirming or
negating words are far-reaching determinants of self-efficacy beliefs. While people are not
equally plausible, verbal persuasion, what another person says to an individual based upon what
17

they believe about the individual, can impact what one believes about themselves (Bandura,
1997). Physiological and emotional states can also influence self-efficacy when one associates
performance with a perceived failure or success (Maddux et al., 1982). The arousal of physical
sensations such as negative moods associated with failure or pleasant feelings associated with
success can influence a person’s beliefs about performance on a particular task (Bandura, 1997;
Maddux et al., 1982). Emotions attached to specific performance tasks become determinants for
beliefs.
Social Cognitive Theory: Defining Outcome Expectation
An individual's cognition to act or behave in a particular manner has two basic tenets,
self-efficacy and outcome expectation (Hsu et al., 2007; Maddux et al., 1982). Outcome
expectations are individual beliefs that a specific action will yield a certain result (Bandura,
1990; Lippke, 2020). Outcome expectation is important to initiating and maintaining behavior
changes and it is significant to motivational aspects of an individual's cognition to act or behave
in a particular manner (Hsu et al., 2007; Lippke, 2020; Maddux et al., 1982).
While some theorists, such as Bandura (1977), believed that self-efficacy predicates
outcome expectancy due to an individual's proficiency or efficacy, others propose that they are
two independent expectancies (Maddux et al., 1982). In an experiment of simple interpersonal
skill tasks, Maddux et al. (1982) found the relational effect in reverse. Research showed that an
increased outcome expectancy significantly increased the intention to perform a pre-described
behavior, whereas increased self-efficacy did not have a causal relationship to performance.
Additionally, opposite of Bandura (1977), Maddux et al. (1982) showed that outcome
expectancy influenced perceptions of self-efficacy.
18

Social Cognitive Theory: Self-Efficacy and Outcome Expectation
Social cognitive theory originated from an agentic self-governing perspective to
determine how one’s actions can influence one’s life’s outcomes (Bandura, 2012). From this
perspective, self-efficacy became the most significant social psychological concept derived from
social cognitive theory (Bandura, 1977, 1989, 1997, 2012). As a foundation for human
motivation and accomplishments, self-efficacy believes that one can exhibit control over life
events by one’s actions (Bandura, 1997). While perceived self-efficacy is subjective to an
individual’s capacity to learn or perform, it encompasses the belief that individuals hold the
power to affect change by their own actions (Bandura, 2002; Lin et al., 2009). Hsu et al. (2007)
suggested that self-efficacy influences behavioral decisions that lead to mastery of behaviors
through sustained efforts and persistence over obstacles. Bandura (2002) established that self-
efficacy beliefs predicted the perception of obstacles and shaped expected goal and aspiration
outcomes. In 2012, Bandura revisited the functional properties of self-efficacy theory in light of
controversial studies showing self-efficacy to have negative or null effects. He clarified that
social cognitive theory did not allege an invariant self-efficacy effect and noted that extraneous
factors distorted the relation between self-belief of capability and action in the conflicting studies
(Bandura, 2012).
Bandura’s (1997) principal concept of self-efficacy was that individuals could regulate
their lives by their beliefs in their capability to perform certain actions. Affirmative beliefs lead
to success from their efforts. In effect, a higher belief in self-efficacy resulted in greater
determination, more resiliency, and positive outcomes (Bandura, 2002). Although Bandura
argued that self-efficacy, the perceived capability to perform a behavior, causally influences
19

expected outcomes of behavior, he did not believe that outcome expectation, the belief that
certain results will come from given actions, influenced self-efficacy (Bandura, 1978, 2012).
Later research by Maddux et al. (1982) sought to determine if the two independent theories self-
efficacy, and outcome expectancy, are causally related in both a direct and the reverse
relationship.
Self-Efficacy in Virtual Religious Communities
The social cognitive theory argues that individuals’ social network influences, and their
cognition fashions an individual's behavior (Bandura, 1989). The cognitive aspects, self-efficacy,
and outcome expectation are vital influencers of knowledge sharing, as Hsu et al. (2007)
demonstrated in professional virtual communities. Self-efficacy, the personal belief an individual
holds of their capability to act, will be an essential aspect of this study to answer the research
question if self-efficacy impacts a participant's activity in the virtual church community.
The review of existing literature reflected limited data on self-efficacy’s impact on virtual
communities. Literature that examined self-efficacy in professional communities gave little
insight into how self-efficacy and the practice of knowledge sharing may impact virtual religious
communities. For example, Chiu et al. (2006) researched how the social cognitive theory of self-
efficacy and outcome expectation influenced a professional social network. However, Chiu et al.
omitted self-efficacy as an influence, citing the foundational principle of performance behaviors,
especially voluntary knowledge sharing and belief in one’s ability to share knowledge, as a
baseline in the study. His research focused on outcome expectation, showing a corollary
relationship with social cognitive and social capital theories. Hsu et al. (2007) highlighted factors
that affected individual behavior for sharing knowledge directed by self-efficacy beliefs, mainly
20

that highly self-efficacious persons shared more frequently in virtual communities. The research
conducted with 274 voluntary members of a virtual community determined that self-efficacy,
directly and indirectly, motivated personal behavior and was a possible predictor of knowledge
sharing behavior. Additionally, Hsu et al. (2007) showed that both self-efficacy and outcome
expectation significantly influenced individuals’ behavior in the virtual community.
Karna and Ko (2015) contributed to the research by determining how cognitive elements,
trust, and a collective mindset accelerated knowledge sharing in social collaboration network
sites. The research of 250 frequent SNS users who answered questions concerning motivational
factors, social collaboration, and knowledge sharing activity showed that individuals shared
more frequently when they thought their contribution would be worthwhile to create value for
others and themselves. A cyclical approach occurred when people shared knowledge in an SNS.
They gained self-confidence and hence shared more frequently. Karna and Ko (2015) also noted
that people shared knowledge in the social network because they enjoyed helping others.
The literature on self-efficacy and virtual religious communities is a relatively
understudied focus. Although research to understand the use of the Internet in shaping religious
beliefs and practices have existed over two decades, most of the data focus on the Internet’s
influence on online rituals and practices, definitions and religious understandings, online and
offline relationships, community, identity, and authority (Campbell, 2013). The void in the
literature for specific interactions and motivations in virtual religious communities offers this
study and future studies an opportunity to understand how cognitive factors motivate or
demotivate communication and knowledge sharing in specific communities.
21

Defining Social Capital
Despite its historical and intellectual course, defining social capital remained a
conundrum. No definitive consensus of the term exists, although similar conceptions are evident.
In Bowling Alone, political scientist Putnam affirmed the social capital conceptual discourse as a
historical debate reprised with contemporary terminology (Putnam, 2000, p. 24). Early
descriptors that characterized mutual impressions of embedded resources within social
structures, and the potentiality of accessing those resources for future use, were proposed by
Bourdieu (1986), Coleman (1988), and Lin (2001). To date, these common facets distinguish
social capital but do not entirely define it. Portes (1998) perceived social capital by the
advantages and beneficial interactions tied to group engagement. However, he inferred that the
concept lacked clarity, the terminology did not incorporate new ideas for sociologists, and he
expressed concerns with causality and measurement. Burt (1992) referred to social capital as a
metaphor and considered the work a diffuse concept. Despite a lack of clarity and a consensus
for the definition of social capital, theorists such as Putnam offered that the nomenclature
differences were marginal, particularly for social scientists who worked explicitly with social
capital (Putnam, 2001).
In essence, the aggregated conception of social capital consisted of a social organization's
features and its potential through its socially structured network. Studying the social, economic,
and cultural contexts of Italian governments and democracy performance, Putnam (1993) defined
social capital features as networks of social ties, levels of interpersonal trust and norms, and
resources that were accessible for individual and collective actions. While Putnam's definition
emphasized a cooperative nature of social capital, not all theorists agreed. For example, Portes
22

(1998) defined social capital as individuals' ability to activate scarce resources through their
membership in networks or broader social structures, emphasizing the importance of individual-
level effects, which contrasted Putnam. However, the social network ties were a common thread
with other theorists. Coleman (1988) stated that social capital was defined by its function, which
was not a singular action but included aspects of social structure and the actions induced in those
structures. He proposed that the relationships within the structures between actors were crucial to
differentiating social capital from other capital forms. His work emphasized social structure to a
greater extent over the individual (Coleman, 1988; Farr, 2004; Portes, 1998). Connecting the
work of developing relationships to capital itself, Lin (2001) defined social capital as access to
resources through network ties. Further, Lin & Smith (2001, p. 19) explained it as "investment in
social relations with expected returns in the marketplace".
In Bowling Alone, Putnam (2000) intellectualized yet simplified social capital's meaning
towards the general population as the network of resources that generated norms, trust, and
information. A closer look at the dimensions of social capital in the literature will offer a greater
understanding of its concept and capacity to benefit individuals and organizations.
Structural connectedness of social capital aligned with how Bourdieu saw social capital.
Bourdieu’s contribution to capital conception featured three key forms of capital: Cultural,
symbolic, and social capital (Bourdieu, 1985; 1986). Differentiated from cultural capital, which
he based upon knowledge and possessions, and symbolic capital, which manifested itself in the
form of honor, respect, and personal authority, Bourdieu stratified social capital by relationships,
essentially, whom one knows (1986). According to Bourdieu, group membership provided
individuals with a “credential,” a group worth, or a pooled resource whose value existed in the
symbolic exchanges within the structured group network (1986). Not restricted to the social
23

connections that benefitted personal objectives, Bourdieu’s idea of social capital incorporated a
collective enterprise’s notion (Bourdieu, 1986). Bourdieu identified social capital as the
“aggregate of the actual or potential resources which are linked to possession of a durable
network” (1986, p. 248-249). Further, Bourdieu (1986) suggested that an individuals’ network,
holding membership in many networks, or connectivity with a small network with powerful
actors directly influenced their social capital measure. Therefore, group membership offered the
capacity to access the group’s collective capital.
Social Capital as Capital
A long-standing interest in the capital generated by association with and participation in
social networks has been the subject of inspection and debate for decades. No conversation on
social capital could be complete without mention of Tocqueville's early contribution to the fields
of sociology and political economy in the United States. In his classic work, Democracy in
America, Tocqueville observed in 1831-1832 that Americans were uniquely individual, yet they
harnessed a collective power by associating for private and public goals (Tocqueville, 1969).
This early concept of social capital became the foundation on which modern scholars would
scaffold new ideals.
The idea of social capital expanded into conventional use in the public sectors during the
1980s, with Portes crediting Bourdieu for its preliminary contemporary analysis (Portes, 1998).
However, the early twentieth century captured social capital's earliest use from an educational
perspective. In 1916, Hanifan elaborated upon the accumulation of social capital as beneficial to
the advancement of the individual and the community. Hanifan referred to "goodwill, fellowship,
sympathy, and social intercourse," fundamental social capital components that connected
individuals and families of a social unit (Putnam, 2000, p. 19). Bourdieu, Loury, Lin, Coleman,
24

and Putnam contributed work toward theorizing, conceptualizing, and popularizing this aspect of
capital as it related to education, the economics of social networks, black marginalization,
membership exclusivity, and urban vitality (Bourdieu, 1986; Coleman, 1988; Portes, 1998;
Putnam, 2000).
Forms of Capital: Economic, Cultural, Social, and Structural
Principally, capital is the currency that grants access to a higher position in society, and
its driving force is the accumulation of capital. Bourdieu identified capital in three principal
forms: economic, cultural, and social (Bourdieu, 1977). He further distinguished symbolic
capital as a fourth and interlinking form of capital (Bourdieu, 1986). Economic capital associated
with power and wealth converted to money, real estate, or property rights. Cultural capital
consisted of three states; an embodied state marked by advancement to improve levels, an
objectified state, cultural goods artifacts, and an institutionalized state, which resulted in
educational qualifications and access (Bourdieu, 1977; Power, 1999).
Bourdieu categorized social capital as that which consisted of the social connectedness or
obligations, which also could convert to economic capital or incorporated into a noble title
(Bourdieu, 1977). Lastly, the concept of symbolic capital added to Bourdieu's sociological theory
catalog in that it noted the perception, knowledge, or recognition of economic or cultural capital
(Bourdieu, 1986). This form of symbolic capital was essential to Bourdieu's understanding of
social structures and power relations. Demonstrating the "interconnectedness" of the forms of
capital, Bourdieu and Wacquant determined that symbolic capital emerged when "recognition or
misrecognition" of forms of the economic, cultural, or social capital presented (1992, p. 119).
25

Bridging, Bonding, Social Capital, and Power
Bourdieu asserted that class distinction was influential in creating social capital (Farr,
2004). Bourdieu's emphasis on capital, class, and power exposed power's perpetuation amongst
the ruling and intellectual classes. His cultural capital relationships, established by familial or life
connections, generated closed networks of power or capital not readily accessible outside of the
networked structure. The sustained authoritative status and privilege over those with less capital
presupposed mobility challenges to access higher social positions by those with lower capital
(Bourdieu, 1977; 1986). The distinctions of social capital lay in the type of bonds formulated
within the network.
Early work by Granovetter (1973) proposed that social networks consisted of ties
between individuals that connect them. The two distinctions, notably strong or weak ties, either
characterized deep affinities, such as what one expects from family or friends, or weaker bonds,
representing acquaintances, associates of other friends, or even strangers with a shared
background. Granovetter (1973) proposed that weaker ties held a more significant influence in
improving or elevating one’s life platforms by sharing new information such as job opportunities
and diverse perspectives. The weaker tie's strength was that it provided individuals access to
levels previously inaccessible with others who could generate new interactions and substantially
impact outcomes and well-being (Granovetter, 1973). Hence, weaker ties formulated a bridging
capital into an expanding network.
On the other hand, bonding capital was the sort that maintained relations within already
strongly associated individuals such as family and close friends. Coleman (1988) saw the inward
focus of bonding capital as a group closure that reserved information and benefits within a set
26

group. Min (2009) found that certain groups maintained or potentially gained privileges with
disproportionately allocated power and resources. The outcome of group closure was that it
inhibited entrepreneurial activity, limited the network’s growth, weakened bridging social
capital, and sustained power perpetuation amongst the ruling class (Bourdieu, 1977).
Value of Social Capital
Marking a shift from the focal point of capital as the production and exchange of
commodities in Marxist ideology, human and social capital focused on individual actors and
organizations (Lin, 2001). Paying close attention to the benefits received by either group, Lin
(2001) suggested that human and social capital were also marketable capital. However, not all
scholars agreed, as Abell (2003) criticized Lin’s articulation of social capital’s transference into
marketable capital. At the same time that he disagreed that the concept correlated to market
exchanges, Abell (2003) agreed that time and effort investments could develop relationships.
Portes (1998) believed that the resources embedded in a social network, a characterization of
social capital, could transfer into significant non-monetary forms of capital such as power and
influence. However, Bourdieu (1986) and others proposed that social capital comprised both the
network and the assets mobilized through that network (Burt, 1992; Lin, 2001; Putnam, 2000).
Similarly, Farr (2004) proposed that accessibility to a structured network cultivated the
advancement, productivity, and future growth of individuals and organizations. Adler and Kwon
(1999) suggested that the assets, like all capital forms, could be invested with future returns’
expectations.
The central idea of forms of capital is value, and things with value are measurable. Many
scholars tied a person’s social capital to their network, ensuring their ability to succeed or
27

achieve. Coleman (1988) suggested that social capital was productive and appropriable, yielding
useful and profitable results not possible outside of the network structure. He credited these
productive goals to the social structure and individuals' actions within the social structure.
Bourdieu (1986) suggested that social capital was convertible. The size of one's network,
coupled with the extent to which one could access and draw upon the embedded resources,
determined the volume of social capital one possessed (Bourdieu, 1986). Putnam suggested that
networks and the associated norms of reciprocity offer value to the people within the networks.
Although the network was responsible for creating value, others may also benefit, and they
potentially contribute value to the greater community (Putnam, 2001). Lin (2001) considered
social capital theory from an analytical perspective that emphasized that an individual's social
resource quality affected one's success or achievement.
Social Capital Dimensions
As with the definition of social capital, there is no unified scholarly consensus of social
capital’s dimensions. Nahapiet and Ghoshal (1998) suggested that the social capital dimensions,
structural, relational, and cognitive, are highly interrelated, and independent analysis of the
dimensions cannot yield a total reflection of its value. A sum of social capital's independent
dimensions or aspects does not necessarily equate to all social capital. A closer look into the
dimensions will give insight into how to construct meaning to social capital concepts.
Structural Dimension of Social Capital
At its gist, most agree that social capital is a by-product of relationships (Bourdieu, 1985;
Coleman, 1988; Ellison et al., 2007; Lin, 2001; Putnam, 2000; Wellman et al., 2001). As the title
implies, the structural dimension defines the networked organization's character by its social
28

structure, embedded resources, diversity, density, and network size (Lin, 2001; Portes, 1998).
The consensus supports that involvement and group participation, as an integral aspect of
sociability, builds individual and community capital (Bourdieu, 1985; Coleman, 1988; Lin,
2001). This structural connectedness of social capital aligned with Bourdieu's definition of social
capital. Bourdieu specified social capital by relationships, essentially, whom one knows (1986).
His definition differentiated it from cultural capital, one's knowledge and possessions, and
symbolic capital, which manifested itself in the form of honor, respect, and personal authority
(Bourdieu, 1977; 1986). According to Bourdieu, group membership provided individuals with a
"credential," a group worth, or a pooled resource whose value existed in the symbolic exchanges
within the structured group network (1986). Although his idea did not restrict social capital only
to the social connections that benefitted personal objectives, it incorporated the notion of a
collective enterprise (Bourdieu, 1986). Bourdieu identified social capital as the "aggregate of the
actual or potential resources which are linked to possession of a durable network" (1986, p. 248-
249). He suggested a potent connection between an individual’s social capital and their
networks, either by holding membership in many networks or in a small network with powerful
actors as group membership offered the capacity to access the group's collective capital (1986).
The structural dimension of social capital refers to the network structure, network
diversity, density, and size (Bourdieu, 1989; Lin, 2001). This dimension is discernible by social
interaction ties characterized by Granovetter's (1973) strong and weak ties. Civic engagement,
membership, and participation in political activities are a few distinctions noted within the
structural dimension. Nahapiet and Ghoshal (1998) referred to sociability as a part of the
29

structural dimension of social capital. They also distinguished between the structural and
relational embeddedness of structural social capital, as did Granovetter (Tsai & Ghoshal, 1998).
Relational Dimension of Social Capital
The relational dimension, characterized by the nature and quality of relationships,
includes the trusts, norms, and identification within a group and grants access to the resources
(Ellison et al., 2007; Lin, 2001; Putnam, 2000; Wellman et al., 2001). Bourdieu (1985)
articulated that social capital generates through individuals or groups of mutual acquaintance and
recognition. Networks of relationships assimilate and accrue tangible and intangible resources,
which surmount social capital (Bourdieu,1985). In general terms, Coleman (1988) described
social capital as the resources gathered through relationships.
While the tangibility of social capital subsists on the lower spectrum of observable
material compared to physical capital and human capital (Coleman, 1988), the resources
obtained through social connections are critical to achieving goals for individuals, social groups,
organizations, and communities (Lin, 2001; Putnam 2000). The foundation of social connections
intricately intertwines into the building of capital. Hence, social capital's core idea is that the
available resources through social interactions generate beneficial opportunities for individuals
and groups to achieve existent and prospective goals (Lin, 2001; Nahapiet & Ghoshal, 1998).
With other forms of capital, resources can reside within the individual; however, social capital
stands apart as the capital resides within the relationship (Robison et al., 2002).
The relational dimension classifies two types of capital that Putnam delineates with
bonding or bridging typology. Putnam defined bonding social capital as an "inward-looking
network" that cohesively reinforces identities and homogenous groups (Putnam, 2000, p.22). In
30

essence, bonding networks consist of family and close friends. On the contrary, bridging capital
takes advantage of the relational network's diversity and density that Bourdieu subscribed to by
formulating open networks that are "outward-looking" (Putnam, 2000). Granovetter (1973)
proposed that bridging capital benefited individuals by creating linkages of a network of strong
ties to weaker ties as bridges to other networks. Lin (2001) further hypothesized that the
relational capital was action-oriented for use to meet specific goals.
Cognitive Dimension of Social Capital
Norms and values distinguish social capital's cognitive dimension which is characterized
by shared emotional connections, social support, collective goals, and civic norms (Nahapiet &
Ghoshal, 1998; Tsai & Ghoshal, 1998). In addition to the previous notions, Nahapiet and
Ghoshal (1998) expanded the cognitive dimension definition to capture the affinity generated
through shared codes, languages, narratives, and culture, particularly in corporate settings. They
proposed that social capital theory effectively explained how knowledge and knowing was
shared, given the “social embeddedness of intellectual capital” (p. 250). Thus, social capital
structural dimension of network ties, cognitive dimension with shared codes, language,
narratives, and relational dimension of trust, and identification, facilitated the knowledge
exchange, thereby creating new intellectual capital (Nahapiet & Ghoshal, 1998).
Researching the macro-micro level of a multinational company with numerous local
business units, Tsai and Ghoshal (1998) asserted that the significant manifestations of the
cognitive dimension, common values, and shared vision encouraged trust in relationships. They
argued that in complex organizations, a shared vision that “embodies the collective goals and
aspirations of the members of an organization” developed cognitive social capital that promoted
31

individual and group actions which benefited the organization (p. 467). Further, Tsai and
Ghoshal established the idea that a shared vision integrates an organizations’ resources. By
connecting the cognitive and structural dimensions of social capital, the literature prominently
displayed the significance of shared vision and the development of interpersonal and corporate
trust and reciprocities (Tsai & Ghoshal, 1998).
Reciprocity allows people to get things done that they would not be able to do on their
own. It is a social exchange feature that Putnam (2000) profoundly associated as an aspect of
social capital that was essential to society. The American Psychological Association online
dictionary (n.d.) refers to reciprocity as “the quality of an act, process, or relationship in which
one person receives benefits from another and, in return, provides an equivalent benefit.” As a
social norm, reciprocity responds to others' actions with returned actions that potentially generate
trust and build more significant capital.
Putnam refers to reciprocity as the idea that one does something for another without
expecting an immediate return but holding confidence for a later repayment (2000, p. 134).
Tocqueville (1969) noted that the societal acceptance of “The Golden Rule” ingrained
citizenship and community in American society. This code of conduct deeply intertwined
reciprocity with honesty and trust, which needed to coexist for social capital’s use. Positive
reciprocity generated trust, and in turn, generated more capital. When offered with or without a
sense of obligation, reciprocity can be a norm that compels people to help others who have
helped them. Swärd (2016) demonstrated that reciprocal actions were necessary for generating
trust amongst project managers in professional settings, even in short-term organizational
32

relationships. Within the shared understandings of the cognitive dimension, reciprocity, trust,
norms, and values are evident.
Emotional support, religious values, social and civic norms substantiated shared
understandings that develop trust and reciprocity (Lin, 2001; Putnam, 2000; Wuthnow, 2002);
however, it is not unique or specific only to the cognitive dimension. There often exists overlaps
in the manifestations of actions and suppositions of the structural, relational, and cognitive
dimensions of social capital, inter-relational properties that cannot be avoided or unnoticed
(Nahapiet & Ghoshal, 1998).
Selfish Motivations and Trust
One must be careful about the implications of motivation theory and outcome expectation
in church groups. Albeit there exists the potential for some malfeasant actors to exploit network
resources for opportunistic gain (Wu et al., 2012), this threat exists whether in-person or online.
Self-advancement and self-promotion intentions apart from spiritual growth and development
can be unwelcome in church groups. Nevertheless, the researcher stresses two essential aspects
of consideration, biblical precepts, and trust constructs.
The Bible is replete with examples of how the first-century church generated trusts and
norms to share resources amongst believers for the common good generously. The sacred texts
of Matthew 25:35-40, Luke 3:10-11, Acts 4:32-35, James 2:14-18 invoke relational ties and
trust. The writings admonished church members to share, consider one another, help, and seek
the group’s common good. Centuries later, the biblical mandate remains for the modern-day
Christian church. Although the terminology for social capital is contemporary (Bourdieu, 1986),
33

biblical principles exude social capital concepts, such as trust, shared norms and values, and
embedded and shared resources.
Research showed that when trust levels are high in virtual communities, individuals will
behave properly (Ridings et al., 2002), avoid opportunistic behavior, and increasingly share
knowledge, thereby increasing social capital (Chiu et al., 2006; Tsai & Ghoshal, 1998). Burt
(1992) opined that social capital is more often a consequence rather than a goal. Social capital
develops with increased trust, and higher levels of trust diminish the probability of opportunism
(Nahapiet & Ghoshal, 1998). Other studies showed that trust levels significantly impacted
community loyalty by influencing personal perceptions of perceived knowledge sharing
self-efficacy, relative advantage, compatibility, and member behavior (Lin, M.-J. et al., 2009;
Nahapiet & Ghoshal, 1998). Further, Tsai and Ghoshal (1998) affirmed that trust influenced
virtual communities' exchange of resources.
Interwoven with trusted relationships, the exchange of resources is foundational to the
development of social capital networks (Bourdieu, 1986; Lin, N., 2001; Putnam, 2000). As far as
opportunists and self-interested actors, Putnam reflected that not all of the network's costs nor
benefits accrue towards one person since social capital is also organizationally inclined (Putnam,
2000, p. 179). Ridings et al. (2002) further articulated that integrity, reliability, and good
intentions were necessary factors to establish trust in virtual communities. These were branded as
part of the cultural values and affirmed the credibility of the group.
Benefits of Social Capital
The literature has highlighted social capital as benefiting individuals and organizations
(Coleman, 1988; Lin, 2001; Putnam, 2000). Burt (1992) suggested that it was the individual
34

