Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Search
2000 character limit reached

Invisible Labor in Open Source Software Ecosystems

Published 12 Jan 2024 in cs.SE | (2401.06889v2)

Abstract: Invisible labor is work that is either not fully visible or not appropriately compensated. In open source software (OSS) ecosystems, essential tasks that do not involve code (like content moderation) often become invisible to the detriment of individuals and organizations. However, invisible labor is sufficiently difficult to measure that we do not know how much of OSS activities are invisible. Our study addresses this challenge, demonstrating that roughly half of OSS work is invisible. We do this by developing a cognitive anchoring survey technique that measures OSS developer self-assessments of labor visibility and attribution. Survey respondents (n=142) reported that their work is more likely to be invisible (2 in 3 tasks) than visible, and that half (50.1%) is uncompensated. Priming participants with the idea of visibility caused participants to think their work was more visible, and that visibility was less important, than those primed with invisibility. We also found evidence that tensions between attribution motivations probably increase how common invisible labor is. This suggests that advertising OSS activities as "open" may lead contributors to overestimate how visible their labor actually is. Our findings suggest benefits to working with varied stakeholders to make select, collectively valued activities visible, and increasing compensation in valued forms (like attribution, opportunities, or pay) when possible. This could improve fairness in software development while providing greater transparency into work designs that help organizations and communities achieve their goals.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (50)
  1. Joan Acker. 1973. Women and Social Stratification: A Case of Intellectual Sexism. Amer. J. Sociology 78, 4 (Jan. 1973), 936–945. https://doi.org/10.1086/225411
  2. Publishing: Credit Where Credit Is Due. Nature 508, 7496 (April 2014), 312–313. https://doi.org/10.1038/508312a
  3. Gender Differences in Accepting and Receiving Requests for Tasks with Low Promotability. American Economic Review 107, 3 (2017), 714–747.
  4. Shaowen Bardzell. 2010. Feminist HCI: Taking Stock and Outlining an Agenda for Design. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’10). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1301–1310. https://doi.org/10.1145/1753326.1753521
  5. Work as a Masculinity Contest. Journal of Social Issues 74, 3 (2018), 422–448. https://doi.org/10.1111/josi.12289
  6. Beyond Authorship: Attribution, Contribution, Collaboration, and Credit. Learned Publishing 28, 2 (2015), 151–155. https://doi.org/10.1087/20150211
  7. Open Source Ecosystems Need Equitable Credit across Contributions. Nature Computational Science 1, 1 (Jan. 2021), 2–2. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43588-020-00011-w
  8. Miriam A Cherry. 2016. Virtual Work and Invisible Labor. In Invisible Labour: Hidden Work in the Contemporary World, Marion G. Crain, Winifred R. Poster, and Miriam A. Cherry (Eds.). University of California Press, Oakland, California, 28–46.
  9. Strategies for Estimating Behavioural Frequency in Survey Interviews. Memory 6, 4 (July 1998), 339–366. https://doi.org/10.1080/741942603
  10. Arlene Kaplan Daniels. 1987. Invisible Work. Social Problems 34, 5 (Dec. 1987), 403–415. https://doi.org/10.2307/800538
  11. Catherine D’Ignazio and Lauren F Klein. 2020. Data Feminism. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
  12. Nadia Eghbal. 2016. Roads and Bridges: The Unseen Labor behind Our Digital Infrastructure. Technical Report. Ford Foundation.
  13. Nadia Eghbal. 2020. Working in Public: The Making and Maintenance of Open Source Software. Stripe Press, San Francisco, CA.
  14. Yulin Fang and Derrick Neufeld. 2009. Understanding Sustained Participation in Open Source Software Projects. Journal of Management Information Systems 25, 4 (April 2009), 9–50. https://doi.org/10.2753/MIS0742-1222250401
  15. Gender and Participation in Open Source Software Development. Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact. 6, CSCW2 (Nov. 2022), 299:1–299:31. https://doi.org/10.1145/3555190
  16. The Labor of Maintaining and Scaling Free and Open-Source Software Projects. Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact. 5, CSCW1 (April 2021), 175:1–175:28. https://doi.org/10.1145/3449249
  17. Skills, Division of Labor and Performance in Collective Inventions: Evidence from Open Source Software. International Journal of Industrial Organization 28, 1 (Jan. 2010), 54–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijindorg.2009.07.004
  18. Measuring Developer Contribution from Software Repository Data. In Proceedings of the 2008 International Working Conference on Mining Software Repositories (MSR ’08). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 129–132. https://doi.org/10.1145/1370750.1370781
  19. Mary L. Gray and Siddharth Suri. 2019. Ghost Work: How to Stop Silicon Valley from Building a New Global Underclass. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, Boston.
  20. Alex O. Holcombe. 2019. Contributorship, Not Authorship: Use CRediT to Indicate Who Did What. Publications 7, 3 (Sept. 2019), 48. https://doi.org/10.3390/publications7030048
  21. A Review of Key Likert Scale Development Advances: 1995–2019. Frontiers in Psychology 12 (2021), 1590. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.637547
  22. Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Cambridge University Press., Cambridge, UK.
  23. Ivar Krumpal. 2013. Determinants of Social Desirability Bias in Sensitive Surveys: A Literature Review. Qual Quant 47, 4 (June 2013), 2025–2047. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-011-9640-9
  24. Contributorship and Division of Labor in Knowledge Production. Social Studies of Science 46, 3 (2016), 417–435. arXiv:26099848
