Cited by 59Open Source Software InnovationsGender and Technology in EducationSoftware Engineering Techniques and Practices

FLOSS Participants' Perceptions About Gender and Inclusiveness: A Survey

Lee, Amanda, Carver, Jeffrey C.·2019·2019 IEEE/ACM 41st International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE)

Abstract

Background: While FLOSS projects espouse openness and acceptance for all, in practice, female contributors often face discriminatory barriers to contribution. Aims: In this paper, we examine the extent to which these problems still exist. We also study male and female contributors' perceptions of other contributors. Method: We surveyed participants from 15 FLOSS projects, asking a series of open-ended, closed-ended, and behavioral scale questions to gather information about the issue of gender in FLOSS projects. Results: Though many of those we surveyed expressed a positive sentiment towards females who participate in FLOSS projects, some were still strongly against their inclusion. Often, the respondents who were against inclusiveness also believed their own sentiments were the prevailing belief in the community, contrary to our findings. Others did not see the purpose of attempting to be inclusive, expressing the sentiment that a discussion of gender has no place in FLOSS. Conclusions: FLOSS projects have started to move forwards in terms of gender acceptance. However, there is still a need for more progress in the inclusion of gender-diverse contributors.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/icse.2019.00077

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • This philosophy has contributed to a notoriously antagonistic environment for women and minorities.

    “This philosophy has contributed to a notoriously antagonistic environment for women and minorities [14,16,23], with CoCs as a particular sore spot.”

    From Codes of Conduct in Open Source (2024) · cites this paper as [14]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lee, A., & Carver, J. C.
Affiliations
University of Alabama (US)
Venue
2019 IEEE/ACM 41st International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE)
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2019-05
Pages
677-687
ISSN
0270-5257 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2955099253
Cited by
59
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 4
FWCI
8.94
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
ACM/IEEE International Conference on Software Engineering: Companion Proceedings (ICSE-Companion) (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Open Source Software Innovations
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender and Technology in Education
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Software Engineering Techniques and Practices
Keywords
free and open source software, gender diversity, inclusivity, gender discrimination

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review