social capital that collectively formulated organizations’ social capital. Coleman (1988) stated
that social capital did not exist outside of the individual nor the organization but was inherent
within and arose mainly from the relationship. He referred to the organization itself as a
purposive organization by stressing corporate actors’ relations as social capital. While Coleman
(1988) stressed more of the corporate action of social capital, others such as Putnam (2000) and
Lin (2001) held broader assumptions of individual and organizational mutual benefits. Putnam
expanded the idea that social capital held measurable assets evident on multiple levels;
individual, group, organization, community, and society (2000).
Embeddedness and Purposive Actions
Of social capital features, the embeddedness of resources, access, and purposive action
stands out. Bourdieu (1986) suggested that social capital comprised both the network and the
assets mobilized through a network aligned with common beliefs. Agreeing upon the structured
nature of networks, Burt (1992), Lin (2001), and Putnam (2000) acknowledged the effective use
of the assets to accomplish particular goals and purposes. Coleman (1988) stated that social
capital facilitated certain actions of actors, whether persons or corporate actors, within the
structure (p. S98). As actors were motivated to certain actions and the actions met specific goals,
the networked social capital’s strength became evident. Therefore, summarily, social capital
contains these features: structural embeddedness, accessibility, action-orientation for the
individual and collective organizational purpose (Lin, 2001).
Lin (2001) defined social capital as the resources embedded in a social structure that is
accessed and mobilized in purposive actions. However, the characteristics of the resources were
not fixed or immutable. The information flowed lucidly between actors in the network. Since the
information was previously inaccessible, it became actionable as it advanced through the social
35

network to achieve goals or a specific purpose (Lin, 2001). Purposive or collective actions work
to meet collective objectives generally not possible outside of the networked connotation (Lin,
2001).
Social Capital Online
More than 50 years ago, a UCLA graduate student team connected a computer-to-
computer network with a Stanford Research Institute team, creating the precursor to today’s
Internet (Cerf & Aboba, 1993). The impact of this event on October 29, 1969, afforded global
communities’ opportunities to communicate, network, and bridge logistic and economic gaps.
The advancements of communications technology and information evolution profoundly
influenced developing social communities and interpersonal interactions (Chang et al., 2011).
However, it is not the technology alone that drives the network, but the reciprocal nature of the
technology and the human social aspects and values that shape the technology’s use to influence
and be an influencer (Bandura, 2002). According to technology experts interviewed by The Pew
Research Center, projections of the digital life future are optimistic. Experts anticipate
technological advancements will lead to better communications, stronger interpersonal
relationships, and positive community development (Stansberry et al., 2020).
Over the past few decades, the rise in online social networking sites (SNS) and virtual
communities has stimulated research significant research to understand its influence upon social
communities and interpersonal interactions online and offline (Wu et al., 2012). Research has
sought to determine how the rise in internet technology, instant access to information, education,
and aspects of business and daily affairs changed how individuals communicate (Bandura, 2002;
Robey et al., 2000; Wu et al., 2012). Scholarly interest in digital networks and virtual
communities increased as social media forms generated individual’s opportunities to network
36

positively to construct social capital components (De Zuniga et al., 2017; Valenzuela et al.,
2009). Online platforms, such as Facebook, conveniently provided virtual social network sites
congruent to sharing knowledge, but as Bandura (2002) hinted, not all interaction was positive.
A dark side of electronic communication happened when anonymity spawned less self-restraint,
allowing people to behave their worst.
When social networks establish trust, negative interactions are less evident (Bandura,
2002). Much of the research showed positive and productive benefits for social capital within
social networking sites. For example, Ellison, Steinfield, and Lampe (2007) examined
Facebook's use of social networking as a source to build social capital. In a study of 286
undergraduate students, they measured three types of social capital, bridging, bonding, and
maintained social capital, in correlation with Facebook intensity use. The data affirmed a
significant association between Facebook use and all three social capital measures, particularly
bridging bonds. Their findings suggested that online interactions can support offline relationships
by maintaining connections, even amidst life and career changes (Ellison et al., 2007).
The increasing availability of social networking sites continues to grant accessibility for
individuals to become part of a networked structure. Additional research showed that SNS
participation strongly correlated with building new networks, political engagement, and
participation in online or offline mobilization efforts (De Zuniga et al., 2017).
Social Capital and Social Networking Sites
Robert Putnam’s thesis of American social capital emphasized the disintegration and
decline of networked capital. He proposed that this was due to the breakdown of the traditional
family unit, the decline in social cohesion primarily due to racial tensions characterized by
37

“white flight,” and the generational decline in civic and voluntary participation (Putnam, 2000,
Chapter 15). Twenty years after his work was published, the Internet arose as a locus for social
engagement and participation. The Internet is replete with social networking sites (SNSs) in
which users can connect, meet, and network to generate new social ties. Web-based platforms
allow for identity construction, friendship connections, and social interactions (Ellison et al.,
2014). In particular, the SNSs provide a social networking platform in which individuals and
organizations create profiles to develop ties, maintain current relationships, and share their
connectivity with others (Ellison et al., 2007).
Pew Research determined in 2021 that a significant number of Americans used YouTube
81% and Facebook 69%, considerably outpacing other social media sites (Auxier & Anderson,
2022). Just a few years earlier, a 2018 Pew Research study also affirmed that Facebook and
YouTube dominated the social media platforms, with 68% of U.S. adults accessing sites via
mobile devices (Smith & Anderson, 2021). Even though millennials used YouTube, Instagram,
and Twitter with greater frequencies, Facebook remained the most widely used social media. A
substantial overlap existed in using multiple social media platforms, with the median use of three
SNSs for many U.S. adults (Smith & Anderson, 2021). As recent as October 2020, Statista
confirmed that Facebook remained the most popular social networking site with over 2 billion
users (Clement, 2020). With its dominating presence in American life, social ties, and
connections, it is no surprise that interest in Facebook's platform generated a significant amount
of research.
38

Facebook Friends, Bridging, and Bonding Social Capital
To understand the benefits of the social network ties of Facebook friends, Ellison et al.
(2007) sought to understand the relationship between the use of Facebook and the formation and
maintenance of social capital. The research in 286 students who regularly used the site affirmed
the SNS's ability to support online and offline friendships and build social capital. According to
the study, Facebooks' most significant benefit granted access to resources held by weaker ties,
more than stronger ties (Ellison et al., 2007). The study's conclusion implied that weaker ties,
identified as a friend of a friend, had a higher propensity to build bridging ties, provided access
to new and novel information as noted by Granovetter (1973), and provided diverse perspectives
associated with bridging capital (Ellison et al., 2014). In a later study, Ellison et al. (2014)
researched specific Facebook relationship maintenance behaviors, such as responding to friends'
posts, to examine their role in perceived bridging social capital. Considering 614 U.S. adults, the
data affirmed that the social and technical aspects of Facebook provided a platform for
individuals to readily make investments into and withdraw resources from their network (Ellison
et al., 2014). Ellison et al. (2014) sought to understand how Facebook enabled greater access to
resources held by weaker ties and bridged social capital. The premise that individuals with
stronger ties held strong bonding social capital due to multiple communication channels, higher
levels of trust, and more significant support leading to accessibility and capital conversion.
However, those with weaker ties had fewer channels to communicate to build bridging capital
(Haythornthwaite, 2005) but would benefit from Facebook as a site to generate social capital.
The literature confirmed that the Facebook platform provided a manner to build and maintain
weaker ties. Essentially, Facebook allowed users to develop broad and diverse social networks
39

and facilitated resource exchanges, therefore enabling bridging social capital (Ellison et al.,
2014).
Burke et al. (2011) studied three types of Facebook behaviors to determine how
Facebook use affects social capital. The researchers evaluated direct communication with
individual friends, generating posts that others read, and passive social news intake such as
reading friends status updates of 415 users. Of the three types of social engagement, the data
showed that only direct person-to-person communication increased bridging social capital,
especially receiving messages. However, sending messages did not generate social capital as it
did not necessarily demonstrate that a new tie was established (Burke et al., 2011).
Eleven years after Ellison's (2007) compelling research on the benefits of "friends,"
Vanden Abeele (2018) replicated the results, affirming Facebook use as a significant factor in
predicting bonding, bridging, and maintaining social capital. In effect, the data associated
frequent Facebook use with greater social capital accumulation that was more significant in
garnering social capital than Internet use alone (Ellison et al., 2007; Vanden Abeele, 2018).
Vanden Abeele (2018) found a significant correlation in bonding social capital from active use of
private Facebook messages, unlike Burke et al. (2011). Burke did not tie Facebook use with
consequential bonding capital. Burke suggested that the unexpected finding was likely due to the
nature of existing offline strong relationships. He encouraged future research to correlate
increasing bonding social capital and SNS use by considering media multiplexity
(Haythornthwaite, 2005) to explain how individuals often communicate with friends on multiple
sites (Burke et al., 2011). Researching concurrent multiple SNS's uses and gratification theory,
Phua et al. (2017) sought to understand bridging and bonding social capital development. The
study of 297 SNS users determined that frequent users of SNSs gained significantly different
40

levels of bridging and bonding social capital from their use. Bridging social capital was more
significant due to high levels of trust, recognition, and emotional bonds. Both Burke et al. (2011)
and Phua et al. (2017) found trust to be a significant measure of network strength, site use
intensity, and the creation of bonding and bridging social capital.
The literature consistently showed that Facebook provided a powerful platform in which
certain social capital types readily establish and convert capital (Ellison et al., 2007; Ellison et
al., 2014; Vandeen Abeele, 2018). However, having a social media account alone did not
generate ties as specific, identified behaviors built network ties. Burke et al. (2011) suggested
that SNS site designers develop more effective communication tools to increase the actual
connectedness of person-to-person. Since his publication in 2011, updates to the Facebook
platform for that purpose have been substantial.
Social Capital and Facebook Business, a.k.a. Fan Pages
Over the years, Facebook has matured from just a social networking site amongst
“friends” to a billion-dollar enterprise of multiple social networking sites with multiple uses and
target platforms within Facebook itself. Facebook offers sociability factors between friends and
generates interest and connectivity to businesses, community groups, special interest groups. It
offers business tools, marketing, and events promotions and support for non-profits in its
growing platform. Not much scholarly data exists for Facebook business pages, formerly known
as fan pages; however, Lin and Lu (2011) conveyed that Facebook fan pages built brand
awareness and created business opportunities. Facebook-branded pages differed from
individuals’ personal social profile pages. They marketed business profiles to millions of
Facebook users. Individuals connected with the business page and followed the page for updates,
41

notifications, events, videos, and live events. With the ability to promote brands to targeted
audiences on its platform and generate a following, a benefit from inexpensive advertising and
target market segmentation, Facebook was the best social media network named for small
businesses to grow (Brookins, 2016). Like the friend-to-friend Facebook interactions, the
consumer’s use of Facebook’s business/fan page demonstrated that social interaction ties, shared
values, and trust remain core to building brand loyalty and intent to use (Lin & Lu, 2011).
Social Capital and Virtual Communities
Another level of online connectivity and networking is the virtual community. Virtual
communities exist online as social networks, often within social networking sites, consisting of
people who share common interests, goals, or practices. Virtual communities may be
professional or social, consist of voluntary or paid membership, and offer learning or knowledge
sharing components (Chiu et al., 2006). The Facebook virtual communities, Facebook groups
offer another manner of connecting with friends and meeting new people. The literature suggests
that individuals expand their social network when they join a virtual community (Chiu et al.,
2006; Hsu et al., 2007). The structural, relational, and cognitive dimensions of social capital are
evidenced within virtual communities in the forms of social interactions, trust, norms,
reciprocity, and shared values, vision, and language (Chiu et al., 2006; Lin & Lu, 2011). Virtual
communities’ natural structure fosters social interactions that engender access to the embedded
resources within a group. This foundation sustains virtual communities, leading to increased
social capital for individuals who frequently use them (Chiu et al., 2006; Ellison et al., 2007).
The establishment and strengthening of network ties build a core component to share
information and knowledge in virtual communities (Chiu et al., 2006; Hsu et al., 2007). Scott and
42

Johnson (2005) refer to E-communities as groups of people who communicate regularly for a
duration of time over the Internet. Research has sought to determine what motivators influence
and enhance knowledge sharing in these communities. For instance, Chiu et al. (2006)
researched social network influence and associated social cognitive theories of self-efficacy and
outcome expectation to determine if there was an increase in the frequency and quality of
knowledge shared in a virtual community of 310 professionals. The results indicated that social
interaction ties, trust, reciprocities, and identification were significant predictors of knowledge
sharing but not knowledge quality. Social interaction ties in the virtual community facilitated
information flow when strong relational bonds were present and frequent communication
existed. Chiu et al. (2006) examined integrity as a value that built trust necessary to encourage
knowledge sharing. As noted by other research, when trust existed between parties, individuals
were more willing to engage in cooperative actions (Nahapiet & Ghoshal, 1998). Chiu et al.
(2006) recognized the norm of reciprocity as mutual and fair knowledge exchanges, contributing
to generating trust.
Lastly, along with previously stated aspects, identification was a positive predictor of
knowledge sharing. Previous studies showed that when individuals visualized themselves with
others in the group, they identified as a part of the group (Nahapiet & Ghoshal, 1998). Chiu et al.
(2006) determined that group members developed a sense of belonging, which contributed to the
elevated trust. Trust played an essential role in the quality but not in the quantity of knowledge
shared (Chiu et al., 2006). Nahapiet and Ghoshal (1998) and Chiu et al. (2006) affirmed a
significant relationship between social trust, social capital, and online interactions that engender
network bonds of trust that encourage knowledge sharing.
43

Social Capital and Religion
The literature generally agrees that religious institutions are exemplar organizations that
precipitated social capital, although it disagrees on the type of social capital generated (Bourdieu,
1986; Lin, 2001; Putnam, 2000; Wuthnow, 2002). In his seminal work, The Forms of Capital,
Bourdieu (1986) suggested three manifestations of capital in general: economic, cultural, and
social. His contribution to the concept of social capital piqued interest at the intersection of
individuals and religious organizations by framing religion as a place of societal belonging that
networked potential promises of credit (Bourdieu, 1989). Factors that Bourdieu considered for
the development of social capital were mutual acquaintance, participation, and network.
If religious precepts are grounded in belonging, then religious institutions offer a
fellowship through networked relationships that support belonging. Putnam's declaration of the
church as the most credible repertoire of social capital in America affirmed its viability as an
integral part of society (Putnam, 2000, p. 66). Offering more than weekly sermons, religious
institutions have served as a place for civic engagement, volunteerism, and involvement for
diverse groups (Wuthnow, 2002). Recent research in online religion intermingles the
construction of social ties, identity, and community development in digital religious spaces to
describe social capital in religion (Campbell, 2010, 2012, 2013).
Involvement with religious organizations and religious identity can generate social capital
through the networks and norms, trusts, and relationships that help individuals and organizations
meet goals (Coleman 1988; Loury 1987; Putnam 1993; Putnam 2000). Churches often serve as
places to solidify bonding social capital and create bridging social capital. Congregations offer
interpersonal networks that help individuals attain goals and connect with influential people in
their communities (Dunlop & Buckingham, 2019; Wuthnow, 2002). Dunlop and Buckingham
44

(2019) sought to find a more inclusive terminology for how faith communities meet social needs,
strengthen communities, and encourage members to engage politically, socially, and
economically. They felt that the term, social capital, limited the experience.
When aligned with a common religious identity, the facets of social capital, shared norms
and values, and reciprocities are evident in structural, relational, and cognitive dimensions
through the relationship distinctions. Lin (2001) considered the social capital produced in many
religious organizations as bonding capital that provides social support, a norm/value. By
evaluating the social behavior and religious activity in social networks, Schafer and Upenieks
(2016) determined that characteristically closed triadic social networks generated bonding
capital. The closed triadic social networks, described by Easley and Kleinberg (2010), proposed
that if two people in a network had a common friend, there was an increased likelihood that they
would become friends at some point. Schafer and Upenieks (2016) compared church
congregants’ social networks to understand congregant to congregant and congregant to non-
congregant social relationships. They determined that inter-congregational relationships created
social networks that generated a tight coherence of religious lifestyle and daily secular activities
(Schafer & Upenieks, 2016). The closed triadic network produced stable and durable social ties
that engendered bonding social capital that helped the organization meet goals within a tightly
knit network. Trust and familiarity were notable staples of bonding social capital.
Contrasting bonding capital in religious networks, scholars sought to determine if the
bridging type of social capital developed in religious communities to reach across economic
layers. Wuthnow (2002) emphasized the importance of relationships to generate bridging social
capital. He noted that in addition to membership, holding a leadership position best aligned the
45

possibility of building bridging social capital. Social capital generated benefits for church
members by bridging capital through developed interpersonal networks. Churches consist of
influential people, and church members' religious involvement helped bridge higher and lower
social capital status relationships. In effect, one's religious engagement fit productively with the
facets notable to social capital: networks, norms, and relationships structured for individual and
group goal attainment (Loury, 1987; Putnam, 2000; Wuthnow, 2002).
As members of a faith community share values and beliefs, other aspects of social capital
exist, such as shared norms, social support, common language, shared vision, and emotional
connections. As a result, church culture, the behavioral norms evident in congregations,
influences individual participation and alliance. Even amongst those who attend different
churches, the faith community has shared values and behaviors that can lead to trust. The data
hinted that "religious adherence" could lead to bridging social capital across churches (Deller
et al., 2018).
Social capital generated in religious organizations benefits the individual and the
organization. It also benefits communities when used for purposive intentions. Coleman and
Putnam affirmed churches as essential incubators for civic skills, civic norms, community
interests, and civic recruitment (Putnam, 2000, p. 66) that were formidable sources of generating
social capital (Coleman, 1988). Employing Putnam's concept of social capital, Strømsnes (2008)
analyzed the importance of church attendance and membership in formulating social capital
measured by an individual's motivation to become politically engaged. Utilizing the Norwegian
Citizenship Survey, the data showed a positive correlation between political activeness and
church members when the frequency of attendance was above average.
46

Considering the historical significance of religious institutions in the United States,
Schwadel et al. (2016) found that the social capital embedded in church-based social networks
served as a leading civic activity resource. The research evaluated more than 600 attendees of
two evangelical churches. The data showed that the density and size of an individual's church
social network positively influenced civic efficacy and religious and secular civic activities.
Likewise, in communities with strong religious influence and organizational concentration,
Deller et al. (2018) validated that many religious organizations positively impacted
entrepreneurial activity. While the data showed that religious institutions and traditions
influenced entrepreneurial activity levels through the mechanism of social capital, Deller et al.
(2018) warned against overgeneralizing Coleman's (1988) claims that religion generates more
social capital than any other American institution.
The literature affirmed that church involvement motivated purposive actions embedded in
networks to promote civic participation, political engagement, and business establishment
(Deller et al., 2018; Schwadel et al., 2016). The action generated positive benefits for
individuals, organizations, and communities. Future research should compare the degree of
capital generated by social networks within churches to different organizations.
Religion Online and in Social Networking Sites
The Christian church's essence is rooted in fellowship. Church gatherings discipled and
encouraged believers with life principles and evangelistic practices as evidenced in the biblical
scriptures of Colossians 1:28-29 and Hebrews 10:24-25 (Biblica, Inc., 2011). The fellowship is a
hallmark of church congregational intimacy. At one time, these communal gatherings existed
within in-person settings only. However, with the use of technology, television, and the Internet,
47

reaching more people affirmed that spiritual growth could occur virtually. The Internet has
become "not only a place of social connection but also one where individuals can seek out
personal spiritual enhancement" (Campbell, 2005, p. 53).
One platform used with particular ease and commonality is Facebook. Utilizing the 2012
National Congregations Study, Lee (2017) projected a high degree of Facebook use by religious
institutions when certain factors were present. Facebook utilization correlated positively with
large membership size, staff resources, and the congregations’ involvement in non-religious
engagement, including social and political activities. When churches substantially engaged with
the community and events outside of their organization, the data showed higher use of the SNS.
Other vital factors correlated to Facebook use by a congregation included religious tradition,
evangelical protestants showing the highest use, and location with urban churches more likely to
use it. Conversely, the more aged the lead clergy, the less likely the church utilized the platform
(Lee, 2017).
Churches and other organizations generally accepted social media platforms and apps
because they offered low cost immediate, and direct contact with stakeholders (Kaplan &
Haenlein, 2010). Research into organizational use of Facebook suggested that a congregation's
social media platforms' use was closely related to their level of community outreach, social
marketing activities, and resources (Lee, 2017). Additional research of SNS in non-religious
settings evaluated the social support structure and well-being of users of social networking sites
(Utz & Breuer, 2017), motivators for sharing behaviors in virtual communities (Phua et al.,
2017), citizenship influences for political participation (De Zuniga et al., 2017), and
communication practices within social media sites (Hsu et al., 2007).
48

The 2020 COVID-19 pandemic impacted churches significantly, with states
implementing gathering restrictions to enforce social distance regulations to stop the spread of
COVID-19 (Brannon, 2020). In efforts to limit "super spreader" events, many churches streamed
their weekly services to members using broadcasting services (Hamner et al., 2020).
Circumstances of the 2020 pandemic shifted the church's perspective regarding the necessity to
use technology and SNS to broadcast services and connect members. In an August 2020 Pew
Research survey of 10,211 U.S. adults, 33% stated they had watched religious services online or
on TV. Of those who typically attend church at least monthly, 72% had attended virtually
(Gecewicz & Smith, 2020).
Social Capital Theory and Social Cognitive Theory
The correlation of Social Capital Theory and Social Cognitive Theory is perceivable
because the principal idea of social capital is investing in networked relationships with the
expectation of a return (Lin, 2001, p.19; Portes, 1998; Putnam, 2000). By framing social capital
as an investment in social relations with a later transfer to another form of capital, positions
social capital as something to be accessed through personal actions (Lin, 2001).
Few studies on online community behaviors have specifically considered motivational
theories as drivers for developing social capital and accessing anticipated returns. By intersecting
social capital theory and social cognitive theory, Chiu et al. (2006) contributed to the research by
examining the integrated consequence of the two theories upon knowledge sharing in virtual
communities. Chiu et al. (2006) analyzed social cognitive aspects of individual and community
outcome expectation and determined that a social cognitive theory alone was insufficient to
encourage knowledge sharing in virtual communities. However, greater understanding occurred
49

when the researchers framed social capital constructs such as trusts, ties, reciprocity, shared
language, and shared vision (Chiu et al., 2006). When both social cognitive and social capital
theories were present, outcome expectations exceeded quantitative and qualitative knowledge
sharing more than outcome expectations alone (Chiu et al., 2006). The data suggested that future
studies consider how motivational theories, particularly self-efficacy, and outcome expectations,
help or hinder engagement levels, connectivity in virtual communities, and responsiveness to
organizational requests and activities.
In a case study of the influence of self-efficacy on social trust and social capital on
Facebook, Wu et al. (2012) sought to determine a user's social traits model. They analyzed how
friendship and respect empowered individuals to take advantage of social privileges and acquire
personal resources. The survey of 415 Facebook users indicated a strong relationship that self-
efficacy positively influenced social trust, social trust positively influenced social capital, and
social trust consolidated the relationship between social self-efficacy and social capital (Wu et
al., 2012). A key finding for the online community was that individuals possessed the confidence
to build social trust by interacting with others and making friends. Wu et al. (2012) suggested
that future research determine how to improve social self-efficacy in online communities,
particularly since deception is a potential problem when people interact online. However, since
this study considered social trust due to self-efficacy, Wu suggested that the relationship between
social self-efficacy and social trust deserved further discussion.
Selfish Motivations and Trust
One must be careful about the implications of motivation theory and outcome expectation
in church groups. Albeit there exists the potential for some malfeasant actors to exploit network
50

resources for opportunistic gain (Wu et al., 2012), this threat exists whether in-person or online.
Self-advancement and self-promotion intentions apart from spiritual growth and development
can be unwelcome in church groups. Nevertheless, the researcher stresses two essential aspects
of consideration, biblical precepts, and trust constructs.
The Bible is replete with examples of how the first-century church generated trusts and
norms to share resources amongst believers for the common good generously. The sacred texts
of Matthew 25:35-40, Luke 3:10-11, Acts 4:32-35, James 2:14-18 invoke relational ties and
trust. The writings admonished church members to share, consider one another, help, and seek
the group’s common good. Centuries later, the biblical mandate remains for the modern-day
Christian church. Although the terminology for social capital is contemporary (Bourdieu, 1986),
biblical principles exude social capital concepts, such as trust, shared norms and values, and
embedded and shared resources.
Research showed that when trust levels were high in virtual communities, individuals
behaved properly (Ridings et al., 2002), avoided opportunistic behavior, and increasingly shared
knowledge, thereby increasing social capital (Chiu et al., 2006; Tsai & Ghoshal, 1998). Burt
(1992) opined that social capital is more often a consequence rather than a goal. Social capital
develops with increased trust, and higher levels of trust diminish the probability of opportunism
(Nahapiet & Ghoshal, 1998). Other studies showed that trust levels significantly impacted
community loyalty by influencing personal perceptions of perceived knowledge sharing self-
efficacy, relative advantage, compatibility, and member behavior (Lin, M.-J. et al., 2009;
Nahapiet & Ghoshal, 1998). Further, Tsai and Ghoshal (1998) affirmed that trust influenced
virtual communities' exchange of resources.
51

