Gender Differences in Early Free and Open Source Software Joining Process

  • Victor Kuechler
  • Claire Gilbertson
  • Carlos Jensen
Part of the IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology book series (IFIPAICT, volume 378)

Abstract

With the growth of free and open source software (FOSS) and the adoption of FOSS solutions in business and everyday life, it is important that projects serve their growingly diverse user base. The sustainability of FOSS projects relies on a constant influx of new contributors. Several large demographic surveys found that FOSS communities are very homogenous, dominated by young men, similar to the bias existing in the rest of the IT workforce. Building on previous research, we examine mailing list subscriptions and posting statistics of female FOSS participants. New participants often experience their first interaction on a FOSS project’s mailing list. We explored six FOSS projects – Buildroot, Busybox, Jaws, Parrot, uClibc, and Yum. We found a declining rate of female participation from the 8.27% of subscribers, to 6.63% of posters, and finally the often reported code contributor rate of 1.5%. We found a disproportionate attrition rate among women along every step of the FOSS joining process.

Keywords

joining process diversity mailing lists 

References

  1. 1.
    About Us. The Humanitarian FOSS Project, http://www.hfoss.org/index.php/about-us
  2. 2.
    About OSUOSL. OSUOSL, http://osuosl.org/about-osuosl
  3. 3.
    Andersen, E.: BusyBox, http://busybox.net
  4. 4.
    Andersen, E.: UClibc, http://uclibc.org
  5. 5.
    Bitzer, J., Schrettl, W., Schroder, P.: Intrinsic Motivation in Open Source Software Development. Journal of Comparative Economics 35(1), 160–169 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
  7. 7.
    David, P., Waterman, A., Arora, S.: The Free/Libre/Open Source Software Survey for 2003. Stanford University (2003), http://www.stanford.edu/group/floss-us/
  8. 8.
    Fisher, A., Margolis, J.: Unlocking the Clubhouse: the Carnegie Mellon Experience. In: Proc. SIGCSE Bulletin, vol. 34, pp. 79–83 (2002)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ghosh, R.A., Glott, R., Krieger, B., Robles, G.: Free/Libre and Open Source Software: Survey and Study, Part 4: Survey of Developers (June 2002), www.flossproject.org/report/
  10. 10.
    Gutwin, C., Penner, R., Schneider, K.: Group Awareness in Distributed Software Development. In: Proc. CSCS 2004, pp. 72–88. ACM Press (2004)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jensen, C., King, S., Kuechler, V.: Joining Free/Open Source Software Communities: An Analysis of Newbies’ First Interactions on Project Mailing Lists. In: Proc. of HICSS 2011, pp. 1–10 (2011)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
  13. 13.
    Krogh, G., Spaeth, S., Lakhani, K.: Community, joining, and specialization in open source software innovation: a case study. Research Policy 32(7), 1217–1241 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lakhani, K.R., Wolf, R.G.: The Boston Consulting Group Hacker Survey (2002), ftp3.au.freebsd.org/pub/linux.conf.au/2003/papers/Hemos/Hemos.pdf
  15. 15.
    Lampe, C., Johnston, E.: Follow the (Slash) dot: Effects of Feedback on New Members in an Online Community. In: Proc. of the 2005 Int. Conf. on Supporting Group Work, pp. 11–20 (2005)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Mason, B.: Issues in virtual ethnography. In: Proc. of Ethnographic Studies in Real and Virtual Environments: Inhabited Information Spaces and Connected Communities, pp. 61–69 (1999)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    MBOX Documentation. Qmail Mirror Selection (1998), http://www.qmail.org/man/man5/mbox.html
  18. 18.
    Nafus, D., Leach, J., Krieger, B.: Deliverable D16: Gender: Integrated Report of Findings. Free/Libre/Open Source Software: Policy Support, http://www.flosspols.org/
  19. 19.
    U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. The Condition of Education 2011. NCES, Table A-26-2 (2011), http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=72
  20. 20.
    About: Fact Sheet. National Center for Women and Information Technology, http://www.ncwit.org/about.factsheet.html
  21. 21.
    Nonnecke, B., Preece, J.: Lurker Demographics: Counting the Silent. In: CHI 2000, pp. 73–80. ACM Press (2000)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Raymond, E.S.: The Cathedral & the Bazaar: Musings on Linux and Open Source by an Accidental Revolutionary. O’Reilly, Beijing (1999)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Robert, K.: Standing out in a Crowd. Keynote Presentation. In: OSCON 2002, Dreamwidth (2002), http://www.oscon.com/oscon2009/public/schedule/detail/10173
  24. 24.
    Robles, G., Scheider, H., Tretkowski, I., Webers, N.: Who Is Doing It? A research on Libre Software developers (2001), http://widi.berlios.de/paper/study.html
  25. 25.
    Soroka, V., Jacovi, M., Ur, S.: We can see you: a study of the community’s invisible people through ReachOut. In: Huysman, M., Wenger, E., Wulf, V. (eds.) Proc. of Int. Conf. on Communities and Technologies, pp. 65–79. Kluwer Academic Publishers (2003)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Users & Documentation. Parrot VM. Web (August 21, 2011), http://parrot.org/dev/docs/user
  27. 27.
    Wheeler, D.: Why Open Source Software/Free Software (OSS/FS, FOSS, or FLOSS)? Look at the Numbers! (April 16, 2007), http://www.dwheeler.com/oss_fs_why.html
  28. 28.
    Women, Minorities, and Persons with Disabilities in Science and Engineering. U.S. National Science Foundation (2011), http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/wmpd/
  29. 29.
    Ye, Y., Kishida, K.: Toward an Understanding of the Motivation Open Source Software Developers. In: Proc. ICSE 2003, pp. 419–429 (2003)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Yum Package Manager, http://yum.baseurl.org/

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Victor Kuechler
    • 1
  • Claire Gilbertson
    • 1
  • Carlos Jensen
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Electrical Engineering and Computer ScienceOregon State UniversityCorvallisUSA

Personalised recommendations