Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
173 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
7 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
46 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
38 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Does the First Response Matter for Future Contributions? A Study of First Contributions (2104.02933v3)

Published 7 Apr 2021 in cs.SE

Abstract: Open Source Software (OSS) projects rely on a continuous stream of new contributors for their livelihood. Recent studies reported that new contributors experience many barriers in their first contribution, with the social barrier being critical. Although a number of studies investigated the social barriers to new contributors, we hypothesize that negative first responses may cause an unpleasant feeling, and subsequently lead to the discontinuity of any future contribution. We execute protocols of a registered report to analyze 2,765,917 first contributions as Pull Requests (PRs) with 642,841 first responses. We characterize most first response as being positive, but less responsive, and exhibiting sentiments of fear, joy and love. Results also indicate that negative first responses have the literal intention to arouse emotions of being either constructive (50.71%) or criticizing (37.68%) in nature. Running different machine learning models, we find that predicting future interactions is low (F1 score of 0.6171), but relatively better than baselines. Furthermore, an analysis of these models show that interactions are positively correlated with a future contribution, with other dimensions (i.e., project, contributor, contribution) having a large effect.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (9)
  1. Bonaccorsi A, Rossi-Lamastra C (2006) Comparing motivations of individual programmers and firms to take part in the open source movement. from community to business. Knowledge and Policy pp 40–64
  2. Grigore M, Rosenkranz C (2011) Increasing the willingness to collaborate online: an analysis of sentiment-driven interactions in peer content production. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Information Sys.
  3. Hars A, Ou S (2001) Working for free? motivations of participating in open source projects. In: Proceedings of the 34th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences
  4. Islam MR, Zibran MF (2018) Sentistrength-se: Exploiting domain specificity for improved sentiment analysis in software engineering text. Journal of Sys and Software pp 125 – 146
  5. Lakhani K, Wolf R (2003) Why hackers do what they do: Understanding motivation and effort in free/open source software projects. Perspectives on Free and Open Source Software DOI 10.2139/ssrn.443040
  6. Mann HB, Whitney DR (1947) On a test of whether one of two random variables is stochastically larger than the other. Ann Math Statist pp 50–60
  7. Miller C, Cohen S, Klug D, Vasilescu B, Kästner C (2021) “did you miss my comment or what?” understanding toxicity in open source discussions
  8. Shapiro SS, Wilk MB (1965) An analysis of variance test for normality (complete samples)†. Biometrika pp 591–611
  9. Viera A, Garrett J (2005) Understanding interobserver agreement: the kappa statistic. Family medicine
Citations (2)

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

Github Logo Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
X Twitter Logo Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
Youtube Logo Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com