Interwoven with trusted relationships, the exchange of resources is foundational to the
development of social capital networks (Bourdieu, 1986; Lin, N., 2001; Putnam, 2000). As far as
opportunists and self-interested actors, Putnam reflected that not all of the network's costs nor
benefits accrue towards one person since social capital is also organizationally inclined (Putnam,
2000, p. 179). Ridings et al. (2002) further articulated that integrity, reliability, and good
intentions were necessary factors to establish trust in virtual communities. These were branded as
part of the cultural values and affirmed the credibility of the group.
Conceptual Framework
The conceptual framework of social cognitive theories of self-efficacy and outcome
expectation may give insight into motivational factors that influence participants in a virtual
religious community to establish and nurture relationships necessary to build social capital. The
framework will inform the research questions if self-efficacy and outcome expectation affect
participation and behaviors in virtual religious communities, does the engagement in the virtual
community develop social capital, and what organizational structures contribute to or impede
social capital development. Figure 1 depicts the enactment of the social cognitive theory to
motivate behaviors in the virtual community, and the social capital facets evidenced as a result.
Based upon the work of Bandura in cognitive behavior, Hsu et al. (2007) and Maddux et
al. (1982) established that two beliefs, self-efficacy, and outcome expectation, influenced
motivated behaviors. As a principle for human motivation and achievements, self-efficacy
defined how an individuals’ actions influenced their life outcomes (Bandura, 2012). Self-efficacy
demonstrated that one could exhibit control over their life’s events by their actions (Bandura,
52

1997). Research showed that self-efficacy influenced behavioral decisions that led to the mastery
of behaviors through sustained efforts and persistence over obstacles (Hsu et al., 2007).
This supports the belief that individuals hold power to affect change by their own actions
(Bandura, 1997; Bandura, 2002; Lin et al., 2009).
Self-efficacy beliefs in an individual’s ability to succeed and a sense of belonging in the
community can give insight into participants’ behaviors. Burke et al. (2011) defined specific
Facebook behaviors as direct communication with friends, making posts, and passively reading
friends’ status updates that lead to the development of bridging social capital. Leading social
capital theorists supported the idea that group involvement and participation was paramount to
sociability which built individual and community capital (Bourdieu, 1985; Coleman, 1988). This
study will consider behaviors within the established virtual community and introduce social
capital as a benefit of a properly developed structural network.
Outcome expectation generated from beliefs that performing a certain action would
produce a specific outcome. As a motivational factor, outcome expectations are the catalyst that
determine behaviors that lead to perceived positive or negative consequences (Lippke, 2020).
Bandura suggested that self-beliefs of efficacy partly governed the effects of outcome
expectancies on performance motivation. He further suggested that self-efficacy casually
influenced expected behavior outcomes, but the reverse relationship was invalid (Bandura, 1978;
2012). Research in secular virtual communities by Hsu et al. (2007) found that personal outcome
expectation significantly influenced knowledge-sharing behavior in virtual communities. With
personal outcome expectancy as motivation, Hsu et al. (2007) showed that individuals shared
knowledge when they believed that sharing brought value to others. In a separate study to
53

consider both self-efficacy and outcome expectancy, Maddux et al. (1982) showed that an
increased outcome expectancy significantly increased the intention to perform a pre-described
behavior. The study noted that outcome expectancy had a more significant influence upon
motivated behaviors than did perceived self-efficacy.
Bandura (1986) believed that outcome expectation resulted from observing situations and
events in an individual’s environment and others’ actual outcomes. Further he suggested that our
outcome beliefs generate from more than once source (Bandura 1977, 1986). The study will
explore individual outcome expectancies that motivate engagement, knowledge sharing,
knowledge-seeking, or support. The framework of personal outcome expectancies influencing
the development of structural, relational, and cognitive social capital dimensions will guide the
understanding of motivated behavior in the virtual community.
The virtual community provides opportunities for individuals to engage, share success
stories, ask for prayer, and support members. These may exist as observable actions or as direct
actions taken by individuals to receive or offer help and support. The study sought to confirm the
transferability of a specific Facebook behavior, direct communication that Burke et al. (2011)
determined lead to the development of social capital. This theory will offer insight into the
motivation to engage and build relational bonds that grant access to social capital.
Social capital evolves through the building of networked relationships among persons in
groups. Social capital consists of reciprocity, norms, values, and trust (Putnam, 2000). Nahapiet
and Ghoshal (1998) and Tsai and Ghoshal (1998) distinguished social capital’s cognitive
dimension by defining norms and values, shared emotional connections, social support, and
collective goals. Further, the research established cultural aspects such as shared codes,
54

languages, and narratives as social capital (Nahapiet & Ghoshal, 1998). The theoretical
framework for social capital development will consider if the virtual community established
attributes, cultural norms, and protocols that influence or impede social capital resource
development.
A key concept to be incorporated into the study will assess social capital development
and frame the perceived embedded benefits of social connections and the resources critical to
achieving goals for individuals, social groups, organizations, and communities (Lin, N., 2001;
Putnam 2000). It will consider how embedded resources within the community are engaged for
purposive actions (Lin, 2001) and how social capital is linked to the virtual community’s
network. Figure 1 shows the conceptual framework for this study that social cognitive theory
will cause group participants to believe they can perform specific actions. The motivated actions
are engaging and participatory behaviors in the virtual community. Thus, the behaviors in the
groups will build bridging social capital identified by structural, relational, and cognitive
dimensions. Additionally, cultural or traditional factors, recognized as organizational attributes
may enhace or block the development of social capital. The study will seek to determine what
actions from the organization or leaders, assist or hinder development.
55

Figure 1
Conceptual Framework for The Study

Summary
An African proverb admonishes individuals with the thought, "If you want to go fast, go
alone. If you want to go far, go together." The anticipated response is that individuals would
adhere to the group's collective power to effectively extend their goals and desires by going
further with others. Similarly, Loury (1987) noted a conflicting emphasis upon an individual's
potential to rise to their best level when observing that no one travels the road entirely alone. The
56

benefit of social capital comes from the networked resources that are accessible through
investments in relationships.
The literature review has given a historical account of the development of the social
capital concept without providing an agreed upon scholarly definition, as a consensus has yet to
be determined. Sharing aspects of what comprises social capital in its structural, relational, and
cognitive dimensions, the review provided an overview of social capital components and how
they fit within its construct framework. The literature review sought to extrapolate social capital
nuances, such as the meanings of embeddedness of social network resources and their
accessibility for individual and collective purposive actions.
As forms of capital, the review delineated human capital and social capital. The literature
review sought to share evidence of social capital in technology, specifically online in social
networking sites. Since this paper's research will be conducted online on social networking sites,
virtual communities, it was necessary to review data that considered social capital aspects in
similar communities. While there was limited data on virtual religious communities, utilizing
data that existed for the business community provided a basis for understanding sharing,
relationship building, and trust generation in virtual communities. The lack of sufficient data on
the digital religious community presents an opportunity for this paper and others to follow, as
features noted in digital business communities may apply in a religious setting. The distinctness
of the religious community, particularly the American church, was included in the literature
review. Social capital and religion have a synergistic relationship in that the literature review
reflects the uniqueness of this organization in generating bonding and bridging social capital.
57

Additionally, the capital generated can benefit the individual, the organization, and the
community.
By integrating social capital theory with social cognitive theory, the literature review
gave insight into actors' motivations within communities. Looking specifically at social cognitive
theories by Bandura that lead to self-efficacy and outcomes, the literature review aspired to share
insight into motivational theories as an agency to share in communities structured for today's
virtual church attendee. Because online interactions that particularly build trust within virtual
communities present a unique opportunity to build social capital, the literature review looked at
behaviors shown in virtual communities that engendered trust. Although the literature presented
did not specifically consider online religious communities, it offers the opportunity to discover
motivating behaviors exhibited in these communities, hence this study's purpose. The literature
review serves to lay the foundational structure for the research questions to be answered using
the theoretical framework of social cognitive theory converging with social capital theory in
virtual religious communities.
Woolcock (2001) summarized social capital with the adage, "It's not what you know; it is
whom you know." Articulating this pearl of wisdom to the social network of virtual religious
communities, and understanding motivators to create social network ties, will give insight on
effective organizational designs that support generating social capital in digital spaces.

58

Chapter Three: Methodology
The applicability of qualitative theory and a constructivist approach for this study are
discussed in-depth in this chapter. The purpose of this chapter is to introduce the research
methodology for this study of self-cognitive motivation as a driver of individual activity in a
virtual religious community, the setting for social capital development. Creswell and Creswell
(2018) suggested that the qualitative research design method is an excellent approach to
comprehend social and human problems. This approach will allow for a more meaningful
understanding of the virtual digital religious community’s use to engage members with each
other and the organization and the level to which creates networked ties. The research plan,
including the methodology, study participants, procedures, analysis method, and ethical
concerns, are also primary components of this chapter.
Research Questions
The study sought to understand, correlate meaning and process to the following research
questions:
RQ1: How do self-efficacy and outcome expectation impact a participant’s activity
within the virtual church community?
RQ2: How do activities exhibited within the social network site contribute to developing
social capital among virtual community members?
RQ3: How do organizational attributes offline and online in the virtual community
influence or impede the creation and actability of social capital’s embedded
resources?
59

Overview of Design
Bourdieu (1985) and Coleman (1988) described social capital as the resources generated
through a network, emphasizing relationships and resources. The theory extended social capital
from individuals to organizations as the available resources through their social interactions
generate benefits for both individuals and groups to achieve goals (Lin, 2001; Putnam 2000).
These embedded resources are accessed and mobilized for intentional and purposeful action
(Lin, 2001). The construct of perceived benefits will vary according to individuals and the
organization. Therefore, allowing participants to expand upon experiences was essential to
inform the study. Further exploration depended upon the interview structure, granting subjects
time and space to lean into their own experiences. The interpretive constructivist epistemological
perspective that seeks to describe, understand, or interpret was suitable for a qualitative study. It
revealed multiple or contextual bound realities from the research data (Merriam & Tisdell,
2016).
Research Design
An investigative analysis was conducted in one-on-one interviews to understand
self-cognitive motivational factors, self-efficacy and outcome expectation, social capital
measurements, and organizational factors.
Measuring Self-Efficacy
Self-efficacy is an abstract concept that is self-reported, is not all-inclusive but is
concerned with an individual’s belief in their capability to accomplish specific attainment
(Bandura, 1997). Often measured in general terms, self-efficacy research indicated that
task-specific scaled measurements of self-efficacy designed for distinct inquiry domains give
greater insight (Bandura, 2006). Subsequently, for a qualitative analysis of the research
60

questions, the research design included a modified self-efficacy instrument. Interview questions
inquired as to what level of confidence did participants in the Facebook Group hold regarding
their ability to communicate with others in the group and respond to calls for action such as
volunteering.
A modified survey instrument tool to measure motives, frequency, intensity, and
religiosity used by Brubaker and Haigh (2017), served as a structural design for the
semi-structured interview to measure self-efficacy and engagement in the virtual community.
Modified open-ended questions focused on understanding and functionality to construct meaning
and process.
Measuring Outcome Expectation
Social cognitive theory of outcome expectation refers to the expected result of an
individual’s own behavior (Bandura, 1997). Three aspects, physical effects, social effects, and
self-evaluation effects, formulate outcome expectation (Bandura, 1997). Individuals may
consider what actions they will take based upon what outcome they expect, for example, if they
expect to feel good or bad, receive social recognition or affirmation, and sense self-satisfaction
or devaluation (Bandura, 1997; Hsu et al., 2007).
Utilizing the concept and organization of the survey tool used by Hsu et al. (2007), which
measured the effect of outcome expectation upon knowledge sharing in a virtual community, a
modified instrument generates open-ended inquiry to understanding the motivation to construct
meaning and process.
Measuring Social Capital
Over the past two decades, scholars adopted three structural measures of social capital in
various disciplines and fields. In particular, name generators (Appel et al., 2014), position
61

generators (Lin & Dumin, 1986), and resource generators (Van der Gaag & Snijders, 2005) have
sought to measure individual social capital effectively. In 2007, Ellison et al. were the first to use
the Internet Social Capital Scales (ISCS). The ISCS by Ellison et al. (2007) evaluated several
constructs, including a Facebook intensity scale that measured Facebook activities engagement
levels, friends count, and the daily amount of time spent on Facebook.
While Woolcock (2001) disagreed with other scholars about which of these tools directly
measure social capital, rather than an indirect consequence of the antecedents and outcomes of
social capital, both the generators and ISCS tools informed this study with recognizable aspects
of individual and organizational social capital. Van der Gaag & Snijders (2005) postulated that
measuring social capital required multiple measurement tools that explained social capital’s
distribution, how it produced to help individuals attain personal goals and the extent of its
context-specific production. Brehm and Rahn (1997) touted the concept of social capital as a
comprehensive notion based upon an individual’s behavior, attitude, and predispositions. For that
cause, open-ended questions that inquired about access to names, positions, and resources,
represented modified versions of the tools, along with modified ISCS tools, informed social
capital constructs for the study.
Methodology and Rationale
Creswell & Creswell (2018) stated that a quantitative approach was appropriate when a
researcher sought to understand relationships between variables. However, according to Merriam
and Tisdell (2016), a qualitative study is suitable when the research objective is to generate a
greater understanding of how people contextualize their history. When the researcher’s goal and
interest are granting meaning to how individuals process and frame their experiences, Merriam
and Tisdell (2016) suggested that qualitative studies are suited for the task. This study aimed to
62

consider motivators for online participation in the virtual community to determine to what extent
it impacted participants’ lives. This construction was best understood from a qualitative approach
as participants derived meaning from their experiences.
The interview format selected for this qualitative study was semi-structured. Areas for
exploration and understanding were self-efficacy belief, outcome expectation, and social capital
formation. The goal was to learn from the participants as they constructed meaning to
experiences, personal beliefs, and motivators to build network ties. Understanding how actors
benefitted from the network ties’ embedded resources, a key marker of social capital, gave
greater insight into virtual community sites’ benefits. The interview questions were open-ended
to best inform the self-reported abstract concepts of self-efficacy and outcome expectation,
allowing participants to define experiences, concepts, and thoughts. The nature of questions that
concern understanding participants’ experiences called for a qualitative design. The
semi-structured interview allowed the interviewer to respond to emerging world views and new
ideas (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). I chose this approach to allow for disclosed world views and
ideas to be explored along with emergent themes and concepts.
Criteria for Selection
The study participants met specific criteria to ensure that they had critical attributes to the
study. The purpose of the research was to understand the motivation for participation in virtual
religious communities and the benefits tied to the network within the community. Therefore,
study participants were purposefully selected from the population of actual participants in the
virtual community. Defining the criteria for a purposeful sampling ensured that those who could
best inform the research would participate to guide the study (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
63

The purposeful selection criteria included that the potential study participants were
current members of the Facebook Group, also known as the virtual community, for each
organization. Facebook metrics within Facebook Groups identified potential study participants
who were members of the virtual religious community on Facebook and were actively engaged
with creating or reading posts, reacting to posts, or commenting on posts. Additionally, the
selected participants identified as frequent and consistent viewers of the online broadcast at least
one time per month. Each of the Facebook Groups at the time of the research had more than
1,900 members. The targeted sample size of N = 9 participants from the two Facebook Groups
did not proportionately represent each group equally.
Since research question three considered both the individual participant perspective and
an organizational context, the interviews with group administrators or moderators sought to add
more significance and perspective from a leadership point-of-view. The interviews were
one-to-one qualitative semi-structured interviews to gather data about the organizational
structure, virtual community platform, and actions leading to social capital. It also sought to
understand the organizational measures and markers of social capital and its accessibility for
purposive action. The interviews sought to understand the organizational mission, vision, values,
and culture that impacted the members’ opportunity to access social capital. If available and
accessible, I, the researcher, considered artifacts of documents and resources to gauge the
organizations’ ability to curate social capital. These included emails to congregants, website,
program handouts, and advertisements as a sampling.
Recruitment
The Facebook administrators from each organization utilized the Group Insights Tool
from Facebook to generate a list of potential participants. The administrator identified top
64

contributors, the group members who made the most number of posts and comments within a set
date range. Per the Facebook analytic, the number of posts held the most weight, followed by the
number of comments. The information was accessible on the Group page by following the
process outlined (as of March 15, 2021): Manage Group panel, select Insights, select
Membership, and select Top Contributors.
The Administrator selected Download Details:
1. Selected the date range for the past 60 days.
2. Selected the File Format Excel .xlsx.
3. Downloaded details of “all,” which included growth, engagement, members, admins,
and moderator activity. Member’s information included most frequent contributors,
age, gender, and location.
All potential participants met the initial criteria of a superuser - top contributor status as
documented in the Excel spreadsheet. Both organizations selected 5 qualified candidates and
invited them to participate on the study. Two participants, representing each organization, had
significant knowledge of the Facebook groups and organizational culture.
Once the potential participants were identified, the organization notified selected
participants via a direct message on Facebook to potential participants indicating their
contributions to the group (see Appendix). The selected potential participant was asked to click a
link requesting telephone and email contact information and to schedule a meeting with me or an
alternative interviewer. Once scheduled, I or the alternate interviewer sent an email to
prospective participants inviting participation in a research study to understand communication
between church members in the Facebook Groups. It notified prospective participants that their
voluntary participation would help churches and other organizations better utilize virtual
65

communities to enhance networking, resource sharing, and meet organizational goals. The email
included study information, privacy protocols, and a link for interested participants to schedule a
Zoom meeting. Following the acquisition of individuals who meet the criteria, they scheduled
one-on-one interviews via Zoom. The 45–60-minute Zoom video call at a dedicated and
convenient time began with reviewing privacy protocols and served as the setting for the
research.
Incentives
Participants were offered a $25 Amazon eGift Card for their participation in the study.
This information was included in the initial Facebook direct message from the organization to
the prospective participant.
Data Collection Method
The study sought to use a purposeful sample of nine participants to share individual
motivators and experiences in the virtual community. The study analyzed and interpreted data
from personal interviews to inform the problem of practice and research questions. Data from
semi-structured interviews, observation, and documents informed the study.
Table 1 states the data sources and intended methods of use based upon the research
question objectives.

66

Table 1
Data Sources: Observations, Interviews, Documents, Digital Materials
Research Questions Method 1 Method 2 Method 3
RQ1: How do self-
efficacy and outcome
expectation impact a
participant’s activity
within the virtual
church community?
(1) Observe activity
in the Facebook
virtual community
as an observer.
(2) Participate in the
Facebook virtual
community.
One-on-one
interviews with
Facebook Group
participants via
Zoom.
Analyze Facebook
Group activity for
group engagement and
markers of cognitive
motivators, and
reactions.
RQ2: How do
activities exhibited
within the social
network site
contribute to
developing social
capital amongst
members of the
virtual community?
(1) Observe activity
in the Facebook
virtual community
as an observer.
(2) Participate in the
Facebook virtual
community.

One-on-one
interviews with
Facebook Group
participants via
Zoom.
Use name, position,
and resource
generators.
Analyze Facebook
Group activity for
intra-group
connections in the
virtual community, the
extent of activity
online that formulates
bridging social capital.
67

Table 1 (cont’d)
Data Sources: Observations, Interviews, Documents, Digital Materials
Research Questions Method 1 Method 2 Method 3
RQ3: How do
organizational
attributes offline and
online in the virtual
community influence
or impede the
creation and
actability of social
capital’s embedded
resources?
Observe Facebook’s
virtual community
activity as an
observer to
understand the
culture, mission,
and resource
activation for
purposive actions.
One-on-one
interviews with
Facebook Group
participants via
Zoom.
(1) Review artifacts,
past posts, photos,
emails,
communications of
the organization and
group administrators’
communications.
(2) Analyze digital
materials,
organizational
documents, websites.

Theoretical Framework
The theoretical framework connects the two beliefs, self-efficacy, and outcome
expectation to specific behavior on Facebook that developed social capital as established by Hsu
et al. (2007) and Maddux et al. (1982). Figure 1 depicts the broad picture of social cognitive
theory’s influence to motivate behaviors in the virtual community, and the social capital facets
evidenced as a result. Additionally, Figure 2 shows a closer detail of the specifics of the social
cognitive motivators and the virtual community behaviors that the study sought to understand.
68

Figure 2

Theoretical Framework for Social Cognitive Motivators to Increase Participation in the Virtual
Community

Figure 3 connects the specific Facebook behaviors that Burke et al. (2011) determined
lead to the development of social capital. The behaviors that participants exhibited built
relationships among persons in groups and developed the dimensions of social capital, such as
reciprocity, norms, values, and trust (Nahapiet & Ghoshal, 1998; Putnam, 2000; Tsai & Ghoshal,
1998). Lastly, Figure 4 simplified the theoretical framework to understand what this study
69

proposed as a result of motivated individual’s participating in a virtual community that
developed social capital.
Figure 3

Theoretical Framework for the Development of Social Capital from Virtual Community
Behaviors

70

Figure 4

Conceptual Framework for Social Cognitive Motivators to Participate in the Virtual Community,
and Behaviors that Develop Social Capital

Research Setting
The study occurred online on two digital platforms, Facebook and Zoom. For the two
organizations, the Facebook business page and Facebook Group Page served as locations for
observations for interactions between members of the virtual communities. Zoom.com was the
tool used to conduct the one-on-one interviews. These platforms provided an appropriate site for
data collection and participant engagement as the data sought to understand motivational theories
for engagement in the virtual community on Facebook. The research further sought to understand
the creation of social capital on these particular platforms where networks exist. Additionally, to
71

inform research question three, organizational data was considered from websites, administrative
emails, and organizational structure charts where available.
The Researcher
The value of observing research ethics confers protection of research participants and
credibility of the data (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). As the primary instrument for this qualitative
study as the researcher, I recognized the theoretical framework that I as a human instrument may
hold. My lens may have led to biases and human shortcomings that could have impacted the
study (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). I am a social constructionist with a philosophical worldview
that inquires “why?” to understand how factors interact, to determine process and meaning, and
causal mechanisms (Hinga, 2019). This paradigm’s ontology perceives that humans construct or
build contextually based meanings of events, occurrences, or happenings as they seek to
understand knowledge (Hinga, 2019).
Disclosing my positionality was imperative for this study. As a prominent leader in this
study’s primary organization and a reputable leader in the secondary organization, I have
influence with the research participants. For this reason, I employed a strategy for data collection
that included affirming the researcher’s positionality with an emphasis on confidentiality and
trustworthiness. The desire was that participants felt free to divulge truths that would inform the
research questions.
As the researcher, I must be aware of biases that could have affected the approach to the
research. As an early adopter with more than thirty years of experience in technology, I am a
proponent for the use of social networking sites as communicative platforms. I recognize these
personal predispositions may lead to assumptions regarding acceptance and use of technology.
Further, the technology used for data collection, participant participation, and responses included
72

the potential hesitancy for self-disclosure of a participant’s knowledge level, experiences, or uses
of the digital platforms.
As a constructed reality underlies qualitative research, I sought to construct meaning by
understanding how people make sense of their experiences, worlds, and meaning given to the
experiences (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). To mitigate potential assumptions and biases, I
committed to conducting member checks which, according to Lincoln et al. (1989), are essential
provisions to enhance a study’s credibility and trustworthiness. Member checks seek to relay the
collected data’s accuracy as participants validated their responses, ensuring that the researcher
accurately captured their responses (Lincoln et al., 1989). The study sought to be dependable,
recording the interactions and logic in the research design accurately. Moreover, utilizing audit
trails, notes, data reconstruction, field notes, and observations traceable to appropriate sources. I
used comprehensive descriptions to convey findings to add to the validity.
Researchers’ biases via self-reflection ensured an open and honest narrative for the
study’s readers (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). The reflexivity practice in which the researcher
frequently reflects on their own emotions in the research process ensured that the researcher’s
emotions or beliefs were not affecting the collected data or findings (Haynes, 2012).
Stakeholder Group
The stakeholders for this study were group members and the organizations. The
sociability of online church members is an important feature of the online fellowship, which has
a parallel offline model. How stakeholders connect and network in-person has nuances that
present differently online than offline (Campbell, 2017). The digital teams were the providers
that report to the directors, the Executive Leadership Teams. The directors’ goals were to provide
online platforms to the stakeholders that support spiritual growth and promote fellowship that
73

enhanced commitment to the church’s mission and vision. Effectively communicating clear and
shared values between directors and providers, coupled with empowering providers with
decision rights, would help meet organizational objectives and success.
Data Sources
Multiple data sources to inform the study added to the research’s rigor, validity, and
credibility.
Method 1
One-on-one semi-structured interviews were conducted and recorded online. Two
interviewers, myself as the Primary Investigator (PI), and an Independent Data Collector (IDC),
conducted the interviews. The IDC conducted interviews for any participant part of Organization
A's Facebook Group, where I am a leader. I conducted all interviews from Organization B.
The IDC and I asked open-ended and probing questions, made observations, took field
notes and recorded the interviews. The interviews were conducted on and recorded by
Zoom.com. All identifying information from the transcribed interviews was removed from the
transcripts.
Method 2
The participant completed a post-interview inquiry via Qualtrics.com to gather social
network information. The post-interview inquiry was not measurable for comparison, but rather
an open-ended questionnaire that informed research question two. The survey was a modified
version of the ISCS (Ellison et al., 2007) utilized to assess social capital via name generators
(Appel et al., 2014), position generators (Lin & Dumin, 1986), and resource generators (Van der
Gaag & Snijders, 2005). The post-interview survey indicated social capital network markers. The
74

