Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 223

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 16 of the 16 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Impression formation in online peer production: activity traces and personal profiles in github

Open access
Marlow, Jennifer, Dabbish, Laura, Herbsleb, Jim·2013·Proceedings of the 2013 conference on Computer supported cooperative work
DOI 10.1145/2441776.2441792
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

In this paper we describe a qualitative investigation of impression formation in an online distributed software development community with social media functionality. We find that users in this setting seek out additional information about each other to explore the project space, inform future interactions, and understand the potential future value of a new person. They form impressions around other users' expertise based on history of activity across projects, and successful collaborations with key high status projects in the community. These impressions influence their receptivity to strangers' work contributions.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/2441776.2441792

Cites

16 of 16 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 223

Metadata

Authors
Marlow, J., Dabbish, L., & Herbsleb, J.
Venue
Proceedings of the 2013 conference on Computer supported cooperative work
Publisher
ACM
Published
2013-02-23
Pages
117-128
DOI
10.1145/2441776.2441792
OpenAlex
W2108050908
Cited by
223
References
16
FWCI
13.42
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
green

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

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.