  25. Cognitive Burden of Survey Questions and Response Times: A Psycholinguistic Experiment. Applied Cognitive Psychology 24, 7 (Oct. 2010), 1003–1020. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1602
  26. Designing for Collaborative Infrastructuring: Supporting Resonance Activities. Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact. 2, CSCW (Nov. 2018), 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1145/3274382
  27. Daniel McNeish. 2018. Thanks Coefficient Alpha, We’ll Take It from Here. Psychological Methods 23, 3 (Sept. 2018), 412–433. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000144
  28. Daniel C. Molden. 2014. Understanding Priming Effects in Social Psychology: What Is “Social Priming” and How Does It Occur? Social Cognition 32, Supplement (June 2014), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.2014.32.supp.1
  29. Computers Can’t Give Credit: How Automatic Attribution Falls Short in an Online Remixing Community. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’11). Association for Computing Machinery, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 3421–3430. https://doi.org/10.1145/1978942.1979452 arXiv:1507.01285
  30. National Science Foundation. 2023. Pathways to Enable Open-Source Ecosystems. Program Solicitation NSF 23-556. National Science Foundation.
  31. Introduction: Conceptualizing Invisible Labor. In Invisible Labor: Hidden Work in the Contemporary World, Marion G. Crain, Winifred R. Poster, and Miriam A. Cherry (Eds.). University of California Press, Oakland, California, 3–27.
  32. More than Code: Contributions in Scrum Software Engineering Teams. In Proceedings of the IEEE/ACM 42nd International Conference on Software Engineering Workshops (ICSEW’20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 137–140. https://doi.org/10.1145/3387940.3392241
  33. Dirk Riehle. 2007. The Economic Motivation of Open Source Software: Stakeholder Perspectives. Computer 40, 4 (April 2007), 25–32. https://doi.org/10.1109/MC.2007.147
  34. Kjeld Schmidt and Liam Bannon. 1992. Taking CSCW Seriously. Comput Supported Coop Work 1, 1 (March 1992), 7–40. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00752449
  35. Kjeld Schmidt and Carla Simone. 1996. Coordination Mechanisms: Towards a Conceptual Foundation of CSCW Systems Design. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) 5 (1996), 155–200.
  36. Susan Leigh Star. 1991. The Sociology of the Invisible: The Primacy of Work in the Writings of Anselm Strauss. In Social Organization and Social Process: Essays in Honor of Anselm Strauss, David R. Maines (Ed.). Walter de Gruyter, Inc., Hawthorne, NY, 265–283.
  37. Susan Leigh Star and Anselm Strauss. 1999. Layers of Silence, Arenas of Voice: The Ecology of Visible and Invisible Work. Computer supported cooperative work (CSCW) 8 (1999), 9–30.
  38. Daniel Stewart. 2005. Social Status in an Open-Source Community. Am Sociol Rev 70, 5 (Oct. 2005), 823–842. https://doi.org/10.1177/000312240507000505
  39. Managing Opacity: Information Visibility and the Paradox of Transparency in the Digital Age. International Journal of Communication 10, 0 (Jan. 2016), 15.
  40. Anselm Strauss. 1985. Work and the Division of Labor. The Sociological Quarterly 26, 1 (1985), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1533-8525.1985.tb00212.x
  41. Lucy Suchman. 1995. Making Work Visible. Commun. ACM 38, 9 (Sept. 1995), 56–64. https://doi.org/10.1145/223248.223263
  42. Assessing Organizational Information Visibility: Development and Validation of the Information Visibility Scale. Communication Research 48, 6 (Aug. 2021), 895–927. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650219877093
  43. Roger Tourangeau. 2018. The Survey Response Process from a Cognitive Viewpoint. Quality Assurance in Education 26, 2 (Jan. 2018), 169–181. https://doi.org/10.1108/QAE-06-2017-0034
  44. The Science of Web Surveys. Oxford University Press, New York, NY.
  45. The Psychology of Survey Response. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
  46. Quantifying the Invisible Labor in Crowd Work. Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact. 5, CSCW2 (Oct. 2021), 319:1–319:26. https://doi.org/10.1145/3476060
  47. Hidden Figures: Roles and Pathways of Successful OSS Contributors. Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact. 4, CSCW2 (Oct. 2020), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1145/3415251
  48. The Penumbra of Open Source: Projects Outside of Centralized Platforms Are Longer Maintained, More Academic and More Collaborative. EPJ Data Sci. 11, 1 (Dec. 2022), 31. https://doi.org/10.1140/epjds/s13688-022-00345-7
  49. Carrots and Rainbows: Motivation and Social Practice in Open Source Software Development. MIS Quarterly 36, 2 (2012), 649–676. https://doi.org/10.2307/41703471 arXiv:41703471
  50. Which Contributions Count? Analysis of Attribution in Open Source. In 2021 IEEE/ACM 18th International Conference on Mining Software Repositories (MSR). IEEE, Madrid, Spain, 242–253. https://doi.org/10.1109/MSR52588.2021.00036

Summary

No one has generated a summary of this paper yet.

Ai Sparkles Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Sign Up to Summarize

Whiteboard

No one has generated a whiteboard explanation for this paper yet.

Ai Sparkles Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Sign Up to Generate

Open Problems

We haven't generated a list of open problems mentioned in this paper yet.

Ai Sparkles Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Generate Now

Continue Learning

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.

Ai Sparkles Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Generate Now

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.

User Circle Single Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Sign Up

Tweets

Sign up for free to view the 1 tweet with 1 like about this paper.

User Circle Single Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Sign Up for Free