IDC reviewed the surveys for Organization A and removed any identifiable information if
supplied.
Method 3
I conducted secondary data analysis on digital documents and communications emails
from the organization to members and followed organization social media posts. I collected and
curated general documents, such as newsletters and flyers distributed to members of the
organization where identification of potential participants was not a concern. Collection of
secondary data from other communications included: Digital communications sent to the general
membership, and organizational social media posts and established group policies for Facebook
Groups.
Special Considerations: Any data collected by the IDC from or about Organization A was
stripped of identifiers before being provided to me for analysis. This included the interview data,
the survey data and the secondary data.
Participants
The researcher sought a purposeful sample of nine participants to observe and analyze
participation in the Facebook Group and interview one-on-one. Determining the criterion-based
selection attributes and selecting people who met the criteria provided the investigator with a
purposeful sample that gave the most insight (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). For all study
participants, the Facebook virtual community group sample was appropriate for the study
because participants actively engaged in the Facebook virtual community with other members
and the organization.
All the participants informed research questions one through three. However, two
participants, as group administrators for the specific groups, informed research question three
75

from an organizational perspective. The group administrators were active members of the virtual
community, a staff member, or a high-level volunteer with a high degree of awareness of the
virtual community’s use. They had a significant understanding of the organization’s culture,
norms, protocols, and social capital.
Instrumentation
A qualitative study’s characteristics included the researcher as the vital instrument
(Creswell & Creswell, 2018). The instruments that collected the data included Zoom.us, the
interview protocol for recording the data, and Sonix.ai, a professional transcription service
transcribed the interviews. Other data sources included observation of historical and current
participation and engagement in the Facebook Group, artifacts from the organization, emails,
social media posts, photos of events or church activities, and worship services. Field notes
documented observations. The researcher used a computer-assisted qualitative data analysis
software, MAXQDA, to aid in the data management and analysis process. The software
solidified data analysis, storage, and assisted with coding.
Utilizing Creswell and Creswell's (2018) qualitative sample interview protocol, I
prepared a protocol that outlined necessary interview information, an introduction, an opening
question, content questions, and closing instructions. The interview consisted of asking
open-ended questions that gave meaning and defined a process. According to Creswell &
Creswell (2018), asking open-ended questions gives respondents the space to think, explain, and
share. Data was studied inductively to generate units of information and codes from the bottom
up to establish themes (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). The prepared interviewer asked probing
questions to gather more information and better understand the interviewee’s responses. Creswell
76

and Creswell (2018) stated that probes will ask for more information or explain meaning and
purpose.
An inductive approach to the data informed the research questions. Questions that
allowed participants to share self-efficacious beliefs, the confidence to function in an online
community, and outcome expectation of activity in the virtual church community informed RQ1.
Modified instruments from Ellison et al. (2007) and Hsu et al. (2007) gave direction to the
questions asked that best inform RQ1 regarding the two social cognitive motivators, self-
efficacy, and outcome expectation.
Questions that allowed participants to share meaning regarding social networks resultant
from activity produced in the virtual community informed RQ2. Modified instruments from
Ellison et al. (2007) and Appel et al. (2014) gave a foundational approach to understanding
social ties generated in the virtual community. The revised version of ISCS by Ellison et al.
(2007) gave insight into bonding and bridging social capital. The name, position, and resource
generators (Appel et al., 2014) modified for open-ended responses gave insight into social
capital.
Questions that allowed participants to share their understanding of the organization’s
mission, vision and culture related to the virtual community’s function informed RQ3.
Specifically, what organizational attributes offline and online in the virtual community
influenced or impeded the creation and actability of social capital’s embedded resources? In
addition to the research question posed for the interview, I used other instruments such as
observation of how individuals participated in the group, artifacts from the organization, emails,
social media posts, photos of events, activities, and worship services. Field notes documented
observations.
77

Data Collection Procedures
Creswell and Creswell (2018) suggested that the research’s success was directly
correlated to a planned data collection approach. Therefore, the researchers should identify the
procedures for recording data. During the COVID-19 pandemic, health concerns and social
distancing protocols dictated a virtual interaction between the interviewer and study participants.
With safety protocols in place, video conferencing was a preferred and acceptable manner to
conduct interviews. Additionally, study participants from Organization 2 resided in different
states, making the use of video conferencing technology a sensible resolution to overcome
distance and logistical barriers.
The one-on-one interviews were conducted following CITI certification. The data for this
study was collected online via Zoom technologies. Interviews were 45- 60 minutes each and
were conducted one-on-one with an interviewer and a study participant. The researcher took field
notes and recorded the interview on Zoom.us. A professional transcription service, Sonix.ai,
transcribed the audio recording of the interview. Double-checking all transcriptions against the
interviewer’s notes and the recordings ensured greater accuracy. A careful review of the
interviews sought to understand non-verbal cues, and confirm information, and accuracy.
The recorded and transcribed interviews were securely stored on MAXQDA and locally
on a personal computer secured with an encrypted password and fingerprint recognition. No
post-interview, follow up, or clarifying questions were needed from the participants.
Observation Protocol
The research setting was the interviews and observations of the virtual community,
known as the Facebook Group page for each organization. I observed engagement between study
participants and the organization by taking field notes of the interactions noted, specifically, calls
78

to action and responses. As an observer of Facebook’s virtual community activity, I sought to
understand the culture, mission, and resource utilization for purposive actions. No personal
information was noted from individual Facebook profiles.
Interview Protocol
Utilizing Creswell and Creswell’s (2018) qualitative sample interview protocol, I
prepared a protocol that outlined basic interview information, an introduction, an opening
question, content questions, and closing instructions. I asked probing questions to gather more
information and better understand the interviewee’s responses. Creswell and Creswell (2018)
stated that probes such as “Tell me more,” “I need more detail,” “Could you explain your
responses more,” and “What does not much mean” asks for more information or an explanation
(p. 191). The desire to understand meaning and purpose fulfills the concept of a constructionist
concept, and a qualitative interview grants the expanse for thought and explanation. The specific
interview protocol is attached in Appendix.
Hsu et al. (2007) conducted previous research on motivational factors for sharing
knowledge, and social capital development in virtual communities. It provided a significant
guide for understanding social cognitive motivators, self-efficacy, and outcome expectation.
Questions from this early research served as a guide for developing qualitative questions to
inform this study. Additionally, Chang and Chuang (2011) utilized a quantitative study to
understand social capital and individual motivation on knowledge sharing, specifically
considering participant involvement as a motivator. The interview tool was modified to guide the
qualitative interviews by modifying the questions to be open-ended, allowing for participant
disclosure.
79

As a site to participate and develop social capital, Facebook’s use was explored
qualitatively from the adapted tools used by Ellison et al. (2007) and Brubaker and Haigh (2017),
where they used Facebook Intensity Use as a measure. A modified version of this inquiry
informed the study as participants share their perceptions of Facebook use intensity. Participation
was a key element of networking in the virtual community. To understand the participant’s
perceptions of the benefits of participating in the online groups and connecting with other
members, potential probes were modified from Chang & Chuang (2011).
An open-ended inquiry that leads to understanding network bonds created in the
Facebook virtual community can give insight into names, resources, or positions that community
members have access. These generators were established as effective survey instruments to
measure social capital (Burke et al., 2011). An inquiry adapted from Chang & Chuang (2011)
informed structural social capital, and Hsu et al. (2007) informed relational social capital.
Data Analysis
According to Creswell and Creswell (2018), the process of coding organizes the data into
meaningful and manageable segments with linguistic representation. The words selected to group
or sort the data provide categorical markers for organizing themes and generating detailed
information about people, places, and things. Creswell and Creswell (2018) suggested generating
five to seven themes as significant research study findings. Utilizing Tesch’s eight steps in the
coding process (Creswell & Creswell, 2018, p. 196) guided the coding process and data analysis.
I compiled all codes in MAXQDA and reduced the codes into themes as they represented
common ideas and thoughts. Creswell and Creswell (2018) proposed categorizing codes or
themes as expected codes, surprising codes, and unusual codes to qualitatively express various
participant’s perspectives.
80

The order of the conducted interviews reflected the coding timing. The coding of
transcripts coincided with the interviews. The pacing of coding allowed the researcher to reflect
and edit the interview questions as theories emerged from the data. With each phase of coding,
the researcher continued to review previous data to make connections.
1. Organize. The data analysis procedures specify the steps to segment the data to
understand the text and image data (Creswell & Creswell, 2018).
a. I organized and prepared the data for analysis by digitizing artifacts and field
items in an accessible secured online folder.
b. All items were cataloged by the name, and content information in MAXQDA.
c. The recorded and transcribed interviews and transcripts are stored locally in
password encrypted MAXQDA software files on a secured personal computer.
2. Codify and generate themes. I considered all of the data from a broad perspective and
organized the data into general ideas, common language, impression, and interviewee
expression from the field notes. The notes were coded in MAXQDA to identify, mark
and catalog nuances and concepts noted in the interviews, digital media, artifacts that
informed the study.
Credibility and Dependability
The research aimed to understand how people interpreted experiences, constructed their
worlds, and what meaning they attributed to their experiences (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Therefore, I prepared clear and thoughtful questions for survey participants. Based on Lincoln et
al. (1985), this study sought credible data collection. The transparent disclosure of the study
methods, sample, and sites contributed to the external reliability.
81

Qualitative data relies upon its credibility, transferability, dependability, and
confirmability (Lincoln et al., 1985). Credibility, strengthened through triangulation strategies,
improved the trustworthiness of the data. As proposed by Lincoln et al. (1985), the researcher
sought to strengthen the study’s credibility by adopting strategic methods, including a set number
of interviews, participant observations during the interview and participant activity in the virtual
community, and performance member checks during interviews. Additionally, the use of a
secondary interviewer necessitated consistency with the interviews with questions and probes.
The research used inquiry that delivered findings that offered utility and transferability to other
settings. The study sought to be dependable, recording the interactions, and accurately used logic
in the research design and activity. Moreover, utilizing audit trails, notes, data reconstruction,
and field notes, were observations traceable to sources.
I used a comprehensive description to convey findings to add to the credibility.
Researchers’ biases via self-reflection ensured an open and honest narrative for the study’s
readers (Creswell & Creswell, 2018).
Ethics
Rationale for IRB
The Institutional Review Board (IRB) can identify ethical issues and establish policies
and guidelines; however, individual values and ethics must guide the researchers. The IRB exists
to protect the rights of research subjects. Glesne (2011) lists strategies to ensure ethical treatment
and protection to research subjects. These include granting sufficient information to make
informed decisions; the ability to withdraw, without penalty, from a study at any point;
elimination of all unnecessary risks; benefits outweigh the risks to the subject; qualified
investigators conduct the research. The following guidelines are included and disclosed.
82

1. Confidentiality and level of disclosure: The nature of social capital is its generation
through relational ties. A high level of disclosure and confidentiality must be
provided throughout the study and in its report. The researcher will mask participant’s
identities to reduce the risk of harm.
2. Compensation: Incentives or small tokens, i.e., $25 Amazon or store gift cards, will
be offered as a method to ensure participation.
3. Power dynamics: As a church leader, there is a presumed influence over the
participants. Data that showed when trust levels were elevated in the virtual
environment, individuals increasingly shared knowledge (Chiu et al., 2006; Tsai &
Ghoshal, 1998). Therefore, I sought to build confidence and trust with the
participants, disclose positionality with participants, and sought to minimize bias and
influence to allow for candid, truthful, and honest responses.
Underlying Ethics
Johnson and Christensen (2015) emphasize the researcher’s importance in recognizing
their subjectivity and monitoring its functions in the research contact. As a church leader and a
researcher, it was essential to understand how participants viewed value-added benefits of
belonging in a church community and what motivators encouraged their participation beyond
worship services. Putnam (2000) described the nature of social capital as that it is individual and
collective. The research served both participant’s and churches’ interests as they hoped to
understand the collective efficacy of participating in digital online communities.
It is often through usual and established relationships in daily interactions with friends,
work colleagues, and even strangers that lead to an accumulation of social capital. However, it is
possible to make social interaction investments intentionally and consciously (Valenzuela et al,
83

2009). These intentional and conscious choices can be questionable when actors and motives are
unknown. Status bridging capital, often in churches, specifically granted ascending access to
power, wealth, influence, and prestige (Wuthnow, 2002). Thoughtful consideration of those at
risk for harm in the study were participants already yielding high social capital levels, who could
feel targeted by individuals aspiring to increase their social capital.
Limitations and Delimitations
The trustworthiness and validity of qualitative research rely on that which the researcher
sees and hears and the researcher's interpretation of the data. Lincoln et al. (1985) noted that
credibility, transferability, dependability, and confirmability were factors that established trust.
Validating that study participants can discuss the phenomenon that the researcher seeks to
explore by presenting accurate and believable data can ensure credibility and transferability
(Lincoln et al., 1985). The consistency, organization, and logic of the research design and
process build the study’s dependability (Lincoln et al., 1985). The researcher recognized
limitations and delimitations. Limitations were:
● Use of external interviewer. The IRB required an outside interviewer for the
researcher's group for study advancement to limit the possible influence of my
position on the study's participants. Utilizing a different interviewer disallowed the
principal researcher's more profound understanding of the theory and literature to
probe the study participants. However, to minimize variations in the interviews, I met
with the IDC to clarify the probes detailed in the study's methodology. Effective
probe usage encouraged participant elaboration of open-ended questions, despite the
difference in interviewers' subject knowledge of the research topic. While this was
84

considered a limitation, it likewise served as a strategy to improve trustworthiness
through triangulation and comparisons with the interviewer's methodology and style.
● Threats to internal credibility included a purposeful sample's subject characteristics
and selection bias. The study sought to include only group members showing high
motivation for participation in the Facebook Group. According to their activity, some
users were group leaders or administrators. Moreover, while not administrators in the
researched groups, two superusers were leaders in other Facebook groups.
Additionally, as was the case with one study participant, they accepted a group
leadership position during the study. Although eight of the nine participants were
volunteers, the responsibility of group leadership could attribute to more frequent
activity and more robust self-efficacy and outcome expectancy beliefs.
● This study used a non-random sampling that was purposeful to select study
participants. Participants' purposeful selection may have represented a transferability
threat if the research does not apply to other situations or organizations. However, the
study sought to overcome this threat by providing roles and activity details of
participants to the readers.
Delimitations were the choices and the boundaries that the researcher made for the study.
The delimitation set in this study included:
● Data were collected through qualitative interviews only and did not include
quantitative data.
● Data were collected from the groups of two organizations. While both were of the
Black church, the churches were different denominations and organizational
85

affiliations. These differences represented a distinction in religious traditions,
geographical regions, culture, and history.
Assumptions
The worldview espoused in this study was constructivism, which sought to understand
how factors interacted, gave process, and meaning through inquiry and associating causal
mechanisms (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). Constructivism entailed multiple participant meanings
and socially constructed realities, leading to theory generation (Creswell & Creswell, 2018).
Assumptions underlying this study included that social-cognitive motivators directly
impacted participation in the virtual community; higher self-efficacious members engaged more
frequently, and participants with specific outcome expectations also had higher engagement
levels. Additional assumptions included the development of network ties. One assumption was
that bridging bonds would generate social capital for individuals in the virtual community.
Likewise, assumptions that organizational culture and online protocols would impact how social
capital developed positively or negatively.
Limitations and Threats to Validity
As the researcher, I shared my positionality as a respected leader in both organizations
with known experience in the technology groups. Participants were encouraged to share candidly
and truthfully to inform the research questions as the study's objective was to have valid, credible
data. Qualitative interviews depended upon the interviewees' candor and are limited if the
information is not honest, trustworthy, or accurate. I further reviewed the recorded interviews for
additional cues and confirmation of field notes taken during the interview.

86

Chapter Four: Findings
Purpose and Research Questions
The study aimed to understand participant motivators in virtual religious communities
and how online communities generate individual and organizational social capital. It considered
the Meta Facebook Groups of two African American church congregations to identify highly
active users’ self-efficacy and outcome expectation motivations and sought to determine
structural, relational, and cognitive social capital development. Additionally, the study sought to
understand if and how organizational culture, norms, protocols, and practices may encourage or
hinder the generation of social capital and its embedded resources.
The research questions explored the motivations, participation, and organizational
influences of nine superusers in the groups. Facebook analytics identified the group's superusers
based upon a weighted measurement of their activity, such as authoring a post, commenting on a
post, and sharing a post outside the group. Table 2 gives insight into the superuser's group roles,
experience leading the group, leadership position, Facebook use intensity, friend count, and
additional informative information, including organizational membership tenure. In one-on-one
interviews, researchers sought to determine participant understandings of experiences, personal
beliefs, and the motivation to build network ties within the virtual community. Additionally,
interviewees completed a brief questionnaire to define further network ties developed as a part of
the Facebook group. The research questions were:
● How do self-efficacy and outcome expectation impact a participant’s activity within
the virtual church community?
● How do activities exhibited within the social network site contribute to developing
social capital among virtual community members?
87

● How do organizational attributes offline and online in the virtual community
influence or impede the creation and actability of social capital's embedded
resources?

Table 2

Participant Information

Pseudonym
Group
Admin of
this Group
Group
Admin in
a different
Group
Number
of FB
friends
Self-reported
time use per
week
Activity, title, and
membership tenure
Leslie No Yes
2001-
3000
3 hours on
church
groups/pages
Active in a small group
ministry. Held an official
title. Worked with
children and youth.
Entrepreneur. Church
membership more than 10
years.
Pat No No
2001-
3000
2 hours on
Facebook
Was in a small group
ministry. Lay leadership,
no official title. Church
membership 5-10 years.
Marion No Yes
1001-
2000
19 hours on
Facebook
Active in a small group
ministry. Active in civic
leadership. Membership
more than 10 years.
Jesse Yes Yes
4001-
5000
20 hours on
Facebook
Group Administrator.
Minister. Active in a
small group ministry.
Held an official title.
Church membership 5-10
years.
Avery Yes No 1-1000
1-2 hours on
church
groups/pages
Group Administrator.
Active in a small group
ministry. No official title.
Church membership less
than 5 years.

88

Table 2 (cont’d)

Participant Information

Pseudonym
Group
Admin
of this
Group
Group
Admin
in a
different
Group
Number
of FB
friends
Self-reported
time use per
week
Activity, title, and
membership tenure
Shon Yes Yes
3000-
4000
30 + hours on
Facebook
Group Administrator.
Minister. Active in small
groups. Leadership
position with official
title. Church membership
5-10 years.
Taylor No No
1001-
2000
2 hours on
church
groups/pages
Minister. No additional
leadership position.
Member of the church for
5 -10 years.
Jordan No Yes
4001 -
5000
30 + hours on
Facebook
Minister. Lives in
another state but
maintains membership in
the online church.
Leadership position
outside of the church
with other faith-based
organizations. Active
Group Administrator of
other Facebook
Groups. Church
Membership more than
10 years.
Sidney Yes Yes
3000-
4000
10-15 hours on
Facebook
Group Administrator.
Active in small group
ministries. Leadership
position without official
title. Church membership
more than 10 years.

Findings
The qualitative study findings revealed motivations for participant activity in the
Facebook Groups. Additionally, the findings assessed differences in self-efficacious motivations
89

and expected outcome motivations. The research also suggests that social capital existed in the
group, members and organizations had access to embedded resources, and they could benefit
from accessing them. The findings also infer that organizational rules could affect group quality
and limit the development of social capital.
RQ1: How Did Motivation Theory Affect Participant Participation?
This research study sought to understand how cognitive motivators, self-efficacy, and
outcome expectation, were integral in motivating activity in the social networking site. All study
subjects were identified as superusers in the groups indicating their activity of curating content
such as authoring posts, commenting on posts, and sharing the posts with others. For example, as
the superusers generated content, many expressed a self-efficacious belief in their ability to
inspire, help or connect with group members. Additionally, many expressed the expectation that
their efforts would help someone.
Social Cognitive Motivation Influenced Participant Behavior to Develop Social Capital
The qualitative study affirmed that social cognitive motivation influenced participant
behavior in the virtual community. Furthermore, the findings revealed self-efficacious and
expected outcomes as different motivators for study participants. Exhibited behaviors affirmed
previous studies by Ellison et al. (2007) and Burke et al. (2011) depicting the benefits of
Facebook friends and specific actions that developed social capital.
As was evidenced by Chiu et al. (2006) and Hsu et al. (2007) in professional networks,
this study also found that motivated behaviors in the virtual community-generated activity that
strengthened weak network ties characteristic in SNS, sites consisting of people with common
thoughts or purposes. Additionally, this study reflected that the by-product of strengthened
network ties modeled social capital characteristics. Therefore, this research indicated that social
90

capital developed in the virtual community with both members and organizations having access
to embedded resources. The findings also inferred that organizational culture could impact a
group's development of social capital.
Few studies considered how motivational theories influence online community behaviors
that develop social capital and access anticipated returns in specific virtual sites. Both Chiu et al.
(2006) and Hsu et al. (2007) researched knowledge sharing in professional virtual networks,
where individuals sought to network and advanced their skills and knowledge. Their work
demonstrated that social cognition affected knowledge sharing in the professional virtual
communities and developed social capital. However, little data existed for the religious
community to specifically understand an individual's motivation to participate in an SNS,
enhance their life skills and knowledge, and develop social capital. The gap in the literature to
understand social cognition's effect on social capital in a virtual religious community provided
the opportunity for this and future studies to explore.
Self-Efficacy Influenced Behavior and Action in Virtual Communities
The qualitative study findings revealed motivations for participant activity in the
Facebook Groups and assessed differences in self-efficacious motivation and expected outcome
motivation. Both factors, self-efficacy and outcome expectation, impacted participant behaviors
in the group, although outcome expectation emerged more frequently during the research.
Self-Efficacy Influenced Virtual Community Behaviors
This study sought to understand if the social cognitive theory of self-efficacy, one's belief
in their ability to perform a specific action, motivated group members to take action.
According to Bandura (2012), self-efficacy beliefs significantly influenced human agency's
91

cognitive, motivational, affective, and decisional processes. Further, self-efficacy affirmed that
what a person believed about themselves motivated them to exhibit specific behaviors online.
The first research question sought to understand if self-efficacy and outcome expectation
influenced a participant's activity in the virtual community. Sufficient literature for social
cognitive and social capital theories informed this study. The literature review provided specifics
of self-efficacy, and outcome expectation, two aspects of the self-cognitive theory that motivated
a person to act or behave in a particular manner (Bandura, 1997; Hsu et al., 2007; Maddux et al.,
1982). Self-efficacy was a self-reported abstract concept, not all-inclusive, but it affected an
individual's belief in their capability to perform specific actions (Bandura, 1997).
This study showed that self-efficacy motivated an individual's behavior. Thus, the
activities exhibited in the virtual community, such as knowledge sharing, making posts,
commenting, praying for others, networking, and responding to calls to action to volunteer,
participate and engage, were motivated by a belief in one's ability to perform that action. All
study participants routinely performed actions like generating posts, encouraging reactions,
comments, and shares. However, the consistent actions of authoring posts and comments were
essential to group member engagement.
The data from this study showed that self-efficacy impacted the superusers' ability to
inspire other group members. For example, Leslie believed their effective life-long writing skills
enabled them to uplift others. Shon, Jordan, and Sidney each demonstrated exceptionally high
self-efficacy beliefs stating they were confident that they could write compelling posts to engage
other members. These motivated users believed they could inspire group members to active
involvement.
92

