Design, discussion, and dissent in open bug reports

ACM International Conference Proceeding Series

Volumn , Issue , 2011, Pages 106-113

  Ko, Andrew J ^a   Chilana, Parmit K ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

Author keywords

Bugzilla; Change requests; Design rationale; Open source

Indexed keywords

BUG REPORTS; BUGZILLA; CHANGE REQUESTS; DESIGN PROPOSAL; DESIGN RATIONALE; OPEN SOURCE; OPEN SOURCES; ORIGINAL DESIGN; QUALITATIVE STUDY; SOFTWARE QUALITY; THREADED DISCUSSIONS; USER NEED; VISUAL PRESENTATION;

DECISION MAKING;

SOFTWARE DESIGN;

EID: 79952576408     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1145/1940761.1940776     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (27)

1. Aranda, J. and Venolia, G. (2009). The secret life of bugs: Going past the errors and omissions in software repositories. Int'l Conf. on Software Engineering (ICSE), 298-308.
2. Bach, P.M. (2009). Design information sharing across multiple knowledge systems in a FLOSS community. iConference.
3. Barcellini, F., Detienne, F., Burkhardt, J.M., Sack, W. (2008). A socio-cognitive analysis of online design discussions in an open source software community. Interacting with Computers, 20, 141-165. (Pubitemid 50014684)
4. Bettenburg, N., Just, S., Schröter, A., Weiss, C., Premraj, R. and Zimmermann, T. (2008). What makes a good bug report? Foundations of Software Engineering (FSE), 308-318.
5. Canary D.J., Brossmann B.G., and Seibold D.R. (1987). Argument structures in decision-making groups. Southern Speech Communication Journal, 53(1), 18-37.
6. Christensen, C.M. (2003). The innovator's dilemma. Harper Collins.
7. Cooper, A., Reimann, R. and Cronin, D. (2007). About face 3: The essentials of interaction design. Wiley Pub.
8. Cummings, J. and Kiesler, S. (2005). Collaborative research across disciplinary and organizational boundaries. Social Studies of Science, 35(5), 703-722. (Pubitemid 41495324)
9. Espinosa, A., Kraut, R., Slaughter, S., Lerch, J., Herbsleb, J. and Mockus, A. (2002). Shared mental models, familiarity, and coordination: A multi-method study of distributed software teams. Int'l Conf. on Information Systems, 425-433.
10. Farnham, S., Chesley, H. R., McGhee, D. E., Kawal, R., and Landau, J. (2000). Structured online interactions: improving the decision-making of small discussion groups. Computer- Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), 299-308. (Pubitemid 32400060)
11. Friess, E. (2008). Defending design decisions with usability evidence: A case study. ACM Conf. on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI), 2009-2016.
12. Glaser, B. G. (1992). Emergence vs forcing : Basics of grounded theory analysis. Mill Valley, CA, Sociology Press.
13. Gutwin, C., Penner, R. and Schneider, K. (2004). Group awareness in distributed software development. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), 72-81. (Pubitemid 40928504)
14. Hiltz, S., Johnson, K., and Turoff, M. (1986). Experiments in group decision making: communication process and outcome in face-to-face versus computerized conferences. Human Communication Research, 13, 225- 252, 1986.
15. Ko, A. J., DeLine, R. and Venolia, G. (2007). Information needs in collocated software development teams. Int'l Conf. on Software Engineering (ICSE), 344-353. (Pubitemid 47430669)
16. Ko, A.J. and Chilana, P. (2010). How power users help and hinder open bug reporting. ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI), Atlanta, GA, USA, to appear.
17. Kriplean, T., Beschastnikh, I., McDonald, D. W. and Golder, S. A. (2007). Community, consensus, coercion, control: CS*W or how policy mediates mass participation. ACM Conference on Supporting Group Work (GROUP), 167-176.
18. Kuhn, D. (1991). The skills of argument. Cambridge U. Press.
19. Lemus, D.R., Seibold, D.R., Flanagin A.J., Metzger M.J. (2006). Argument and decision making in computer-mediated groups. Journal of Communication, 54(2), 302-320.
20. Li, Q., Heckman, R., Allen, E., Crowston, K., Eseryel, U., Howison, J., and Wiggins, A. (2008). Asynchronous decisionmaking in distributed teams. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), San Diego, CA.
21. Mentis, H.M., Bach, P. M., Hoffman, B., Rosson, M.B., and Carroll, J.M. (2009). Development of decision rationale in complex group decision making. ACM Conf. on Human Factors in Computing (CHI).
22. Pennebaker J.W., Mehl M.R. and Niederhoffer K.G. (2003). Psychological aspects of natural language use: Our words, our selves. Annual Review of Psychology, 54(1), 547-577. (Pubitemid 37417505)
23. Seaman, C. B. and Basili, V. R. (1998). Communication and organization: An empirical study of discussion in inspection meetings. IEEE Trans. on Soft. Engineering, 244(7), 559-572. (Pubitemid 128741973)
24. Straus, S. G., McGrath, J. (1994) Does the medium matter? The interaction of task type and technology on group performance and member reactions. J. of Applied Psychology, 79, 87-97.
25. Twidale, M.B. and Nichols D.M. (2005). Exploring usability discussions in open source development. HICSS.
26. Ullman, D.G. (2009). The mechanical design process, McGraw Hill.
27. Zannier, C., Chiasson, M., & Maurer, F. (2007). A model of design decision making based on empirical results of interviews with software designers. Information and Software Technology, 49(6), 637-653. (Pubitemid 46602966)