FLOSS Participants' Perceptions About Gender and Inclusiveness: A Survey
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
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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
Gender differences in risk taking: a meta-analysis
Byrnes, J. P., Miller, D. C., & Schafer, W. D. (1999) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.125.3.367 · Cited by 3,723 · see citing works
Lakhani, K. R., & Wolf, R. G. (2003) · doi:10.2139/ssrn.443040 · Cited by 1,531 · see citing works
Gender differences and bias in open source: pull request acceptance of women versus men
Terrell, J., Kofink, A., Middleton, J., Rainear, C., Murphy-Hill, E., Parnin, C., & Stallings, J. (2017) · PeerJ Computer Science · doi:10.7717/peerj-cs.111 · Cited by 287 · cited 4× · see citing works
“Prior research has shown that female contributors overprepare for contributing to FLOSS [24].”
BackgroundInfluential‘Patches don’t have gender’: What is not open in open source software
Nafus, D. (2012) · New Media & Society · doi:10.1177/1461444811422887 · Cited by 204 · cited 4× · see citing works
“This result suggests that the attitude of FLOSS participants towards females is improving, as compared to previous studies [16].”
BackgroundResultInfluential
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Codes of Conduct in Open Source
Frluckaj, H., & Howison, J. (2024) · Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion in Software Engineering · doi:10.1007/978-1-4842-9651-6_17 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
Tensiones desde la perspectiva de género en torno al potencial democratizador del software libre
Ortmann, C. (2022) · Comunicación y Género · doi:10.5209/cgen.84342
- 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
- Licence
- 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