Even if participants did not utilize the terminology of self-cognitive influence, the
motivated action fulfilled the conception that Bandura articulated (1977). Taylor exhibited self-
efficacious beliefs, although they attributed the capacity to do so as divinely inspired. As
Bandura (1977) described, self-efficacy was a persons' belief regarding their capability to
execute a specific task needed to accomplish a particular goal (Bandura, 1977). Although they
believed that their actions were godly motivated, Taylor, like the other study participants,
believed that they could perform the action and routinely did post and share.
The significance of self-efficacy upon motivated activity generated in the virtual
community was compelling. Self-efficacy correlated to a personal belief regarding one’s ability
to perform an action more so than it referred to a person’s actual ability to act (Maddux et al.,
1982). Self-efficacy was critical to inspire and motivate (Bandura, 1997, 2006).
As it related to the specifics of the social networking site, the research sought to
understand if individuals believed they could effectively post in the group and if that belief was
more significant than their knowledge of making a post. To understand, we probed the
participants about their self-efficacy beliefs and how self-efficacy motivated them to generate
activity within the virtual community. Distinct activities included: authoring posts, commenting
on others' posts, sharing a post within or outside of the group, generating a reaction to a post,
sending a direct message, or off-platform communication such as texting someone from the
group. Previous data affirmed by Hsu et al. (2007) affirmed that highly self-efficacious persons
shared more frequently in virtual communities.
The Facebook platform identified the purposefully selected subjects as superusers in
selected Facebook Groups. The nine subjects shared personal experiences to describe
motivations and use of the platform. While most respondents indicated significant confidence
93

levels in authoring posts, one respondent emulated a more spontaneous relationship between
authoring posts and her self-efficacy. Taylor stated that they had not thought of their authoring
posts as an aspect of confidence or self-efficacy, stating, "It literally isn't something I really think
about." Referring to the group as "community and family," they felt it was a safe place where
they felt empowered and unrestrained to share and confident that others would receive their
messages. Thus, when authoring posts, they stated, "It is literally something that I feel it within
my spirit, my soul, and I type it." A group administrator, Shon, felt similar to Taylor. They
described themselves as having "a high confidence level in the group." They remarked that
posting into the group "is really kind of intuitive in who you are to share out."
While the data seemed to affirm that the superusers held high efficacy beliefs, not all
users initially posted in the group because of self-efficacy beliefs. For example, Avery recalled
feeling comfortable the first time they made a post in the group. Although they were unclear on
their motive at that time, they sensed two needs, belonging and presence. Stating, "it was
something that I needed to do at the time, I needed to talk to someone, and Facebook was there."
They further went on to say that prior to that time, "my activity in the group was limited to
reactions and using mainly emojis to characterize my feelings." As a result, they felt like they
were heard and affirmed. Since their initial posting, they became a regular commentator.
Affirmation Increased Self-Efficacy. Positive affirmation increased self-efficacy and
encouraged study participants to share frequently in the SNS. The superusers reported that
positive affirmations, expressed as comments that reflected encouragement, agreement, or
gratitude, increased their desire to post. Additionally, particular posts, especially prayers,
resonated with more group members. The superuser author felt effective, affirmed, and validated
when a post received a significant reaction.
94

Experience and substantiation also motivated users to write in the group. For example,
Leslie, whose self-efficacious beliefs were based upon a successful writing history, their
experience, coupled with the reader’s affirmation, increased their self-confidence, and
encouraged them to generate more posts.
I've had people say, gosh, you ought to put that in the book. That came at the right time.
You just don't know what I was going through. I'm always getting that kind of feedback...
And so just that motivation of hearing the response, and not only just hearing the
response, but actually seeing them take what I write and share it, motivates me. - Leslie
Supplementary to authoring posts, Leslie felt compelled to reply to comments on other
posts in the group. For instance, when someone shared an encouraging post and group members
commented, Leslie consistently read the comments and regularly reacted or replied. They felt it
was meaningful that "the original commenter sensed connectivity, empathy, and encouragement
from others in the group." Believing that their comments would meet that need, motivated them
to continue responding. Of Bandura's (1997) five determinants that influenced self-efficacy
beliefs - performance experiences, vicarious performances, verbal persuasion, imaginal
performances, and affective states and physical sensations, it was evident in the research that
verbal persuasion was highly influential with the participants.
Post engagement increased the motivation to post. For instance, Pat's self-directed efforts
of authoring posts and engaging group discussions were founded in their desire to be a
trustworthy source of inspirational messages and scripture. Saying, "So what I put, I guess they
trust me. You know, it's going to be something inspirational, and I'm going to research it!" They
felt that their posts were engaging for the group as they touched upon various life aspects that
were relatable to many members. They considered responses positive influences since group
95

members consistently commented or reacted to the posts and encouraged them to post more
frequently. Their commitment to being trustworthy helped change the perspective of Facebook
for many senior members in the group who initially did not trust site. Their commitment to
ensuring accuracy was noticeable to the group administrator who asked them to become an
administrator of their group. They felt highly confident that they could do the task without much
instruction regarding group moderation and were hopeful about being a source of inspiration to
connect members to the church and each other.
Self-Efficacy Was Essential for Inspiration
The real-life behaviors in the virtual community affirmed Bandura's (1997, 2006) theory
that self-efficacy was essential for inspiration. In addition, the study participants believed that
they were transformative influencers in both day-to-day matters and very significant moments
for group members. For example, Pat visualized their activity as having a positive influence on
group members, to the point of changing a person's outlook on their day. In addition, their
positive efforts made them an inspirational source for others.
Encouraging words and prayers inspired group members. Like Pat, Jesse revealed their
confidence in posting prayers to the group because of their established prayer ministry. They
were grateful to participate in the process that helped others with a fresh perspective on current
problems. Self-efficacy advanced the idea that individuals activate change in their lives and the
lives of others (Maddux & Kleinman, 2016). Furthermore, stronger self-efficacy beliefs were
associated with positive outcomes (Maddux et al., 1982). The belief that they could encourage or
pray for others was vital to understanding what motivated the frequent use of these specific
actions.
96

Prayers Were Pivotal. When it came to authoring and commenting on posts, the topic of
prayer stood out in many of the interviews. Considering that the groups were communities of
Christian believers connected to a religious organization, it was likely that group members held
kindred life experiences and expectations. Posted prayer requests, whether specifically for one
person or in general for the entire group, were notable. Additionally, the gratification derived
from helping someone in need was significant for enhancing self-efficacy. Positive reactions and
comments that affirmed the timely prayer posts motivated users to post more inspirational
messages and prayers.
Jordan and Shon noted that their prayer posts seemingly garnered more comments,
reactions, and shares. They attributed a higher response rate to the prayer posts due to two
causes. First, group users who shared similar experiences would readily affirm prayers that
petitioned for needs that they also needed. Moreover secondly, in the tradition of the African
American church, it was common to endorse, agree with and validate prayers, thereby reacting to
prayer or commenting "Amen" affirmed a prayer request. Therefore, the agreement and cosign to
the prayer posts were markedly higher as group members shared similar and relatable
circumstances, and therefore they related to the prayers in a general sense. Figure 5 is an
example of a group member’s prayer request which to date of the dissertation had a considerable
response. Figure 6 shows the Facebook insights that were consistent with the majority of prayer
requests posted.
Like Jordan and Shon, Jesse felt that prayer posts and comments affirmed their efficacy
as individuals to help group members with inspiration and encouragement. Often the prayers
were posted to the group, but when a member requested prayer, it gave others group members
the gateway to share a prayer.
97

Figure 5
Prayer Request

98

Figure 6

Facebook Post Insights

Jesse described their responsiveness to prayer requests and how they confirmed that they
had prayed:
A lot of people say on Facebook, ‘I'm praying for you.’ I try not to say that because
people say, ‘I'm praying for you,’ and they move to the next post. If I'm praying for you,
let me drop you some prayer right there in the comments. And you will know for sure
that someone is praying. - Jesse
99

Because of Jesse’s efforts to respond timely and affirm the requestor that someone was praying,
they discovered that they were helping group members. Additionally, their swift public response
encouraged timely responses from other group members to also acknowledge the request.
Impact of a Leadership Position. The superusers expressed a sense of responsibility to
represent their organization's values. Some of the superusers were church leaders, which
accounted for their need to represent their organization appropriately. However, not all were
official church leaders, yet they held the same beliefs. For instance, Jordan intertwined their
self-efficacy to share knowledge with being "connected to the vision of the church, the
organizational leader, and the members." They stated that their communication required
"sensitivity in sharing and thoughtfulness in responding." According to this user, it also required
a degree of "accountability to the church leadership to share concerns about other users
[concerns with spiritual life, needs], if they arose." Their confidence was underscored by being
connected and accountable to the church.
Overall, the data showed that study participants were motivated to engage in the group
when they believed they could help someone. The study participants consistently affirmed that
the most salient motivation was to encourage or assist others in need of spiritual support. Similar
results were seen by Brubaker and Haigh (2017) which determined that ministering, particularly
encouraging others, was a leading factor for participation in an SNS site. Since this research
sought to understand how self-efficacy and outcome expectation played a role in motivation, the
next phase of probes delved deeper into what actions participants took based upon what they
expected to happen as a result. Consistent among all participants, the superusers expressed self-
efficacy about sharing messages to assist others. Likewise, there was clear evidence of outcome
expectation as a motivating factor.
100

Outcome Expectation Influenced Behavior and Action in Virtual Communities
This study sought to understand if the social cognitive theory of outcome expectation
motivated members of the Facebook Group. Bandura (1990) deemed outcome expectation as
individual beliefs that specific action would yield a particular result. The first research question
considered two self-cognitive theories that influenced participant behavior in virtual
communities. The second aspect of the question examined the theory of outcome expectation as
motivated behavior. It aimed to determine if participants acted with an expected outcome in
mind (Bandura, 1990, 1997).
This study showed that outcome expectation motivated participant behavior and action in
the virtual community. Thus, behaviors exhibited in the Facebook Groups were motivated
activities based upon the participants' belief in what would result from their action. In particular,
the behaviors were knowledge sharing, posting, commenting, praying, networking, and
responding to volunteer opportunities. In addition, the study participants routinely generated
posts that caused reactions, comments, and shares with motivated self-efficacy actions.
Expressed as feelings, affirmation, and self-satisfaction, outcome expectation is the
expected result of an individual's behavior (Bandura, 1997). According to Bandura (1997) and
Hsu et al. (2007), individuals may determine their actions based upon the outcome that they
anticipate experiencing. Moreover, Bandura specified three effects that formulated outcome
expectation: physical, social, and self-evaluation effects (1997). Although social effects seemed
more prevalent in the interviews, the study participants articulated these expectations in various
ways detailed in the section below. However, when it concerned content generated for the group,
group leaders specifically held more robust outcome expectations such as feedback, engagement,
and inspiration.
101

Superusers expected that their participation in the SNS would help the organization
succeed. Jordan sensed an intentional aspect of outcome expectation. They articulated that their
participation would help the group achieve its goals by helping individuals to realize their unique
existence. They shared that it was possible by helping others in "discovering their purpose and
being reminded of their purpose that God created them for a godly intent and purpose." The
ministry aspect of helping others find purpose and meaning was a crucial part of Jordan's mantra
and essential to the group's overall success. As a superuser, they recognized that they brought
value to the group by inspiring a fresh outlook, and they expected that others would receive the
message well. Composing encouraging posts and sharing personal development courses were
methods that Jordan utilized to help group members. Their expectancy for group development
and growth was frequently validated by those who participated.
Inspiring others to engage was an outcome expectation of contributing. Like Jordan,
Taylor, who was not an admin, but a faithful sharer in the group, communicated their
expectations from their posts, "I am that individual that is going to help, you know, help to just
kind of encourage you to engage." They felt positive that their comments encouraged others to
engage more consistently, noting that some users only needed a little nudge of inspiration.
Feedback As Outcome Expectation
Concisely stated, Shon coined what all study participants emulated, "When putting
content out there, the expectation is feedback." They cautiously admitted that feedback could be
good or bad on social media. However, they stressed that the group leaders shared messages
hoping to resonate with someone who would respond. They expected that the feedback would
encourage group members to share their stories. The group leaders encouraged people to
comment with profound inspiration and personal testimony. They stated, "the expectation is
102

always a hope of somebody giving feedback." When group leaders received comments, it
substantiated the ministry.
Feelings As Outcome Expectation
In a broader sense of outcome expectation, what a person anticipated feeling due to their
action was an indicator of outcome expectation (Bandura, 1997). Moreover, feelings could
motivate individuals to share knowledge in a virtual community (Hsu et al., 2007). The
superusers authored numerous posts, albeit some participants revealed uncertainty regarding
what content would resonate with group members. However, when messages encouraged or
inspired members, the superusers described feeling satisfied, effective, and connected. How the
study participants felt authoring the posts and receiving affirming responses was invaluable to
their outcome expectation. As a result, they often experienced increased positive feedback, likely
to the point of being accustomed to the acknowledgment.
As an outcome expectation, feelings are embodied in affirmation and self-satisfaction that
Bandura (1997) described as a behavior motivation. The expected outcome of their action made
post authors feel good and acknowledged. According to Bandura (1997) and Hsu et al. (2007),
individuals may determine their actions based upon the outcome that they anticipate
experiencing. Connecting the idea that study participants authored more posts in the group
because they expected the message to be relevant motivated them to engage more frequently.
The higher level of motivated engagement was particularly applicable to non-group leaders
Leslie, Marion, Avery, and Pat. Thus, these highly engaged users anticipated and received
positive responses from their posts.
Acknowledged. Feeling acknowledged made post authors feel good. Study participants
admittedly felt good and acknowledged when they authored posts that garnered responses from
103

group members. In particular, Pat, a Group Administrator, mentioned that they "felt effective in
managing the group quality and interaction based upon members' responses." While Pat had not
been an administrator for an extensive time, being in the group and inspiring dialogue was
routine.
Likewise, conveying their belief that group members sought encouragement, Shon
expressed their feeling to the post responses as, "It makes me feel good. It makes me feel really
good, not only from a person that's putting the content out there but also just from a church
perspective." They further explained that the content generally was sourced from the church
leaders or ministry initiatives. However, their responsibility was to communicate these messages
to the group effectively. They felt that the response levels indicated that their ministry was
impactful, and that gave them "a really good feeling." Their feeling of satisfaction was also
associated with overall reactions and the frequency in which members responded.
Gratitude. Outcome expectations varied for many of the participants. Nevertheless,
gratitude and personal acknowledgment from posts were key findings. Many superusers posted
with the expectation that someone would affirm the post. Group members regularly conveyed
gratitude for the superusers' posts by commenting, sharing a direct message, or expressing in
person. As an illustration, when Marion responded to what they expected to occur after they
posted, they shared their experience of how group members voiced gratitude for their posts:
When I post something important, they will see me at church or somewhere and say,
thank you for that information. I get a lot of verbal responses, text or direct messages
saying thank you for that Facebook post. – Marion
Recognizing that they do not post for an outpouring of gratitude, Marion illustrated that
they only anticipate someone saying thanks based upon experience. Likewise, Pat stated that in
104

addition to name recognition which they found gratifying, they received positive feedback from
group members who said, "You always respond, Thank you."
Reputation As Outcome Expectation
Distinguishable aspects of reputation emerged as unexpected study findings as an
outcome expectation. Building and maintaining a good reputation was important to all the study
participants evidenced by their desires to share accurate knowledge, be entrusted to a leadership
position in the church, be affirmed by the Pastors, and be recognized offline. While the reasons
appeared to be different, the underlying measure attests to an expectation that the actions in the
group would increase name and position awareness.
Perhaps the most admirable of the expected outcomes, Sidney expressed the desire to
maintain their reputation because "families depended upon good leaders with a good name."
Sidney's commitment to helping marriages survive authenticated their standing as a leader in the
church. An advocate for healthy marriages, they expressed that the leader's reputation was
essential to members' confidence in the group. Sensing the existence of troubled relationships,
they believed that many couples felt that the church was a safe haven, and online groups were a
good resource. Thus, they believed that members had greater faith and trust in the group when
the leader bore a good reputation. "So, you know, we have to walk a fine line being a leader, but
they [group members] are more inclined to listen to you than they would an outside person." As
Sidney shared marital inspirational messages in the group, they felt that it enriched their
reputation as a leader.
The sharing of verified information corroborated reputation. Civically engaged Marion
similarly expressed that leaders maintain a good reputation by disseminating truthful
information. As a leader of a cultural association, they understood the value of building and
105

maintaining a good reputation. Frequently, to add to other groups' resources, Marion leveraged
the information they learned in the church's group. However, they fact-checked the information
to ensure its accuracy because, as they stated, "That is important to me because it's a reputation
that you hold when you share, and you want to make sure you have the correct information."
The motivation to maintain an online presence and reputation as a leader was important
to Leslie, who stated, "I personally, I share. Because of the position I hold in the church. I share
as much as I can share." While probing expectation and significance of reputation, Leslie stated
that the Pastor occasionally commented on their Facebook posts. They felt that their comments
enhanced their reputation and publicly affirmed them as a leader. Their actions authoring posts in
the group suggested their desire for uniformity with the church's message. "I want it to reflect our
leadership and what they represent. And so every now and then, he [the Pastor] will come on
there and endorse what I say." Being aligned with the church's vision, encouraging others to
participate in the church events, and helping people sense community were noteworthy methods
by which they built a reputation. All of the study participants except Taylor expressed outcome
expectations of reputation development, growth, or public acknowledgment.
The social cognitive theory establishes that physical, social, and self-evaluation effects
develop outcome expectation. Hence, the expectation of feeling good or bad, receiving or lacking
social recognition or affirmation, and self-satisfaction or devaluation, motivate human behavior
(Bandura, 1977; Hsu et al., 2007). Therefore, when considering the motivated behavior of the
study participants, particularly an expectation of recognition, which reputation characterizes, it is
relatable that recognition motivated behavior. Summarily, the study participants overwhelmingly
were motivated by an outcome expectation of maintaining a good reputation. Leaders
substantiated their reputation through active participation.
106

Community As Outcome Expectation
Assuring a safe, intentional, spiritual community online was an outcome expectation for
all study participants. Intentionally connecting with group members and praying for others was
how the group ascertained quality, safety, and spirituality. As a result, one-on-one associations
and spiritual intercession generated elements necessary to build trust essential for community
development.
The study participants purposively acted to connect with other group members. Although
causes varied according to the study participants, social and self-evaluative reasons arose as
motivators. Group participation afforded new connections and increased Leslie and Jesse's
number of Facebook friends. However, friendship growth resulted from direct connectivity with
group members, personal communication, and prayer or inspiration.
Intentional Outreach. When probed concerning the bases to directly connect with other
users, Taylor stated they were very intentional about reaching out. They voiced concerns about
individuals feeling alone and isolated during the COVID-19 pandemic. They described their
motive as, "If I respond, then they will know that they are being heard and seen. They will know
that they are not alone." As they envisioned, their actions helped group members overcome
pandemic-related stress. "I just wanted people to know, especially virtually, that you are heard
and that you are seen. Yeah, even though it is flooded with requests, we hear you, and we see
you, friend." They acknowledged that their outreach efforts were intentional to reframe the idea
of community in virtual settings.
Accordingly, Leslie also acknowledged deliberately meeting group members to
strengthen the online community. They considered the Facebook group members first-line
greeters and church representatives who could reach out to others to help them not feel lost in the
107

crowd or disconnected from the church. They believed that their online efforts were helping the
church leaders by reaching new people, disengaged members, and those on the periphery.
Saying, "I think it is a good thing because I am doing it and somebody else is doing it. So, to me,
that is we are reaching even more people." Their extensive efforts helped fulfill one of the
church's values to outreach to others.
The superusers universally expressed the idea that they could connect users with the
church community. As Shon voiced their expectation from the intentional connection, they
affirmed the thought: "I would hope that they gain community." Seeking to mirror the offline
relationship of a parishioner to the church, they felt compelled to connect with group members in
the same manner as if they had walked into the church doors.
Friends. Group participation afforded new connections and increased the number of
Facebook friends if desired. Describing their goal of meeting new people in the Facebook group,
Leslie shared the challenges of mega-church membership. They desired to meet more people, but
it was difficult to know many church members due to the extensive membership and multi-
services. As they encountered new names in the group, they sent friend requests. Consequently,
they felt they accomplished a goal of meeting others, saying, "I really can say that I have gained
just so many new friends that are members of the church that I did not know." Exuberantly
expressing that they had developed more Facebook friends, Leslie fulfilled an outcome
expectation.
In another example, Pat expected to shift online friendships offline. It was evident that
Pat's friendliness extended beyond group participation to real-life settings. Their outcome
expectation of meeting group members in person occurred on a few occasions, further motivating
Pat to meet other group members at church service or events.
108

Leadership. In instances where the study participant held a leadership position, it
significantly influenced their outcome expectation. Additionally, their commitment to
representing the church was intentional. Regarding activity in the group, many participants
responded that their activity represented their church leadership and the church as a whole.
Because they maintained a high commitment to upholding the church's reputation and mission,
they expected users to bond with the church, its leaders, and members. For example, Shon's
group became a bridge between online members and the physical church by representing the
church.
Leaders and non-leaders alike felt it was imperative to help group members spiritually in
times of need. In particular, Shon expressed a goal for their group to deliver knowledgeable
content that "encourages them, and also allows them to feel more connected to us as a church."
As a result, they helped users feel closer to God. They further extrapolated the positive impact
that "helped people connect to the ministry by letting them know that the church, members, and
leaders are present to help them." Consequently, based upon their organization's representation,
their group generated a sense of divine help and community for its group members.
Leaders felt compelled to represent church leadership and to be present in the virtual
space. When probed why they were highly active in the group, Leslie responded with several
reasons, but the core was that they were a leader at the church. Additionally, Leslie felt that their
presence online was necessary to connect with ministry members that they recognized offline.
Eventually, they considered the group a viable place to "keep engaging with some of the
members that I know there at the church." Leslie’s outcome expectation of participating in
multiple channels of communication with church members was effective in building their
109

reputation online as a leader. Activity in the group granted Leslie the ability to represent the
church's leadership and an additional level of personal connectivity with members.
Participation in the group allowed members to support one another and partake in
ministry. While positions were not necessary to respond to requests or needs, sometimes the
church leaders promoted group members to a moderator position based on their group
engagement. To cite one example, Jessie, a minister, was active in their church's group. They
realized that the group provided an additional platform for ministry participation and began
serving online. Their actions online were an extension of what they offered in person. "I can pray
for you. I can encourage you. I can exhort you. I can tell you what God's word says for your
situation. I can offer you scriptures to read." As they extended their ministry online into the
group, they became a leader. They expected that their group participation would extend the
church's ministry and help others in the group. Jesse’s outcome expectation was that their
ministry would be effective in the group by assisting members’ needs.
From another perspective, Taylor, a minister at church but not a group moderator,
believed that their online presence was necessary to help others. They stated that they sought
opportunities to respond to messages, interact with users, and acknowledge their presence. Their
motivation to respond highlighted two themes noted in the research, even for superusers without
an official leadership role: church representation and commitment to community. Regarding their
expectation, they stated, "I find it engaging, and I also find that I am looking for opportunities
too. I don't want to miss an opportunity to say that I see you." Taylor expected that
acknowledging others in the group would build community.
Comparing the expected outcome of helping others feel connected, Leslie also felt it was
essential to acknowledge group members. They stated, "I actually like to go back and, you know,
110

comment on their comment to let them know that I see their comment." Leslie also elaborated, "I
just think it's very, very important to respond." Taylor shared a personal experience in which
they felt dismissed and invisible. That hurtful experience compelled Taylor to acknowledge
others regularly. Both Taylor and Leslie expressed that as a result of their acknowledgment of
others through their online actions, they expected group members to sense that God also sees
them.
Prayer and Help. Two key actions that emerged as the most consistent activity that the
study participants made were deliberately making contact with other users and offering
intercessory prayer. In other words, the superusers purposively acted to connect with other group
members. Although the action seemed homogenous amongst the participants, the outcome
expectation, mainly social and self-evaluative, varied according to the study participants.
Responses to posts or comments affirmed the authors, but some users were motivated by
other anticipated outcome expectation. Whether it was to increase personal friendships, represent
the church, fulfill a Christian commitment or ministry calling, or even personal gratification,
there was a selection of outcomes expected from intentionally connecting with other group
members. Frequently, the study participants cited building community as an expectation.
Just as superusers felt that by intentionally engaging with group members, they could
help them sense community to feel connected with the church and make more friends, they held
similar expectations of helping members in need. Several users stated they often prayed online
with group members with empathy and concern.
Prayer helped the group members connect. With a genuine sense of gratitude for the
virtual community, Jessie shared how they perceived the effectiveness of their ministry through
prayer. When someone articulated a need or requested prayer, they were willing to pray online
111

without hesitation. They felt that it helped those in need. Additionally, their group activated the
prayer button, a Facebook feature for religious organizations that encouraged members to share
prayer requests and pray for others. They believed that the prayer button was an effective
mechanism to encourage members.
Facebook features helped members to connect through direct and indirect contact. While
expressing concern for publicly sharing intricate prayer requests, Marion also felt that the prayer
button helped group members request prayer and know that others were offering prayers. When
they observed general prayer requests posted, they stated that they would inbox the group
member for personal contact. As a result of the specific outreach, they had helped a few
members above prayer. Sharing their belief that group members "cannot go into depths with
everyone. So, it is nice when there is someone to say, OK, I hear you, let's chat about it, or I will
reach out to you about it." While the group post facilitated more in-depth conversations, away
from the group, they felt that individual outreach gave them the confidence to share concerns and
needs.
Additionally, Facebook features helped users to connect via phone call. For example,
Sidney used a Facebook feature to connect with group members. They utilized a calling tool to
talk to group members directly, even when they did not have a phone number. Sidney shared that
they would call or send a direct message to contact group users. "So, I just try to stay in contact,
especially with our married couple friends, because as we are all getting older, you know, some
people are dealing with illnesses." Moreover, they expressed concern with couples feeling alone
and lacking support because of the pandemic. Their objective was to maintain contact and meet
ministry goals to help couples remain committed in marriage.
112

