Silent Participants: Getting to Know Lurkers Better

Nonnecke, Blair; Preece, Jenny

doi:10.1007/978-1-4471-0057-7_6

Cited by 120 publications

(90 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The particular steps involved in Fred's trajectory were (1) peripheral monitoring of the development activity; (2) reporting of bugs and simultaneous suggestions for patches; (3) obtaining CVS access and directly fixing bugs; (4) taking charge of a ''module size'' project; (5) developing this project, gathering support for it, defending it publicly; (6) obtaining the approval of the core members and getting the module integrated into the project's architecture. This reinforced some earlier research findings: Von Krogh et al (2003), for instance, clearly describe how successful OSS ''joiners'' spend a significant period of time ''lurking'' at the periphery (Nonnecke and Preece, 2003), simply observing activities (step 1). They also emphasize the crucial role of ''starting out humbly'' by contributing technical solutions to already existing Figure 3.…”

Section: Integration Of People Into the Actor-networksupporting

confidence: 59%

A Methodological Framework for Socio-Cognitive Analyses of Collaborative Design of Open Source Software

Sack

Détienne

Ducheneaut

et al. 2006

Comput Supported Coop Work

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Open Source Software (OSS) development challenges traditional software engineering practices. In particular, OSS projects are managed by a large number of volunteers, working freely on the tasks they choose to undertake. OSS projects also rarely rely on explicit system-level design, or on project plans or schedules. Moreover, OSS developers work in arbitrary locations and collaborate almost exclusively over the Internet, using simple tools such as email and software code tracking databases (e.g. CVS).All the characteristics above make OSS development akin to weaving a tapestry of heterogeneous components. The OSS design process relies on various types of actors: people with prescribed roles, but also elements coming from a variety of information spaces (such as email and software code). The objective of our research is to understand the specific hybrid weaving accomplished by the actors of this distributed, collective design process. This, in turn, challenges traditional methodologies used to understand distributed software engineering: OSS development is simply too ''fibrous'' to lend itself well to analysis under a single methodological lens.In this paper, we describe the methodological framework we articulated to analyze collaborative design in the Open Source world. Our framework focuses on the links between the heterogeneous components of a project's hybrid network. We combine ethnography, text mining, and socio-technical network analysis and visualization to understand OSS development in its totality. This way, we are able to simultaneously consider the social, technical, and cognitive aspects of OSS development. We describe our methodology in detail, and discuss its implications for future research on distributed collective practices.

show abstract

Section: Integration Of People Into the Actor-networksupporting

confidence: 59%

A Methodological Framework for Socio-Cognitive Analyses of Collaborative Design of Open Source Software

Sack

Détienne

Ducheneaut

et al. 2006

Comput Supported Coop Work

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Those students who ''sat out of a discussion'' or ''lurked'' in the study can loosely be labeled as ''lurkers'', but mandatory and graded online discussions made it hard for students to remain inactive or lurk in discussions for a prolonged period of time as they may in any public forums. Lurkers and lurking are part of an online group and without insight into lurkers and lurking, our understanding of online groups is incomplete (Nonnecke & Preece, 2003). Although students here demonstrated behaviors of lurkers, but reasons for lurking may be drastically different from those in a public forum.…”

Section: Cognitive Engagementmentioning

confidence: 82%

Interaction and cognitive engagement: An analysis of four asynchronous online discussions

2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Online discussion plays a unique role in face-to-face and distance teaching and learning. Interaction and student cognitive engagement during the online discussion are critical for constructing new understanding and knowledge. This article analyzes types of interaction that occur during online discussions, examines levels of student cognitive engagement in each discussion, and explores their effects on and implications for learning and teaching in higher education. By combining methods of social network analysis with qualitative content analysis, the article explores new methodologies for analyzing participation, interaction, and learning that take place online, and suggests areas for research in learning and teaching online.Keywords: asynchronous discussion, cognitive engagement, computer-mediated communication, discussion forum, electronic conferencing, interaction, teaching and learning online Advances in technology have enhanced communications between students and the instructor, and among students themselves. Many college instructors, due to easy access to communication technology tools, have moved or extended part of a classroom discussion to an online forum, where students and the instructor continue their discussion on course-related topics. Instructors sometimes find it difficult to facilitate class discussions online because there remains scant knowledge about interaction and student cognitive engagement in the asynchronous online discussion. This article analyzes types of interaction in four asynchronous online discussions, examines student cognitive engagement in each discussion, explores factors that may cause differences in interaction and cognitive engagement, and highlights possible implications for learning and teaching online and for research in computer-mediated communication (CMC).

show abstract

“…Some of these steps had been recognized in previous research. Von Krogh et al (2003), for instance, clearly describe how successful ''joiners'' spend a significant period of time ''lurking'' at the periphery (Nonnecke and Preece, 2003), simply observing activities (step 1). They also emphasize the crucial role of ''starting out humbly'' by contributing technical solutions to already existing problems (steps 2 and 3), before moving on to more significant accomplishments (step 4).…”

Section: Oss Socialization As a Learning Processmentioning

confidence: 99%

Socialization in an Open Source Software Community: A Socio-Technical Analysis

Ducheneaut

2005

Comput Supported Coop Work

359

303

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Open Source Software (OSS) development is often characterized as a fundamentally new way to develop software. Past analyses and discussions, however, have treated OSS projects and their organization mostly as a static phenomenon. Consequently, we do not know how these communities of software developers are sustained and reproduced over time through the progressive integration of new members. To shed light on this issue I report on my analyses of socialization in a particular OSS community. In particular, I document the relationships OSS newcomers develop over time with both the social and material aspects of a project. To do so, I combine two mutually informing activities: ethnography and the use of software specially designed to visualize and explore the interacting networks of human and material resources incorporated in the email and code databases of OSS. Socialization in this community is analyzed from two perspectives: as an individual learning process and as a political process. From these analyses it appears that successful participants progressively construct identities as software craftsmen, and that this process is punctuated by specific rites of passage. Successful participants also understand the political nature of software development and progressively enroll a network of human and material allies to support their efforts. I conclude by discussing how these results could inform the design of software to support socialization in OSS projects, as well as practical implications for the future of these projects.

show abstract

Silent Participants: Getting to Know Lurkers Better

Cited by 120 publications

References 7 publications

A Methodological Framework for Socio-Cognitive Analyses of Collaborative Design of Open Source Software

A Methodological Framework for Socio-Cognitive Analyses of Collaborative Design of Open Source Software

Interaction and cognitive engagement: An analysis of four asynchronous online discussions

Socialization in an Open Source Software Community: A Socio-Technical Analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About