Conversations with the group members inspired avid connectivity. When Shon reached
out to group members, they anticipated that it would have a positive impact. Moreover, they
believed that their responses effectively encouraged and guided members through difficult times.
They served as an inspirational guide to peace and comfort. Overall, they definitively expected
that by engaging with the group, members could have deeper connections that went beyond
Sunday morning interactions. Sharing, "the real purpose and the goal of the group is to engage
our members and find ways to have those conversations, sharing content that we wouldn't
necessarily share in the general Facebook page." They felt effective in encouraging others
through difficult life moments.
Summary Motivation
The superusers genuinely sensed their actions were an outstretched hand of the church
and were motivated to contribute to the community. Connecting this concept to prior research,
Hsu (2007) asked virtual community members to complete the prompt, "my contribution would
help this community to..." to understand how outcome expectation played a role in participant
activity. When the superusers in this study responded to the same prompt, many expressed that
their actions would help the church meet organizational goals. They articulated the church
objectives as helping individuals feel welcome and belonging, inciting spiritual growth and
discipleship, and encouraging members to trust God. Hence, motivated activity was high when
the superusers believed that they were representing the church and helping others.
The data revealed two perspectives of the superusers' outcome expectancies. The
perspectives observed differences depended upon who would experience the outcome
expectation. First to note was that the superusers expected the group member to receive or
113

achieve an outcome. Additionally, the superuser may have also expected to gain personally as
well.
The concept of personal expectation motivating individual behavior appeared taboo to an
extent in the Christian community. However, Jordan effectively summarized their motivated
behavior with the statement, "God will give the outcome He wants." Jordan trusted that their
actions would result in God giving the desired outcome. Connecting the theory of outcome
expectancy, the expected result of an individual's action (Bandura, 1977), to Jordan's proposed
outcome, that God will give the final result, is an outcome expectation.
It is important to restate that outcome expectancies are natural tendencies and are not
contrary to biblical precepts. Philippians 2:3-4 admonished the Christian, "Do nothing out of
selfish ambition or vain conceit. Rather, in humility value others above yourselves, not looking
to your own interests but each of you to the interests of the others." The research found
consistently that motivated actions were rooted in care and concern for others in the virtual
communities, including actions motivated by outcome expectancies.
The excitement that the superusers expressed was exhilarating and enlightening. Their
commitment to the organizations and the group members was outstanding. Shon admitted, "I feel
like I'm obsessed with Facebook groups," sharing that they moderate and participate in the group
as a member. They intentionally write their posts and comments to help others. Likewise, Avery
articulated, "I love this, good or bad, the Facebook group has been an inspiration." They believed
that it was inspiring because of the communication and community. "We may not all be able to
go sit down in front of a table and eat cheesecake together. But we can share stories and share
triumphs and victories and pain and know that there is someone there on that Facebook page." In
essence, the motivated superusers effectively found a community to serve.
114

RQ2: Determining How Behavior Developed Social Capital in Virtual Communities
Putnam's (2000) simplified definition of social capital as the network of resources that
generated norms, trust, and information, guided the interviews, giving meaning to the second
research question. In order to understand how online activity in the Facebook group contributed
to developing social capital among its members, the study participants were interviewed and
completed an assessment of the group's social capital. The study considered the three dimensions
of social capital and access to its embedded resources.
The three elements of social capital are structural, relational, and cognitive dimensions.
The structural dimension referred to the social structure, embedded resources, diversity, density,
and network size (Bourdieu, 1998; Lin, 2001). The relational dimension referenced the nature
and quality of relationships, including the trusts, norms, identification within a group, and access
to the resources (Ellison et al., 2007; Lin, 2001; Putnam, 2000; Wellman et al., 2001). Lastly, the
cognitive dimension was characterized by shared emotional connections, social support,
collective goals, and civic standards (Nahapiet & Ghoshal, 1998). The research considered the
dimensions of social capital to determine its development and presence within the Facebook
groups.
Structural Dimension
Members' network access utilized a variety of resources. While primarily characterized as
Christian and African American, both groups were diverse in other ways, such as age,
profession, experience, interest, talent, wealth, and education. Each religious organization
boasted nearly 2,000 group members and more than 20,000 church members. With that, the
structural dimension of the group and individual social capital could be extensive.
115

Members of the group had access to a wealthy network. Since participating in the
Facebook group, some superusers noted that they had achieved a goal, objective, or had
overcome a concern through the network. For example, although they felt that some members
did not take advantage of the privileges afforded by the network, Sidney shared how they
benefitted from the group. When they shared their daughter's desire to attend a university and
upon graduation, her career goals, a group member recognized her and was willing to advocate
for her. Therefore, Sidney’s daughter gained access to resources previously unavailable for
education and professional employment.
In another instance, Jordan shared that a finance entrepreneur had helped several
members access financial resources and programs for homeownership, investments, and
retirement. It was new and novel information that many group members had no prior access to at
that level. But, again, some group members accessed resources, and others like Avery did not.
Avery shared that while the group had been "encouraging and inviting for other things,” there
were several things in which they had not participated. However, they did feel that if they needed
the information, they could access the group resources at other times.
Relational Dimension
Trusts, norms, and group identification were foundational elements necessary to develop
relational social capital. Additionally, trust was essential to sharing knowledge (Karna & Ko,
2015). Most, but not all superusers, expressed a high level of trust in the group. For example,
when asked if they felt that the church Facebook community members were trustworthy, Avery
stressed that they trusted the group members based on how they represented Christ and inspired
others in the group. However, they also stated that they were wary of blindly trusting everyone, a
sentiment that Leslie also reiterated.
116

When leaders were transparent, vulnerable, and confidential, it built trust. Defining
friendships in the virtual community was admittedly challenging for Jordan, who felt it was
"important to set safe borders and boundaries, particularly in these social media groups."
Nevertheless, they discovered that establishing relationships with people, making new contacts,
and continuing old friendships and relationships, was essential. They shared that social media,
and the Internet were lifelines for people and helped overcome isolation. They further
communicated that group engagement with transparency made it a safe space for healing,
encouragement, and expression. While it was risky, they found that trust was the underlying
expression for how the group operated with integrity.
Unlike Jordan, not all superusers felt comfortable being transparent in the group. For
example, while they shared that they mostly trusted the group, both Leslie and Jesse confided
that they had not posted specific intimate requests in the group. Instead, citing being a very
private person, Leslie stated that they would share broad non-specific requests. Yet Jessie
conveyed they simply had not thought about it, and acknowledged, "I think it would be more
effective if I did post." Despite their different actions, all three superusers, Jordan, Leslie, and
Jesse, agreed that others perceived common ground when leaders showed vulnerability.
Not only was trust necessary from the leaders, but it was also an essential group quality.
Sidney understood that trust and confidentiality strengthened group quality. They emphasized
that "there should be a sense of security when someone is confiding in you, that they know that
you have their best interests and you're not just there to take it as fodder or gossip." Accordingly,
they stressed that individuals feel secure when with trustworthy people.
117

Cognitive Dimension
Represented in the forms of shared emotional connections, social support, collective
goals, and civic standards, the cognitive dimensions of social capital emerged as themes.
Reflected through feelings or expressed emotions, study participants detailed how they
connected with group members. For example, Leslie shared their astonishment at the profound
support within the group. While they were grateful to inspire other group members in their
capacity, they sensed that often the timing of the message was a true inspiration, and "maybe
what they just needed at that time."
In another instance, when probed about their feelings of participating in the community,
Avery stated that they experienced a sense of accomplishment knowing they were "able to
support someone in their feelings, whether it is a great time or a sad time. You know, just to offer
your support to them and what they're feeling at the particular time." Additionally, Avery
insisted that bonds of friendship, trust, and understanding developed emotional connectedness.
Similar sentiments were echoed by Shon and Taylor, both affirming that social support was
paramount, particularly during the pandemic as people felt less connected.
Further expressing both the emotional connectedness of the superuser and the member,
Avery concluded that "it makes you feel good that you have given them the support where
maybe you weren't able to touch them or pick up the phone and call them at that moment." By
sharing their compassion, availability, and enthusiasm for the platform, the superusers utilized
the group feature to build social capital within their group organically.
Weak Ties Generated Bridging Social Capital
Social networks, represented as strong or weak ties, are bonds between individuals that
connect them. Strong bonds signified close relationships, such as family or friends. The weaker
118

bonds represented acquaintances, friends of friends, or even strangers with a shared background
(Granovetter, 1973). Granovetter (1973) proposed that weaker ties had a more consequential
impact on raising individuals' prospects by gaining access to previously inaccessible information
and diverse perspectives. Hence, connecting to individuals on different social levels strengthened
weak network ties, developing bridging social capital. Accordingly, weak ties formed a bridge
into an expanding network.
The embedded resources in the network represented social capital that group members
and organizations accessed (Bourdieu, 1986). It was the case for Sidney, whose daughter
benefitted from group social capital by gaining access to educational and professional
opportunities. Sharing in the group opened a new resource for his daughter to increase individual
social capital. In addition, Jordan, who shared financial resources with the group, provided
access to previously inaccessible information. The group members who obtained the knowledge
became homeowners, increasing individual and group social capital. Hence, there was evidence
of weaker ties cultivating bridging social capital into an expanding network, elevating life
platforms for group members.
People with weak ties in a network benefitted from Facebook by generating bridging
social capital (Haythornthwaite, 2005). However, it was necessary to note that bridging social
capital was more significant due to high trust, recognition, and emotional bonds (Phua et al.,
2017). All three elements were evident in the research, with impressive notability of trust.
Additionally, Burke et al. (2011) and Phua et al. (2017) found that trust was a significant
measure of network strength, site use intensity, and the creation of bonding and bridging social
capital. The following section demonstrates the primacy of trust in the network.

119

Trust Was Essential to Establish Social Capital Dimensions
Although trust influenced other dimensions of social capital. Nahapiet and Goshal (1998)
proposed that trust was a facet of the relational dimension. They found trust to be the antecedent
of knowledge exchange and knowledge exchange the precursor to resource development.
Further, they determined that the network exchange influenced social capital, with trust
foundational to sharing knowledge.
Developing Trust
To understand how trust developed in the group, Jordan expressed the need for group
leaders to model vulnerability, openness, and time. Jordan shared that it was "incumbent upon,
particularly the leaders in the group to be transparent, to kind of let it all hang out. And that's
risky. That's risky." Shon and Jordan agreed that knowledge sharing begat more knowledge
sharing. Emphasizing that trust grew when people shared knowledge and experience, Jordan
added that trust-building happened "in a way that oftentimes takes even personal acquaintances a
long time to come to that level where they're able to share."
Contrarily not all study participants agreed with the idea of the leaders' vulnerability and
openness. For example, Leslie preferred to post general messages like, "the day is different. Pray
for me," rather than posting, "I am in the hospital, pray for me." In addition, Leslie and Jesse
conveyed that it was not their character to share openly with the group as such, although they had
shared a personal request, story, or information one-on-one with a group member.
Past research determined that cognitive elements, trust, and a collective mindset
accelerated knowledge sharing in social collaboration network sites (Karna & Ko, 2015). Hence,
it is understandable why the virtual community was a trusted setting to build trust and exchange
knowledge with its collective mindset and purpose. Sidney contributed to the idea, imputing that
120

church ministry groups attracted people with similar interests and demographics, such as singles,
married couples, men's and women's groups. Sensing that people felt secure in small groups,
online and offline, Sidney shared that "trust was foundational to people sharing emotion,
experiences, and knowledge." In addition, Sidney believed that group members trusted the
leader's fiduciary and capability to direct them appropriately.
Leaders developed trust. However, this study was not conclusive on the role of the
leader's vulnerability to trust development. For example, some leaders openly shared their
personal vulnerability in the group, while others decidedly remained overall optimistic in
messaging without conveying personal vulnerability. Future research on leaders' vulnerability
will give insight into beneficial or detrimental aspects of virtual communities and SNS
leadership.
Trust Was Foundational to Knowledge Sharing
Organizations, as institutional settings, are conducive to the development of high levels
of intellectual capital and social capital (Nahapiet & Goshal, 1998; Putnam, 2000). To better
understand how knowledge sharing related to capital development, Nahapiet and Goshal (1998)
emphasized the "social embeddedness of intellectual capital" (p. 250). They determined that trust
was the foundation for sharing knowledge in a community.
When study participants like Shon expressed a high degree of trust in the group, they also
affirmed that knowledge exchange encouraged more knowledge sharing. Shon emphasized that
the act of sharing in a trustworthy environment increased trust, and thereby, members exchanged
knowledge more often. Shon stated, "Seeing them share, realizing that there's a trust level that
they demonstrate, also allows me to have that trust level as well." The members' actions proved
cyclical as sharing produced more group confidence and sharing.
121

Knowledge Sharing Developed Social Capital
The study participants frequently shared knowledge, defined as a variety of ministry,
spiritual, faith-based informative, and organizational-oriented information. Similar to the
categories noted by Brubaker and Haigh (2017), ministry posts represented the knowledge type
shared more frequently. Participant disclosure and group observations revealed a higher
frequency and quantity of ministry-based content posts. Additionally, these types of posts
received more reactions. Ministry content consisted of the intentional action to reach others by
sharing faith-based information, messages, prayers, or beliefs that inspired, encouraged, and
uplifted others. The participants often ministered to the spiritual and emotional needs by helping
those who requested prayer, experienced personal faith struggles, or needed spiritual guidance.
The nine study participants noted that their posts or comments were grounded in a desire to
minister and share inspirational messages with group members.
Knowledge sharing was not limited to spiritual or biblical precepts. Participants
frequently shared faith-based information that Brubaker and Haigh (2017) defined as
inspirational content, details about religious services, activities or events, and faith-based
products or services. All nine study participants specifically mentioned sharing faith-based
organizational information such as service times updates, events and programs, and volunteer
information. The participants expressed the need to share correct information, and four
participants, Marion, Jesse, Pat, and Sidney, expressed a heightened commitment to validated
information. Marion and Jesse, in particular, indicated that they consistently fact checked for
reliability prior to sharing, and Pat shared that they researched scriptures and information before
posting.
122

Compared to the virtual professional community (Chiu et al., 2006), this study's findings
affirmed that social interactions generated access to embedded resources in the virtual religious
community. Furthermore, specific behaviors such as networking and knowledge sharing built
bonds that increased social capital for individuals (Chiu et al., 2006; Ellison et al., 2007).
Accessing group resources were a measurable element of social capital. Participants responded
to a modified resource generator to name various professions in the group. Figure 7 shows the
more common professions that study participants recalled and had accessed. The study
participants stated that they utilize the group as a resource when they needed specific attributes.
Knowledge Sharing. Group identification, similar to collective mindset, is a core aspect
of the relational dimension of social capital. Additional research determined that trust and
collective mindsets improved knowledge sharing in professional social networks (Karna & Ko,
2015). However, while the trust was evident in all interviews, only one participant specifically
emphasized a collective mindset necessary for sharing knowledge. Jordan described the like
mindedness of some members as, "People having similar experiences of hurt, maybe leaving the
church, or looking for other sources of spirituality and growth outside of the traditional church."
They described similar experiences, desires, goals, and life circumstances as characteristics that
attract and bond members.
Group members shared a common faith. Therefore, sharing was more accommodating.
As it related to sharing knowledge in the group, Jordan stated that they confidently share because
participants "think alike about their spirituality and have close connections." Concerning the
type, quantity, and quality of expertise shared, Jordan emphasized that while the group was
church based, the information disseminated was more than spiritual. The information shared
123

consisted of inspirational, social, financial, educational, and professional content to improve
participants lives.
As Karna and Ko (2015) established, trust was foundational to knowledge sharing in
virtual communities. Shon shared how trust generated more trust, stating, "Seeing them share,
realizing that there's a trust level that they demonstrate, also allows me to have that trust level as
well." The members' actions proved cyclical as sharing produced more group and leadership
confidence. "So, if I feel that others are not hesitating to talk, share, and encourage, then that also
encourages me and allows me to feel like it's a safe space." Further, Shon explained that group
members' consistency and truthfulness affirmed a supportive knowledge-sharing environment.
Purposive Action
The essential component of social capital is its purposive action. The group activity was
necessary to develop social capital. One substantial group action called for community
engagement. Lin (2001) described social capital as the resources embedded in the networks that
help the individual and the organization reach its goals and achieve purposive actions. Many
religious organizations churches, in particular, serve the community. Additionally, it is not
uncommon for many church members to live in the community. Thus, when community needs
arose, the churches represented in this study were frequently first responders to community
needs.
The organizations highly effective actions leveraged the group's human capital. When
there was a need for volunteers, group leaders communicated within the group, and members
responded. For example, when their city's utility outage disrupted normal living conditions, one
organization became a service center for its community. Volunteers, called to action in the
group, distributed food, water, and supplies. Avery was a volunteer, but initially, they were
124

hesitant until someone from the group commented that they would join them. They expressed
contentment with the group encouraging volunteerism, stating, "that is kind of the way I look at
it. Being in the community, doing things with people, and sharing it with people." In essence, the
Facebook group inspired person-to-person commitment. "It also allowed within that group for
other people to say, 'I want to come with you or why don't you come with me?'" Avery shared
that being active in the group online and offline has been a blessing.
Superusers effectively motivated some members to attend events promoted in the group.
For example, Leslie shared how they utilized the group to encourage attendance for an in-person
event. Most of the members were not familiar with the program. However, because Leslie posted
with details, responded directly, and encouraged others to attend, they encountered several
members at the event, and it was their first time meeting offline.
Measuring Social Capital
This study sought to determine social capital developed in the Facebook group by
utilizing modified tools used in earlier research to measure social capital. Therefore, to address
research question 2, it was essential to know if the group developed social capital. Hence, to
determine individual and group social capital, the study utilized open-ended questions about
access to names, positions, and resources. The online questionnaire was modified versions of the
Internet Social Capital Scales (ISCS) used by Appel et al. (2014), Burt (1992), Lin and Dumin
(1986), and Van der Gaag and Snijders (2005) to measure individual social capital. Additionally,
the interviews sought to include aspects of the Facebook intensity scale by Ellison et al. (2007)
that measured Facebook activities engagement levels, friends count, and the daily amount of
time spent on Facebook.
125

When asked if they could trust a group member to help solve their problems, the
superusers overwhelmingly stated yes. They stated various reasons for their response, including
their shared faith, the trusted connections, knowing some people offline, the supportive nature of
members, and their genuineness expressed through transparency. However, two users singled out
that they would trust familiar people, not strangers, and long-time Christians.
Overwhelmingly the superusers agreed they could turn to people in the group for advice
about making important decisions. Some had developed real-life relationships with group
members and depended upon first-hand knowledge of the person to ask. However, most stated
that they felt the group members represented levels of achievement in different areas, and they
would be willing to share their experiences or insight to help them in important decisions.
Accessing group resources were a measurable element of social capital. This study
modified the resource generator used by Ellison et al. (2007) to ask if superusers could ask group
members for a financial resource and to name specific professions in the group. Except for one
respondent, the superusers also felt confident that they could ask a group member for a $100
emergency loan if needed. Again, citing trust and shared experiences, they felt someone would
offer if they needed it.
More than monetary assets, group resources were strengths and indicators of the groups’
capital. As Jordan stated, "Because our group is so diverse there is bound to be someone who
specializes in something." Admittedly Jordan shared that they often look to the group for
resources when needed. Marion also stated that the group was a significant resource that they
often visited when they needed a specific professional service. Previous studies showed linkages
between bridging social capital because of knowledge of and access to group resources (Appel et
126

al., 2014; Ellison et al., 2007). Figure 7 shows the various professions that superusers shared as
group members' professions.
Lastly, the study participants responded if their participation in the group helped them
achieve a goal, objective, or overcome a concern. The users astoundingly believed that their
group participation brought value to their lives by helping to build a vibrant community of
friends, create ministry space, meet others, offer encouragement, and be encouraged. Some
expressed growth in their faith through Bible study, prayer, and spiritual disciplines. And yet
others stressed the fellowship and connectedness that happened during worship. Exercise as part
of their daily discipline was encouraged in the group, and getting closer to other members, were
also mentioned as notable achievements gained by group participation.
Facebook Use Intensity
Early research by Ellison et al. (2007) and Brubaker and Haigh (2017), used Facebook
Intensity Use as a measure of participant engagement and social capital. However, in this study,
few users were aware of their time investment in the group and on Facebook overall. The users
inconsistently reported time. For the superusers with church leadership positions, especially
moderators, their self-reported time and group activity levels were higher and more consistent.
Table 2 references self-reported weekly time spent on Facebook for study participants. While the
group moderators spent more time curating content and responding to messages, the amount of
time spent in the group varied from person to person. Some participants claimed only a few
minutes daily or weekly, and others stated that they enjoyed being in the group, reading posts
and comments daily. There was no consistent time measured for the superusers in this study,
except they admittedly spent enough time catching up.

127

Figure 7

Resource Generator Professions Known in Group

Conclusion on Social Capital in the SNS
The data concludes that the network connectivity forges bonds based upon evidence of
identifiable social capital dimensions. Putnam (2000) identified different types of social capital
bonds comprised of strong and weak ties. First, they were bonds between common identity
groups that were evident and relevant as most users were African American Christians.
Secondly, he identified bonds with people we know and shared a standard set of norms, virtues,
and interests, which was highly applicable to the group.
Both Granovetter (1973) and Putnam (2000) identified weaker ties as bridges. These
were the relationships between people from different groups or positions that offered linkages
giving people more significant opportunities by connecting with people they previously could
not access. For example, activities in the Facebook group, such as making new friends,
128

ministering, praying for others, and volunteering, afforded members equal access. Amply stated
by Jordan, "the groups are really kind of leveling out the playing field where people do have a
sense of equality in the group." The ability to form bridges connects to Wuthnow's (2002)
affirmation that membership in a religious organization offered a place for civic engagement,
volunteerism, and involvement across diverse groups. This study's findings supported that the
activity in the virtual community built social capital by building bridges through active
connections with group members.
RQ3: How do organizational attributes offline and online in the virtual community
influence or impede the creation and actability of social capital’s embedded
resources?
Organizational Rules Can Impact Social Capital Development
The third research question sought to inform if organizational attributes in the virtual
community impacted social capital development. For example, spoken and unspoken rules,
cultural norms, community guidelines, and social courtesies impact how people interact in a
community. The research looked to discover if rules influenced or impeded the creation and
actability of the group's embedded resources.
Organizational rules potentially interfered with social capital development in the groups
by limiting access to generate network building posts and reducing direct communications. As
Burke et al. (2011) demonstrated, of the three types of Facebook social engagement, direct
communication with friends, generating posts that others read, and passive social news intake,
only direct person-to-person communication increased bridging social capital. Consequentially,
participant engagement declined when informal and formal rules limited members' access to
freely share posts in the groups.
129

Group differences in the two groups. An unexpected development during the research
impacted group member access for one organization. In one organization, administrators
monitored and moderated group members' posts during the groups' infancy. However, as the
group matured, there was a desire to improve control of the types of posts and the group page
aesthetics. Consequentially, one organization paused the ability of group members to post. The
decision limited group members' access to author posts or prominently share information in the
group.
Group Rules
"Be kind and courteous." Meta - Facebook generated the base rule for all groups.
Although not all Facebook groups enforced the rules, the general descriptor was a start for all
groups. The groups for this study desired to create a welcoming environment where members felt
respected. Therefore, they asked that responses would be respectful and reflect kindness.
In the case of rules, one organization’s group leaders modified the group rules by
restricting members' posts. Although the group had fewer rules than the other organization,
members' inability to post new communication threads significantly reduced member-to-member
contact. Research by Ellison et al. (2007) demonstrated that Facebook was an excellent site to
develop social capital. However, limitations on communication yielded limits on network
development.
By comparison, the second organization had a substantial list of ten rules that members
agreed to prior to group entry. The data showed that several of the rules potentially hindered
social capital development for this group. While members could post, a group administrator
moderated the content and determined if the post "fit" the group experience and met the group
quality parameters. Rules such as no political candidate posts, no sharing posts from
130

unauthorized users, and organizational pride, which disallowed some information from other
religious organizations, limited the information shared in the network. These additional rules
regulated the content and types of messages shared. Both groups determined that the rules were
necessary to increase the quality of the group. One might argue that rules are necessary as
guidelines to function. Future research on group guidelines could benefit organizations
struggling with the balance of guidelines for group quality.
Group Quality
Group administrators and moderators managed the page and the posts. Where members
could post, their posts needed the group leaders' approval to appear publicly to other members.
Although moderation no longer applied to one group, it was previously the standard in both
groups. All superusers felt that their groups offered good quality information relevant to
members and the church. The types of posts generated by moderators were more frequently
ministry or event-related, special programming, and friendly posts to engage conversation.
Where group members were allowed to post, posts included greetings, memes, prayer requests,
and event information. Although one group restricted individual political candidate information,
moderators shared general voting information, including a list of all political candidates, polling
locations, and voters registration information.
Conveying that the group administrators "preferred to control the narrative to a greater
extent," Shon shared that group members could react and comment to existing content. When
contrasting the member access of one group to the other, organizational posts dominated one
group, whereas individual posts were more prevalent on the other. Not that there was a correct or
incorrect manner of determining group quality and member access; however, the reduced or
131

declined access potentially impacted the development of social capital. Future studies should
consider how limitations on posts affect the ability to build bridging social capital.
Organizational Culture
Posts in the group called people to action. As a result, the organizations held various
events that fostered member engagement through community and political involvement, such as
voting and voter registration. Additionally, group moderators leveraged members' access to
volunteerism, donations, and specific online and offline programming for purposive action.
Hence, linking the above activity to Lin's (2000) depiction of social capital as resources
embedded in the networks that help the individual and the organization reach its goals and
achieve purposive actions, the organizations and individuals benefited from group social capital.
Group Social Capital Accessed
Participants expressed knowledge of information resident in the group, and the
organizations likewise accessed group resources for organizational activity. The following three
principles considered how individuals had access to social capital development. First, social
capital developed within networks, benefiting both the individual and the organization. Second,
the diversity of the network added value to the type and wealth of information (Putnam, 2000).
Third, among networked individuals, information that could inform or inspire action flowed
freely and quickly between individuals (Lin, 2001).
When study participants completed the modified ICSC name, position, and resource
generator, the data showed significant knowledge of group resources, coupled with a belief in the
actability to access the resources. Moreover, the group participants felt that the most needed
resources likely existed in the virtual community. Lin (2001) stressed the structural
132

embeddedness, accessibility, action-orientation of social capital for the individual and collective
organizational purpose as primary for social capital definition.
Conclusion on Findings
Social networking sites are locations to develop or sustain relationships (Ellison et al.,
2007). Later studies by Ellison et al. (2014) sought to understand offline to online relationships'
dynamics and multiple communication channels, particularly for developing social capital
networks. Organizational culture, established by rules and guidelines, written or unwritten,
formulate how people interact.
The trust developed in the groups, expressed by the superusers based upon use, access,
and transparency, developed the social network in which users could minister, grow, and
connect. As Putnam (2000) and Granovetter (2005) discoursed, a group's diversity afforded the
group members access to weak ties; therefore, bridging capital resulted from the relational
network's diversity. Even more so, Brubaker and Haigh (2017) affirmed that Facebook presented
bond-building opportunities by connecting with others in faith communities. This study's
findings were that cultural limitations could affect the development of weak ties into bridging
social capital; however, further studies with these parameters offer future research opportunities.

133

Chapter Five
Discussion
Historically, the church served as an essential epicenter for social capital development in
the United States (Brehm & Rahn, 1997; Putnam, 2000). However, present-day challenges for
religious organizations profoundly affect the institutions' extent of future social capital
development. To illustrate, imagine significant declines in membership attributable to changes in
spiritual and religious identity. Further, suppose attendance dwindled as a result of habits
established by pandemic-related crowd restrictions. These are conundrums that the church faces
post-pandemic. Fewer church members equate to a diminished capacity for network growth. If
churches cease to exist, an integral center of social capital development, resources, and action
also culminate.
This chapter will summarize the study and connect this study's findings to the existing
literature on social capital, self-cognitive theories of self-efficacy, and outcome expectation to
analyze and interpret how motivated behavior developed social capital. The chapter will
correlate meaning to the existing literature based on the research, summarize the findings and
share the study's context, implications, and limitations. Lastly, the chapter will include
recommendations from the study.
This study explored how social cognitive theory motivated members of Facebook Groups
of two African American mega-churches to engage and participate in the organization's virtual
community. Additionally, the study sought to understand how motivated behaviors developed
social capital for the individual and the organization and, lastly, whether organizational culture
played a role in social capital growth.
134

A purposeful sample of nine highly engaged Facebook Group members participated in
the study. Facebook metrics identified these nine superusers based upon a weighted
measurement of posts. Facebook Groups were social media sites created to engage members
socially, inform members of organizational activities, and generate an online community. Unlike
the organization page, group pages were places to communicate shared interests with others by
allowing member-to-member engagement creations, commenting, sharing, and reacting.
The qualitative research, conducted with open-ended questions, focused on how users
functioned and constructed meaning to group participation. The research sought to determine the
perceived benefits and consequences of group participation. Participant responses gave insight
into their online experiences. The superusers detailed compelling factors that motivated their
involvement, such as self-efficacy beliefs and outcome expectations. Further, they shared their
understanding of organizational culture that influenced the development of beneficial social
networks. Additionally, the superusers described their network development, resource
awareness, and access to others in the group. Lastly, post-interview, the study participants
completed an open-ended survey, a modified version of ISCS tools used by Appel et al. (2014),
Burt (1992), Lin and Dumin (1986), and Van der Gaag and Snijders (2005) to validate awareness
of professions and group resources that informed social capital constructs for the study.
The stakeholders for these groups were parties that had a vested interest in the purposeful
intention of the groups. The primary stakeholders are the group members who benefit from
individual access and group connectivity, including information and resources available in the
group. The second group of stakeholders are organizations that benefit from the group's
resources and fulfill corporate vision and mission, notably membership fellowship.

135

Social Cognitive Beliefs Motivated Behaviors
The theoretical framework for this study considered how social cognitive behaviors
generated action in the virtual community and impacted the development of social capital. Figure
1 in Chapter Three depicts the effect of self-efficacy and outcome expectancies on motivated
behaviors that are notable in the virtual community. The participants affirmed self-efficacious
beliefs that motivated their actions, confirming Bandura's theory that self-efficacy was
paramount for inspiration, motivation, and performance (1997, 2006). Initially, some participants
hesitated to identify with self-efficacy terminology. However, additional probes and allowance
for expression became gateways for participants to share their experiences. Self-efficacy for the
nine superusers was grounded in faith, belief in their capacity to do the action, ministerial
experience, writing skills, verbal persuasion, and affirmation.
In addition to self-efficacy, outcome expectation significantly impacted the actions of the
study's participants. The research uncovered underlying convictions that each superuser held to
perform specific actions to inspire or encourage others in the virtual community. The superusers
held outcome expectancy beliefs; however, the superuser was not always the object of the
outcome expectation. Surprisingly, much of the motivated behavior anticipated outcomes for
others. For example, when a superuser prayed or helped others, they expected others to benefit.
However, this was not always the case, as some superusers expected increased friendships,
substantiated reputation, and leadership affirmation because of their action. Utilizing the
theoretical framework shown in Figure 1, social cognitive theory, self-efficacy, and outcome
expectation, were positive motivators for engagement in virtual communities.
Moreover, in addition to self-cognitive theory, this study conjoined social capital theory
to understand the derived benefits of network engagement. Figure 3 in Chapter Three depicts the
136

motivated behavior exhibited in the virtual community and consequential social capital
dimensions that develop. The motivated participants effectively exhibited behaviors that
enhanced the quality of the network by increasing engagement, collaboration, and
communication between group members. The actions in the Facebook Groups, identified as
behaviors leading to social capital development, such as sharing knowledge, making and
commenting on posts, networking, supporting others, and volunteering (Burke et al., 2011), are
displayed. Thus, social interaction, civic engagement, trust, identification, norms, collective
goals, and social support developed from member engagement and participation.
Early social capital theorists recognized the value of one's social network. Involvement
and group participation built individual and community capital (Bourdieu, 1985; Lin, 2001). This
study demonstrated that specific motivated behaviors in the virtual community increased
network awareness, helped develop new friendships, and generated identity elements for
individuals to connect. All three dimensions of social capital, structural, relational, and cognitive,
were identifiable and recognized. As members engaged by notably sharing knowledge,
supporting others, and volunteering, they built relationships. Through their relationships,
networks formed, and they increased their capital. Social capital developed when people
connected and networked.
The study revealed the synergetic effect of motivated behavior and actions. Affirmation,
gratitude, and reputation development generated a positive reciprocal effect upon motivation. For
example, the more a person was affirmed, the more frequently they shared knowledge. The
study's theory anticipated the nature of the relationship of motivated behavior upon observed
activity; however, it did not anticipate a similar cause and effect between the virtual community
behaviors and the development of social capital. When individuals engaged on a higher level or
137

frequency, it built trust, developed social bonds through individual interactions, and bridged
social capital. As a result of more significant dimension expression, the participant engaged more
in the community with specific behaviors. Figure 4 reflects only a one-way action of virtual
behaviors to develop social capital. In reality, this study showed that there should be two arrows,
one going in each direction, as social capital development also influenced individual behaviors in
the community. Lastly, the study revealed that organizational attributes, customs, traditions,
rules, or norms could interfere with the production of social capital.
Activities In the Social Network Site Developed Social Capital
The second research question sought to determine how activities exhibited in the social
network site contributed to the development of social capital among virtual community
members. To begin with the principle of the network of friends, compelling research on the
benefits of friends established Facebook use as a significant determinant in predicting bonding,
bridging, and maintaining social capital. Wuthnow (2002) documented the church's role in
serving as a place for civic engagement, volunteerism, and involvement with diverse groups.
Organizations benefit from volunteer requests and program participation from group members;
however, the virtual community should be a place of engagement and resource activation to
solidify bonding social capital and create bridging social capital. If rules break network
development, it hinders social capital development.
Trust Essential to Develop Social Capital
Trust emerged as a theme in the study. Trust was essential to developing relational social
capital (Nahapiet & Goshal, 1998). Although approaches to developing trust differed among the
participants, many agreed that a leader's vulnerability, accessibility, and confidentiality played a
significant role. Regardless of how trust developed, it was a necessary precursor to sharing
138

knowledge, which developed social capital (Brubaker & Haigh, 2017). Trust development online
proposed a different paradigm from in-person. Current technological norms, fraudulent activities,
and security weaknesses were threats to network development as trust was a controversial matter
of safety. The superusers generally expressed trust in other group members due to
commonalities, including church membership and network recognition.
Implications for Practice
As more organizations shift online, the church cannot be left behind. It must keep up with
current trends. Beyond broadcasting services, a one-way interaction, religious organizations must
determine how to loop their followers into communicative networks connecting people to people
and people to organizations. The rise in online social networking sites (SNS) over the past few
decades piqued the interest of scholars seeking to understand the virtual community's influence
on social communities and online and offline interpersonal interactions (De Zuniga et al., 2017;
Valenzuela et al., 2009; Wu et al., 2012). Social networking sites are popular, and projections of
the future of digital life are optimistic. Anticipated technological advancements will lead to
better communications, which will give rise to stronger interpersonal relationships and positive
community development in virtual spaces (Stansberry et al., 2020).
Online communication has become an integral part of most of our lives. At the core of
online communication, growth is trust. This study found that trust was preeminent and essential
to developing social capital. The role of trust was a foundation for building the network. As trust
increased, participation increased, and social capital constructs developed. This study recognized
that group trust was more significant than general trust in people online and greater than in the
Meta Facebook organization and policies. However, the group members meticulously developed
139

trust with other group members. Bandura's (2002) proposition that negative interactions were
less apparent when social networks established trust affirmed the group model.
While trust was not the only attribute in the Facebook group, it was a critical underlying
factor for group development and individual participation. Riddings et al. (2002) suggested that
trust comprised ability and a combined integrity and benevolence dimension. Their data
demonstrated that trust was a significant predictor of virtual community members' desire to
exchange information, particularly to acquire information. The implication of this study reflects
upon group members' trust development in leaders and other members. Other considerations
grounded in the trust are knowledge sharing, volunteer participation, and action-oriented
responses to calls for volunteers. Future research should consider trust precepts as antecedents in
virtual religious groups.
Encouraging planned activity for users and participants to make the Facebook Group or
other SNS for the organization a premier online destination will increase presence, viability, and
connectivity. Further implications of practice include the viability to sustain motivated behaviors
in the group. Online burnout is a threat to many individuals. The challenge of reaching
individuals on social media platforms for network outreach will remain. As social networking
sites constantly change in popularity, user familiarity, algorithms, and access, organizations
should stay abreast of the technology that could enhance network development.
Recommendations
The following are recommendations for religious organizations and leaders to inspire
greater motivation to participate in virtual communities to develop and access the network's
social capital.
1. Leaders should have an overall strategy to develop networks and social capital.
140

2. Leaders should understand the concept and value of social capital. As Putnam (2000)
suggested that America's richest repository of social capital was in the churches, leaders
must note the concept of social capital and understand its formation.
3. Leaders should understand why the church historically was a significant source of social
capital and understand the current threats.
4. Leaders and members should overcome stigmas and negativisms associated with the idea
of networks in church.
5. Leaders should understand how diverse congregations develop bridging social capital that
helps individuals and organizations to meet goals.
6. Leaders should recognize how changes in religious identity impact church membership
and attendance and recognize current global and national trends.
7. Leaders should recognize how new traditions and routines impact church attendance.
8. Leaders should work to develop trust in online groups. By involving respected,
committed leaders who recognize the necessity to create a trustworthy, safe environment,
knowledge sharing will be more significant.
9. Leaders should be able to identify where their members worship.
10. Leaders should recognize how online membership offers an incredible opportunity for the
spiritually connected to remain connected.
11. Leaders should recognize how online members hold as significant roles as in-person
members and can equally contribute to the organization's missions, values, and worth.
12. Leaders should access the organization's network social capital to meet goals through
actionable items.
141

13. Leaders should recognize that churches must connect the organization to individuals, in-
person and online.
14. Leaders should recognize that churches must connect individuals to individuals,
especially those online.
15. Leaders should encourage network development and engagement to inspire more robust
bond development among members.
16. Leaders should seek to identify motivated individuals to lead virtual community
development, train the leaders, and encourage growth. Table 3 suggests the proposed
motivational behaviors and actions, the underlying theories, and recommended actions
that organizations can encourage or modify for enhanced for group development.

Table 3
Summary of Key Motivational Influences and Recommendations for Group Moderation
Motivated Behaviors
and Actions
Motivation
Type
Priority
Level
Recommendations
Authoring posts to
encourage and inspire
group members.
Self-efficacy

Outcome
Expectancy
High Enhance the content of posts,
particularly by group leaders.
Encourage member response or reaction
by actionable words.
Re-evaluate community guidelines
around posts to encourage higher
quality knowledge sharing.

Authoring posts to
share church or
community-related
information.
Self-efficacy Medium Ensure accurate information to share in
the group. Encourage community
engagement and volunteerism.
142

Table 3 (cont’d)
Summary of Key Motivational Influences and Recommendations
Authoring general
prayer posts for
groups or responding
directly to prayer
requests.
Self-efficacy
Outcome
Expectancy
High Identify group members with a
motivated passion for prayer.
Encourage authorship.
Encourage direct contact.
Develop resources for referrals.
Group members can request personal
needs and feel confident that other
group members will respond
supportively.

Composing posts to
share specific
resources and
knowledge.
Self-efficacy
Outcome
Expectancy
Medium Ensure accurate information to share in
the group. Encourage active
participation and engagement around
lifestyle matters. Group members can
access other group members.
Responding to calls to
action to volunteer,
participate or engage.
Self-efficacy
Outcome
Expectancy
High Engage the group's embedded resources.
Develop or affirm
reputation.
Outcome
Expectancy
Medium Consider how leadership is affirmed in
the organization.
Develop friendships,
strengthen network
ties, and build
bridging social capital.
Outcome
Expectancy
High Consider meaningful ways to encourage
network development.

Future Research
Social, religious, community-based, and professional organizations exist in virtual
communities. Participant engagement is essential to the success of these groups. Although this
study consisted of highly motivated group participants, the findings may be generalizable to
other groups, even those with less motivated users, to understand the implications and benefits of
143

their group engagement. Likewise, the study's findings may offer insight into types of motivated
behavior and specific actions that encourage more significant group participation.
The development of social capital occurred when participants engaged with one another.
Weak network ties that bridged social capital gave rise to quality groups that garnered interest
and sustainability for future growth. Attaining a more profound understanding of social capital
will benefit various organizations whose network ties are conducive to acquiring embedded
resources. The Facebook groups were appropriate sites for networking, and consideration of
these types of social networking sites will also offer an opportunity for future research.
Conclusion
Social capital is not only individual but also organizational. Putnam stated in Bowling
Alone (2000) that the American faith-based organization, a "crucial reservoir of social capital,"
must challenge its future with inclusive ideology, being more tolerant of other faiths and
practices (p. 409). Written in the early period of Internet use, Putman recognized the Internet's
capacity to develop networks, stating, "Social capital is about networks, and the Net is the
network to end all networks" (p. 171). Whether or not Putnam considered churches as types of
organizations to build capital in the virtual realm, data has proven its capability. Wuthnow
(2002) demonstrated that religious institutions are places of civic engagement, volunteerism, and
involvement for diverse groups and develop bridging social capital. Therefore, involvement must
span into online and offline practices.
In 1999 Wellman and Gulia debated if online communities were actual communities.
They concluded that virtual or otherwise, social networks offered opportunities to build
networks. Further, they suggested that cyber links between individuals would become social
links forming groups of people who were usually socially or physically dispersed (Wellman &
144

Gulia, 1999). How religious organizations establish community and build networks online offers
an opportunity for future sustainability, growth, and development. Leaders should identify and
minimize cultural and organizational influences that limit social capital development.
Additionally, the leaders' role in motivating group members to engage is essential to the group's
quality. Therefore, careful consideration of leadership qualities, skills, and motivation should be
employed.
Bourdieu (1989) considered mutual acquaintance, participation, and network factors for
developing social capital. He framed the intersection of individuals and religious organizations
as a place of societal belonging that networked potential promises. However, declining church
attendance and membership rates impact the organization's capacity to generate significant future
social capital. Accordingly, online church development and the social connectivity of church and
community members offer potential growth for current and future network development.
Individuals accumulate social capital through relationships and daily interactions with
friends, work colleagues, and strangers. However, it is possible to make social interaction
investments intentionally and consciously (Valenzuela et al., 2009). One can be motivated to
develop an enriched network of diverse relationships. Understanding motivated behavior can
increase network development in virtual communities.
The motivation of the community members may offer an essential growth opportunity for
religious organizations. This study found similar evidence of social cognition's effect on social
capital development in professional virtual communities in virtual religious communities (Chiu
et al., 2006; Hsu et al., 2007; Lin et al., 2009). However, the gap in the literature to understand
social cognition's effect on social capital in a virtual religious community provided the
opportunity for this and future studies to explore.
145

The COVID-19 pandemic shifted how churches offer services to their membership. Most
religious organizations adapted to broadcast services. However, many organizations realized that
broadcasting alone omitted a significant aspect of organizational life, fellowship. When
congregants began returning to houses of worship, a significant number of fellow parishioners
were missing in-person. Online attendance, live and video on demand, should continue to inspire
faithful followers, and developing online communities should help organizations enrich network
bonds that benefit individuals and organizations.
Amidst challenges for church growth, such as identity with spirituality and religiosity
(Jones, 2018), the church must re-invigorate attendance and membership via broadcast services
and online programs. Subsequently, if the church remains a social capital hub, it will depend
upon its faithful religious core's loyalty, influence, and presence in belief and practice. Leaders
must recognize and value their network's social capital potential to help meet organizational
objectives. The future will dictate that the church's outreach will need to engage current and new
members in novel and non-traditional religious spaces or risk more significant loss of members
and associations.

146

References
Abell, P. (2003). [Review of Social Capital: A Theory of Social Structure and Action, by N. Lin].
American Journal of Sociology, 108(6), 1423–1424. https://doi.org/10.1086/380538
Adler, P., & Kwon, S. (1999). Social capital: The good, the bad, and the ugly” [Paper
presentation]. 1999 Academy of Management Meeting at Chicago.
American Psychological Association [APA]. (n.d.). Reciprocity. In APA dictionary of
psychology. Retrieved December 18, 2020, from https://dictionary.apa.org/reciprocity
Appel, L., Dadlani, P., Dwyer, M., Hampton, K., Kitzie, V., Matni, Z. A., ... & Teodoro, R.
(2014). Testing the validity of social capital measures in the study of information and
communication technologies. Information, Communication & Society, 17(4), 398-416.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2014.884612
Auxier, B., & Anderson, M. (2022, January 31). Social media use in 2021. Pew Research Center:
Internet, Science & Tech. https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2021/04/07/social-
media-use-in-2021/
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change.
Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215. https://doi:10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191
Bandura, A. (1978). Reflections on self-efficacy. Advances in Behaviour Research and Therapy,
1(4), 237–269. https://doi.org/10.1016/0146-6402(78)90012-7
Bandura, A. (1982). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. The American Psychologist,
37(2), 122–147. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.37.2.122
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall
147

Bandura, A. (1989). Human agency in social cognitive theory. American Psychologist, 44(9),
1175–1184. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.44.9.1175
Bandura, A. (1990). Perceived self-efficacy in the exercise of personal agency. Journal of
Applied Sport Psychology, 2(2), 128-163. https://doi.org/10.1080/10413209008406426
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Worth Publishers.
https://doi.org/10.5860/CHOICE.35-1826
Bandura, A. (2002). Growing primacy of human agency in adaptation and change in the
electronic era. European Psychologist, 7(1), 2–16. https://doi.org/10.1027/1016-
9040.7.1.2
Bandura, A. (2006). Guide for constructing self-efficacy scales. Self-efficacy beliefs of
adolescents, 5(1), 307-337.
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Timo_Lorenz2/post/Can-we-use-general-self-
efficacy-scale-GSE-10-for-measuring-the-self-efficacy-in-every-
case/attachment/59d62592c49f478072e9a60c/AS%3A272165419585544%40144190070
0706/download/BanduraGuide2006.pdf
Bandura, A. (2012). On the functional properties of perceived self-efficacy revisited. Journal of
Management, 38(1), 9–44. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206311410606
Bandura, A., & Locke, E. A. (2003). Negative self-efficacy and goal effects revisited. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 88(1), 87. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.1.87
Biblica, Inc. (2011). Holy Bible, New International Version. https://www.biblica.com/bible/niv/
(Original work published 1973).
Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of a theory of practice. In Outline of a Theory of Practice (Vol. 16).
Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511812507
148

Bourdieu, P. (1985). The social space and the genesis of groups. Social Science Information,
24(2), 195-220. https://doi.org/10.1177/053901885024002001
Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. In J. G. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of theory and
research for the sociology of education (pp. 241–258). Greenwood Press.
https://canvas.harvard.edu/files/4148520/download?
Bourdieu, P. (1989). Social space and symbolic power. Sociological Theory, 7(1), 14–25.
https://doi.org/10.2307/202060
Bourdieu, P., & Wacquant, L. J. (1992). An invitation to reflexive sociology. University of
Chicago Press.
https://www.academia.edu/5543729/Bourdieu_and_Wacquant_An_Invitation_to_Reflexi
ve_Sociology_1992
Brannon, V. C. (2020, June 1). Banning religious assemblies to stop the spread of COVID-19.
Congressional Research Service.
https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/LSB/LSB10450.
Brehm, J., & Rahn, W. (1997). Individual-level evidence for the causes and consequences of
social capital. American Journal of Political Science, 41(3), 999-1023.
http://doi.org/10.2307/2111684
Brookins, M. (2016, October 26). The advantages of having a Facebook presence for companies.
Small Business - Chron.com. https://smallbusiness.chron.com/advantages-having-
facebook-presence-companies-18594.html
Brown, R. K., & Brown, R. E. (2003). Faith and works: Church-based social capital resources
and African American political activism. Social Forces, 82(2), 617-641.
https://doi.org/10.1353/sof.2004.0005
149

Brubaker, P., & Haigh, M. (2017). The religious Facebook experience: Uses and gratifications of
faith-based content. Social Media+ Society, 3(2).
https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305117703723
Burke, M., Kraut, R., & Marlow, C. (2011, May). Social capital on Facebook: Differentiating
uses and users. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing
systems (pp. 571-580). https://doi.org/10.1145/1978942.1979023
Burt, R. (1992). Structural holes the social structure of competition. Harvard University Press.
https://doi.org/10.4159/9780674029095
Campbell, H. (2005). Considering spiritual dimensions within computer-mediated
communication studies. New Media & Society, 7(1), 110–134.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444805049147
Campbell, H. (2010). When religion meets new media (pp. 24-26). Routledge.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203695371
Campbell, H. (Ed.). (2012). Digital religion: Understanding religious practice in new media
worlds. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203084861
Campbell, H. (2013). Religion and the internet: A microcosm for studying internet trends and
implications. New Media & Society, 15(5), 680–694.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444812462848
Campbell, H. (2017). Surveying theoretical approaches within digital religion studies. New
Media & Society, 19(1), 15–24. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444816649912
Cerf, V., & Aboba, B. (1993). How the Internet came to be. The Online User’s Encyclopedia:
Bulletin Boards and Beyond. Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley. pp. 527-535.
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Vint-
150

Cerf/publication/237130669_How_the_Internet_came_to_be/links/563ea38208aec6f17dd
ab0dd/How-the-Internet-came-to-be.pdf
Chan, D., & Cheng, G. (2004). A Comparison of Offline and Online Friendship Qualities at
Different Stages of Relationship Development. Journal of Social and Personal
Relationships, 21(3), 305–320. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407504042834
Chang, H. H., & Chuang, S. S. (2011). Social capital and individual motivations on knowledge
sharing: Participant involvement as a moderator. Information & management, 48(1), 9-
18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2010.11.001
Chaves, M. (2011). American religion: Contemporary trends. Princeton: Princeton University
Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400839957
Chiu, H., Hsu, M. H., & Wang, E., (2006). Understanding knowledge sharing in virtual
communities: An integration of social capital and social cognitive theories. Decision
Support Systems, 42(3), 1872–1888. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2006.04.001
Clark, R., & Estes, F. (2008). 5: Motivation gaps. In Turning research into results: A guide to
selecting the right performance solutions (pp. 79-102). Information Age Publication.
Clement, J. (2020, November 24). Most used social media 2020. Statista.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/272014/global-social-networks-ranked-by-number-of-
users/
Coleman, J., (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of
Sociology, 94, 95-120. http://doi.org/10.1086/228943
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed
methods approaches. Sage Publications.
151

De Zúñiga, H., Barnidge, M., & Scherman, A. (2017). Social media social capital, offline social
capital, and citizenship: Exploring asymmetrical social capital effects. Political
Communication, 34(1), 44–68. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2016.1227000
Deller, S., Conroy, T., & Markeson, B. (2018). Social capital, religion, and small business
activity. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 155, 365-381.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2018.09.006
Dunlop, S., & Buckingham, H. (2019). De-centering social capital: exploring the implications of
empirical research for conceptualizing Christian faith-based social engagement. Journal
of Contemporary Religion, 34(1), 135–152.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13537903.2019.1585126
Easley, D., & Kleinberg, J. (2010). Strong and weak ties. In Networks, crowds and markets:
Reasoning about a highly connected world (pp. 48–50). Cambridge University Press.
http://www.cs.cornell.edu/home/kleinber/networks-book/networks-book-ch03.pdf
Ellison, N., Steinfield, C., & Lampe, C. (2007). The benefits of Facebook “friends:” Social
capital and college students’ use of online social network sites. Journal of
Computer-mediated Communication, 12(4), 1143-1168.
http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00367.x
Ellison, N., Vitak, J., Gray, R., Lampe, C. (2014). Cultivating social resources on social network
sites: Facebook relationship maintenance behaviors and their role in social capital
processes. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, (19),4, 855–870.
https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12078
Farr, J. (2004). Social capital: A conceptual history. Political Theory, 32(1), 6–33.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0090591703254978
152

Gecewicz, C., & Smith, G. (2020, August 7). Americans oppose religious exemptions from
Coronavirus-related restrictions. https://www.pewforum.org/2020/08/07/americans-
oppose-religious-exemptions-from-coronavirus-related-restrictions/
Glesne, C. (2011). But is it ethical? Considering what is right. In Becoming qualitative
researchers: An introduction (4th ed., pp. 162–183). Essay. Pearson Education.
Granovetter, M. S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78(6),
1360-1380. https://doi.org/10.1086/225469
Granovetter, M. (1983). The strength of weak ties: A network theory revisited. Sociological
Theory, 1, 201–233. https://doi.org/10.2307/202051
Granovetter, M. (2005). The impact of social structure on economic outcomes. The Journal of
Economic Perspectives, 19(1), 33–50. https://doi.org/10.1257/0895330053147958
Hamner, L., Dubbel, P., Capron, I., . . . Leibrand, H. (2020). High SARS-CoV-2 attack rate
following exposure at a choir practice — Skagit County, Washington, March 2020.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2020; 69:606–610.
http://dx.doi.org/10.15585/mmwr.mm6919e6
Hastings, O. (2016). Not a lonely crowd? Social connectedness, religious service attendance, and
the spiritual but not religious. Social Science Research, 57, 63-79.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2016.01.006

153

Haynes, K. (2012). Reflexivity in qualitative research. Qualitative Organizational Research:
Core Methods and Current Challenges, 72-89.
https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=uE610zo3nF0C&oi=fnd&pg=PA72&ots
=pFyrsuNv9E&sig=f3wXu3Aby3jm-Em5A7rdOf0qeOg#v=onepage&q&f=false
Haythornthwaite, C. (2005). Social networks and Internet connectivity effects. Information,
Community & Society, 8(2), 125-147. https://doi.org/10.1080/13691180500146185
Helland C. (2000) Online-religion/religion-online and virtual communities. In J. K. Hadden and
D. E. Cowan (Eds.), Religion on the internet: Research prospects and promises
(pp. 205-223). JAI Press.
Helland, C. (2002). Surfing for salvation. Religion, (32)4, 293–302.
https://doi:10.1006/reli.2002.0406
Hinga, B. (2019). “Validity” and “Reliability” in quantitative and qualitative. A handout adapted
from Y. Lincoln & E. G. Guba. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. SAGE. [Class handout].
University of Southern California.
Hsu, M., Ju, T., Yen, C., & Chang, C. (2007). Knowledge sharing behavior in virtual
communities: the relationship between trust, self-efficacy, and outcome expectations.
International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 65(2), 153-169.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2006.09.003
Johnson, R., & Christensen, L. (2015). Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative, and
mixed approaches (5th ed.). Sage Publications.
Jones, J. (2018). U.S. church membership down sharply in past two decades.
https://news.gallup.com/poll/248837/church-membership-down-sharply-past-two-
decades.aspx
154

Kaplan, A., & Haenlein, M. (2010). Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities
of social media. Business Horizons, 53(1), 59–68.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2009.09.003
Karna, D., & Ko, I. (2015). We-intention, moral trust, and self-motivation on accelerating
knowledge sharing in social collaboration. https://doi.org/10.1109/hicss.2015.40.
Lee, Y.-J. (2017). Is your church “liked” on Facebook? Social media use of Christian
congregations in the United States. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 28(3),
383–398. https://doi.org/10.1002/nml.21291
Lin, K.-Y., & Lu, H.-P. (2011). Intention to continue using Facebook fan pages from the
perspective of social capital theory. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking,
14(10), 565–570. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2010.0472
Lin, M.-J. J., Hung, S.-W., & Chen, C.-J., (2009). Fostering the determinants of knowledge
sharing in professional virtual communities. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(4),
929–939. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2009.03.008
Lin, N. (2001). Social capital: A theory of social structure and action. Cambridge University
Press.
Lin, N., & Dumin, M. (1986). Access to occupations through social ties. Social Networks, 8(4),
365–385. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-8733(86)90003-1
Lin, N., & Smith, J. (2001). Social capital: A theory of social structure and action. Cambridge
University Press. https://ebookcentral.proquest.com
Lincoln, Y. S., Guba, E. G., & Pilotta, J. J. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. International Journal of
Intercultural Relations, 9(4), 438–439. https://doi.org/10.1016/0147-1767(85)90062-8
155

Lippke, S. (2020). Outcome expectation. Encyclopedia of Personality and Individual
Differences, 3379-3381.
Loury, G. (1987). Why should we care about group inequality? Social Philosophy and Policy,
5(1), 249-271.https:// doi:10.1017/S0265052500001345
Maddux, J., & Kleiman, E. (2016). Self-efficacy: A foundational concept for positive clinical
psychology. In A. M. Wood & J. Johnson (Eds.), The Wiley handbook of positive clinical
psychology (p. 89–101). Wiley Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118468197.ch7
Maddux, J., Sherer, M., & Rogers, R. (1982). Self-efficacy expectancy and outcome expectancy:
Their relationship and their effects on behavioral intentions. Cognitive Therapy and
Research, 6(2), 207–211. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf01183893
Merriam, S., & Tisdell, E. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation.
(4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Min, E. (2009). Authority, gender, and language: A qualitative study of a college -preparatory,
English -medium high school in South Korea. (Publication No. AAI3357003) [Doctoral
dissertation, University of Southern California - Riverside].
Nahapiet, J., & Ghoshal, S. (1998). Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organizational
advantage. Academy of management review, 23(2), 242-266.
http://doi.org/10.2307/259373
Phua, J., Jin, S., & Kim, J. (2017). Uses and gratifications of social networking sites for bridging
and bonding social capital: A comparison of Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and Snapchat.
Computers in Human Behavior. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.02.041
156

Pintrich, P. (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of student motivation in
learning and teaching contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 667–686.
http://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.95.4.667
Pintrich, P., & Schunk, D. (2002). Motivation in education: Theory, research, and applications.
Prentice Hall.
Portes, A. (1998). Social capital: Its origins and applications in modern sociology. Annual
Review of Sociology, 24(1), 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.24.1.1
Putnam, R. (1993). Making democracy work. civic traditions in modern Italy. Princeton
University Press.
Putnam, R. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. Simon &
Schuster.
Putnam, R. (2001). Social capital: Measurement and consequences. Canadian Journal of Policy
Research, 2(1), 41-51.
https://www.alnap.org/system/files/content/resource/files/main/1825848.pdf
Ridings, C. M., Gefen, D., & Arinze, B. (2002). Some antecedents and effects of trust in virtual
communities. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 11(3-4), 271–295.
https://doi.org/10.1016/s0963-8687(02)00021-5
Robey, D., Khoo, H., & Powers, C. (2000). Situated learning in cross-functional virtual teams.
Technical Communication, 47(1), 51-66. https://doi.org/10.1109/47.826416
Robison, L., Schmid, A., & Siles, M. (2002). Is social capital really capital? Review of Social
Economy, 60(1), 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1080/00346760110127074
157

Schafer, M. H., & Upenieks, L. (2016). Trans-congregational triadic closure: Churchgoers’
networks within and beyond the pews. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion.
http://doi.org/10.1111/jssr.12281
Schwadel, P., Cheadle, J. E., Malone, S. E., & Stout, M. (2016). Social networks and civic
participation and efficacy in two evangelical protestant churches. Review of Religious
Research, 58(2), 305-317. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13644-015-0237-y
Scott, J. K., & Johnson, T. G. (2005). Bowling alone but online together: Social capital in
e-communities. Community Development, 36(1), 9-27.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15575330509489868
Smith, A., & Anderson, M. (2021). Social media use 2018: Demographics and statistics. Pew
Research Center: Internet, Science & Tech.
http://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2018/03/01/social-media-use-in-2018/
Stansberry, K., Anderson, J., & Rainie, L. (2020, August 14). Experts optimistic about the next
50 years of Digital Life. Pew Research Center: Internet, Science & Tech.
https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2019/10/28/ecperts-optimistic -about-the-next-
50=years-of-digital-life/
Strømsnes, K. (2008). The importance of church attendance and membership of religious
voluntary organizations for the formation of social capital. Social Compass, 55(4),
478-496. https://doi.10.1177/0037768608097234.
Swärd, A. (2016). Trust, reciprocity, and actions: The development of trust in temporary inter-
organizational relations. Organization Studies, 37(12), 1841-1860.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840616655488
158

Taylor, R. J., Chatters, L. M., & Levin, J. (2004). Religion in the lives of African Americans:
social, psychological, and health perspectives. Sage Publications.
https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=rflyAwAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PR5&dq
=Taylor,+R.+J.,+Chatters,+L.+M.,+%26+Levin,+J.+(2004).+Religion+in+the+lives+of+
African+Americans:+social,+psychological,+and+health+perspectives.+&ots=mXNQMI
Ep5D&sig=KchMtUUMicv_2gImHaIvk2LKGTA#v=onepage&q&f=false
Tocqueville, A. de. (1969). Democracy in America. (G. Lawrence, Trans., J. P. Mayer, Ed.).
Doubleday.
Tsai, W., & Ghoshal, S. (1998). Social capital and value creation: The role of intrafirm networks.
Academy of Management Journal, 41(4), 464-476. https://doi.org/10.5465/257085
Tuck, E., &Yang, K. (2014). R-words: Refusing research. Humanizing Research: Decolonizing
Qualitative Inquiry with Youth and Communities, 223–248.
https://doi.org/10.4135/9781544329611.n12
Utz, S., & Breuer, J. (2017). The relationship between use of social network sites, online social
support, and well-being. Journal of Media Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-
1105/a000222
Valenzuela, S., Park, N., & Kee, K. (2009). Is there social capital in a social network site?
Facebook use and college students' life satisfaction, trust, and participation. Journal of
Computer-Mediated Communication, 14(4), 875–901. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-
6101.2009.01474.x

159

Vanden Abeele, A. (2018). Does Facebook use predict college students’ social capital? A
replication of Ellison, Steinfield, and Lampe’s (2007) study using the original and more
recent measures of Facebook use and social capital. Communication Studies, 69(3),
272–282. https://doi.org/10.1080/10510974.2018.1464937
Van Der Gaag, M., & Snijders, T. A. (2005). The resource generator: Social capital
quantification with concrete items. Social Networks, 27(1), 1-29.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socnet.2004.10.001
Wellman, B., & Gulia, M. (1999). Net-surfers don’t ride alone: Virtual communities as
communities. Networks in the Global Village: Life in Contemporary Communities, 10(3),
34-60.
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.28.4435&rep=rep1&type=pdf
Wellman, B., Haase, A., Witte, J., & Hampton, K. (2001). Does the internet increase, decrease,
or supplement social capital? Social networks, participation, and community
commitment. American Behavioral Scientist, 45(3), 436-455.
https://doi.org/10.1177/00027640121957286
Woolcock, M. (2001). The place of social capital in understanding social and economic
outcomes. Canadian Journal of Policy Research, 2(1), 11-17.
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Michael-
Woolcock/publication/269576288_The_Place_of_Social_Capital_in_Understanding_Soc
ial_and_Economic_Outcome/links/57c77f6c08ae28c01d4f84ee/The-Place-of-Social-
Capital-in-Understanding-Social-and-Economic-Outcome.pdf
160

Wu, S., Wang, S., Liu, F., Hu, D., & Hwang, W. (2012). The influences of social self-efficacy on
social trust and social capital: A case study of Facebook. Turkish Online Journal of
Educational Technology-TOJET, 11(2), 246-254. https://www.learntechlib.org/p/55733/
Wuthnow, R. (2002). Religious involvement and status-bridging social capital. Journal for the
Scientific Study of Religion, 41(4), 669-684. http://doi.org/10.1111/1468-5906.00153

161

Appendix: Interview Protocol
Research Questions
RQ1: How do self-efficacy and outcome expectation impact a participant’s activity within the
virtual church community?
RQ2: How do activities exhibited within the social network site contribute to developing social
capital among virtual community members?
RQ3: How do organizational attributes offline and online in the virtual community influence or
impede the creation and actability of social capital’s embedded resources?
Facebook Direct Message From The Organization To Potential Participant
Dear Friend,
We have identified you as a Top Fan in the Facebook Group! We want to thank you for
your engagement and participation in our virtual community. We are participating in a research
study to understand better how the Facebook community can serve the church members. We are
asking you to participate in this study.
The details are below:
● One-on-one interview via Zoom with a researcher.
● The interview will take approximately 45 - 60 minutes of your time.
● The interviewer will offer you a $25 eGift Card from Amazon to thank you for your time
and information.
We ask that you schedule the interview in the next 3-5 days. Please use this link to
schedule a convenient time when you will not have many interruptions and are able to give
quality time and attention to the questions. https://calendly.com/miawright/60min?month=2021-
07
162

Thank you in advance for your participation!
Introduction to the Interview
Hello, I am Mia Knight Wright, a doctoral student at USC. I am currently working to
understand better what motivates members to be active in the virtual community and their
perceived benefits. Additionally, I want to understand better how churches utilize their virtual
communities to emulate the in-person church model in which members fellowship, build
networks, and achieve goals. As you know, you have been identified as an active member of
your church’s Facebook Group. Thank you for agreeing to share your experiences with me. I
invite you to be candid and share your experience. Do I have your consent to participate? Do I
have your consent to record this interview?
Interview Questions

Interview Questions Potential Probes RQ
Addressed
Source
Social Cognitive
Motivator: Self-efficacy
RQ1
When you engage in the
FB Group, how would you
describe your confidence
about sharing your content,
comments, or knowledge
with others in the group?
SE1 What makes you feel confident
when you share your experiences,
insights, or expertise as an example
into the virtual community?
SE2 How would you describe your
confidence in sharing your
experiences, insights, or expertise
by engaging in dialogue with others
in the group?
SE3 How would you describe the
feeling you have when you share
your ideas and perspectives with
others participating in discussions?

Questions
SE1- SE4
modified from
Hsu et al.,
(2007)
163

SE4 How confident are you in
authoring a post or responding to
posts in the community forum? Can
you tell me more about this?

Social Cognitive
Motivator:
Outcome Expectation

RQ1
What outcomes do you
expect to gain by engaging
with others in the FB
church group?

OE1 Explain what you think that
you gain by doing specific actions
in the FB Group – like making
posts or commenting on a post?
OE2 Is there an expectation of a
specific outcome from your activity
in the group?
OE3 How can sharing knowledge
or empathy with other community
members impact your opportunity
to make more friends?
OE4 If you share your knowledge
with other community members, do
you feel that you will be seen as
trustworthy? How so?
OE5 How do you sense that
network ties between community
members can be strengthened when
knowledge is shared?
OE6 Complete this thought: My
knowledge sharing would help this
community achieve its goals or
visions by….

Questions
OE3-6
modified Hsu
et al., (2007)

164

Social Capital:
Name, Resource, Position
Generators

RQ2
Do you know people in the
FB group that you can say
the following about?
SC/NG1: What names could you
say that you trust to help solve your
problems?
SC/NG2: In whom would you have
the confidence to go to if you
needed an emergency loan of $100?
SC/NG3: Can you name people in
the FB group that you can turn to
for advice about making very
important decisions?
SC/NG4: Do you sense this is true,
“based on the people I interact with,
it is easy for me to hear about new
job opportunities.” What makes you
feel that way?
SC/RG1: Based upon your group
interaction, can you share different
occupations of the people you know
from the FB Group?
SC/RG2: Is there someone in the
group whom you could depend on
for professional services?
RQ2 Questions
SC/NG1-4 and
SC/RG1-2
modified
position and
resource
generator style
questions from
ICSC
Facebook
Burke et al.
(2011) and
Ellison et al.
(2007).

165

Social Capital:
Dimensions
RQ2
How would you describe
your relationships or bonds
with some of the FB group
members? (can be online
or offline)
Structural Dimension
(Social Interaction)
SC/S1: How do you maintain close
social relationships with some
members of the virtual community?
SC/S2: About how much time do
you spend interacting with some
members in the virtual community?
SC/S3: Describe your
communication with some members
in the virtual community.

Relational Dimension (Trust)
SC/R1 How do you feel about the
following statement: Trust from
participating positively affects the
quality of sharing behavior in the
virtual community.
SC/R2 How do you believe that
trust is built in the virtual
community?
SC/R3 How truthful do you believe
that members in the virtual
community are dealing with one
another?
(Identification/based trust)
SC/R4 How freely or candidly do
you believe that you can talk to the
community members about your
personal issues?

Questions
SC/S1-S3,
SC/R1-R3,
SC/R7-R8, and
SC/C1-C4
modified from
Chang &
Chuang
(2011).

Questions
SC/R4-6
modified from
Hsu et al.,
(2007).
166

How would you describe
your relationships or bonds
with some of the FB group
members? (can be online
or offline) (cont’d)
SC/R5 What do you think will
happen if you share your problems
with a community member? Do you
believe that he/she will respond
constructively and caringly?
SC/R6 How do you think that most
online community members will
respond to help others?
(Identification)
SC/R7 Thinking about a sense of
belonging. What are your feelings
toward the virtual community?
SC/R8 Please elaborate on a sense
of togetherness or closeness in the
virtual community?

Cognitive Dimension
(Shared Language)
SC/C1 How would you describe
your manner of communication
with others in the group?
SC/C2 What is your understanding
of the community’s communication
(common language), and how does
it affect how you engage in the
virtual community?
(Social Support)
SC/C3 What do you think about the
content and knowledge shared or
posted frequently in the virtual
community? (Knowledge quantity)
SC/C4 What kind of knowledge or
content can members from the
virtual community? (Knowledge
quality)

167

Social Capital
Benefits/Purposive
Actions
RQ1,2,3
Describe your benefits
from participating in the
online groups and
connecting with other
members.

Participant Engagement
PI1 How interested are you in
participating in the virtual
community?
PI2 How much do you enjoy
participating in the virtual
community?
PI3 How can participation in the
virtual community help you to
express who you are since you have
common interests with others?
PI4 How willing are you to help
other participants in the virtual
community?
PI5 What do you feel that you gain
with you help other participants in
the virtual community? Why would
you help?
PI6 Have you participated in
anything offline that you learned
about in the virtual community?
PI7 How were you motivated to
participate?
PI8 How would you describe the
intensity of your use of Facebook?
PI9 How would you describe the
intensity of your participation in the
Facebook group?
(Benefits)
SC-B1 Can you describe how
interaction in the digital church
group helped you to achieve a goal,
objective, or overcome a concern?
Questions PI1-
PI7 modified
from Chang &
Chuang
(2011).

PI8-PI9
modified from
Ellison et al.,
(2007) and
Brubaker &
Haigh, (2017).

168

Organization Culture
RQ3
How does your church
support the relational
connections of members in
the virtual community?
OC-1 How are friendships
encouraged in the virtual
community?
OC-2 How do you feel about the
way that FB Group moderators
engage with members in the group?
OC-3 How would you describe the
postings from the organizational
leaders for the group? (seek to
understand if it is too much
marketing, too political, too
financial, appropriately spiritual)
OC-4 What rules, traditions, or
protocols (spoken or unspoken)
guide how you interact in the virtual
community?

The Conclusion to the Interview:
I want to thank you for sharing your experiences sincerely. I do not have any further
questions for you. Do you have any questions for me, or is there anything you would like to add
that I have not asked? [Allow time to think, reflect, and ask.] I believe that the data collected and
analyzed will help organizations know how to structure social media networking sites better and
digital church campuses to meet the needs of their parishioners and members more effectively.
You are a critical part of that process. Again, I want to thank you for your time.

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

An intersectional examination of inequity in Black Bahamian men’s employment experience: a critical theory and social cognitive perspective

PDF

Knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences within leadership development: a study of a business unit in a prominent technology company

PDF

The importance of teacher motivation in professional development: implementing culturally relevant pedagogy

PDF

Noncredit programs: catalyst for development of social capital in adult students

PDF

Media literacy education: a qualitative inquiry into the perspectives teachers hold about teaching media literacy

PDF

Social capital and community philanthropy: the impact of social trust and social networks on individual charitable behavior and community foundation development

PDF

Financial inequity and the impact of acquiring technology competency within the emergency medical service community

PDF

Raising cultural self-efficacy among faculty and staff of a private native Hawaiian school system

PDF

Transformation of business models in terrestrial TV broadcasters in South Korea

PDF

An examination of soft skills in the virtual workplace

PDF

Developing a computer science education program: an innovation study

PDF

The emotional and therapeutic impact of video games for health: Is motivation to improve more important than expectations for improvement?

PDF

Examining the relationship between Latinx community college STEM students’ self-efficacy, social capital, academic engagement and their academic success

PDF

Impact of job insecurity on intergenerational knowledge sharing among machinists in the United States

PDF

Musical self-efficacy of graduate students in South Korea and the United States

PDF

The effects of math anxiety and low self-efficacy on students’ attitudes and interest in STEM

PDF

Intersectional equity in higher education leadership: leveraging social capital for success

PDF

Learning the language of math: supporting students who are learning English in acquiring math proficiency through language development

PDF

Vocational education graduates: a mixed methods analysis on beliefs and influences of career choice and persistence

PDF

Teacher well-being matters: an explorative study of early childhood teacher well-being, their experiences, and perspectives

Asset Metadata

Creator Knight Wright, Mia (author)

Core Title Motivation for participating in virtual religious communities: developing social capital

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)

Degree Conferral Date 2022-05

Publication Date 04/13/2022

Defense Date 04/05/2022

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag bonding social capital.,bridging social capital,Community,digital religion,Facebook groups,knowledge sharing,OAI-PMH Harvest,outcome expectation,relational social capital,religion online,Reputation,self-efficacy,social capital,social networking sites,social-cognitive,structural social capital,virtual community

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Min, Emmy J. (committee chair), Filback, Robert A. (committee member), Williams, Monica G. (committee member)

Creator Email knightwr@usc.edu,mia.wright@mac.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC110939613

Unique identifier UC110939613

Legacy Identifier etd-KnightWrig-10504

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Knight Wright, Mia

Type texts

Source 20220413-usctheses-batch-923 (batch), University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the author, as the original true and official version of the work, but does not grant the reader permission to use the work if the desired use is covered by copyright. It is the author, as rights holder, who must provide use permission if such use is covered by copyright. The original signature page accompanying the original submission of the work to the USC Libraries is retained by the USC Libraries and a copy of it may be obtained by authorized requesters contacting the repository e-mail address given.

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA

Repository Email cisadmin@lib.usc.edu