Publication:
Talk Is Silver, Code Is Gold? Beyond Traditional Notions of Contribution in Peer Production: The Case of Drupal

Thumbnail Image
Files
fhumd-03-618207.pdf (1.33 MB)
Official URL
https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fhumd.2021.618207
Full text at PDC
Publication Date
2021-03-18
Authors
Rozas, David
Gilbert, Nigel
Hodkinson, Paul
Advisors (or tutors)
Editors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Frontiers
Citations
Google Scholar
Exportar
DC QDC MarcXML RDF MODS METS ORE-ATOM
Research Projects
Organizational Units
Journal Issue
Abstract
Peer production communities are based on the collaboration of communities of people, mediated by the Internet, typically to create digital commons, as in Wikipedia or free software. The contribution activities around the creation of such commons (e.g., source code, articles, or documentation) have been widely explored. However, other types of contribution whose focus is directed toward the community have remained significantly less visible (e.g., the organization of events or mentoring). This work challenges the notion of contribution in peer production through an in-depth qualitative study of a prominent “code-centric” example: the case of the free software project Drupal. Involving the collaboration of more than a million participants, the Drupal project supports nearly 2 of websites worldwide. This research (1) offers empirical evidence of the perception of “community-oriented” activities as contributions, and (2) analyzes their lack of visibility in the digital platforms of collaboration. Therefore, through the exploration of a complex and “code-centric” case, this study aims to broaden our understanding of the notion of contribution in peer production communities, incorporating new kinds of contributions customarily left invisible.
Description
UCM subjects
Informática (Informática) , Investigación social
Unesco subjects
1203.17 Informática
Keywords
Citation
Acquia.com (2014). Talk Is Silver, Code Is Gold: Acquia's Code Contributions to the Drupal Project. Available online at: http://www.acquia.com/blog/talk-silver-code-gold-acquias-code-contributions-drupal-project (accessed July 25, 2014). Arvidsson, A., and Peitersen, N. (2013). Value Crisis. The Ethical Economy: Rebuilding Value After the Crisis. New York, NY: Columbia University Press. Google Scholar Benkler, Y. (2002). Coase's penguin, or, linux and the nature of the firm. Yale Law J. 112, 369–446. doi: 10.2307/1562247 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Benkler, Y. (2006). The Wealth of Networks: How Social Production Transforms Markets and Freedom. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Google Scholar Bergquist, M., and Ljungberg, J. (2001). The power of gifts: organizing social relationships in open source communities. Inform. Syst. J. 11, 305–320. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2575.2001.00111.x CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Bezroukov, N. (1999). A second look at the Cathedral and the Bazaar. First Monday 4. doi: 10.5210/fm.v4i12.708 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Brannick, T., and Coghlan, D. (2007). In defense of being native: the case for insider academic research. Organ. Res. Methods 10, 59–74. doi: 10.1177/1094428106289253 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Brown, L. (Ed.). (2009). The Nicomachean Ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar Carillo, K. D. A., Huff, S., and Chawner, B. (2014). “It's not only about writing code: an investigation of the notion of citizenship behaviors in the context of Free/Libre/Open source software communities,” in 2014 47th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (Waikoloa, HI: IEEE), 3276–3285. doi: 10.1109/HICSS.2014.406 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Castells, M. (2011). The Rise of the Network Society, Vol. 12. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons. Google Scholar Chełkowski, T., Gloor, P., and Jemielniak, D. (2016). Inequalities in open source software development: analysis of contributor's commits in Apache software foundation projects. PLoS ONE 11:e0152976. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0152976 PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Coleman, G. (2013). Coding Freedom: The Ethics and Aesthetics of Hacking. New Jersey, NJ: Princeton University Press. doi: 10.1515/9781400845293 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Crowston, K., and Howison, J. (2006). Hierarchy and centralization in free and open source software team communications. Knowl. Technol. Policy 18, 65–85. doi: 10.1007/s12130-006-1004-8 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Crowston, K., Jullien, N., and Ortega, F. (2013). “Is wikipedia inefficient? Modelling effort and participation in wikipedia,” in 46th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (Wailea, HI). doi: 10.1109/HICSS.2013.368 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Crowston, K., Wei, K., Howison, J. and Wiggins, A. (2012). Free/Libre open-source software development: what we know and what we do not know. ACM Comput. Sur. 44:7. doi: 10.1145/2089125.2089127 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar De Filippi, P., and Hassan, S. (2015). “Measuring value in commons-based ecosystem: bridging the gap between the commons and the market,” in MoneyLab Reader, INC Reader, eds G. Lovink and N. Tkacz (Amsterdam: Institute of Network Cultures, University of Warwick), 74–91. Google Scholar de Joode, R., and Egyedi, T. (2005). Handling variety: the tension between adaptability and interoperability of open source software. Comput. Standards Interfaces 28, 109–121. doi: 10.1016/j.csi.2004.12.004 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Dempsey, B., Weiss, D., Jones, P., and Greenberg, J. (2002). Who is an open source software developer? Commun. ACM 45, 67–72. doi: 10.1145/503124.503125 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Drupal Association (2014). The Drupal Association: Coming of Age. Available online at: https://assoc.drupal.org/node/709 (accessed July 25, 2014). Drupal.org (2014a). Contribute to Drupal.org. Available online at: https://drupal.org/contribute/drupalorg (accessed November 11, 2014). Drupal.org (2014b). Decide on the List of User Contributions to be Included on User Profiles. Available online at: https://www.drupal.org/node/2305759#comment-9004949 (accessed September 15, 2014). Drupal.org (2014c). Drupal Groups. Available online at: https://groups.drupal.org/ (accessed November 11, 2014). Drupal.org (2014d). Ways to Get Involved. Available online at: https://www.drupal.org/contribute (accessed April 30, 2014). Drupal.org (2017). Drupal. Available online at: https://drupal.org (accessed February 10, 2017). Fershtman, C., and Gandal, N. (2007). Open source software: motivation and restrictive licensing. Int. Econ. Econ. Policy 4, 209–225. doi: 10.1007/s10368-007-0086-4 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Franck, E., and Jungwirth, C. (2003). Reconciling rent-seekers and donators – the governance structure of open source. J. Manage. Govern. 7, 401–421. doi: 10.1023/A:1026261005092 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Fuster-Morell, M., Martínez, R., and Salcedo, J. L. (2016a). “Mapping the common based peer production: a crowd-sourcing experiment,” in The Internet, Policy & Politics Conference (Oxford). Fuster-Morell, M., Salcedo Maldonado, J. L., and Berlinguer, M. (2016b). “Debate about the concept of value in commons-based peer production,” in International Conference on Internet Science (Florence), 27–41. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-45982-0_3 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Gallagher, A. (2013). Ethical Principles and Procedures for Teaching and Research. Available online at: http://www.surrey.ac.uk/fhms/Ethics%20Committee/ethicsfiles/Ethical_Principles_and_Procedures.pdf (accessed June 5, 2019). Ghosh, R., Glott, A., Krieger, B., and Robles, G. (2002). Free/Libre and Open Source Software: Survey and Study. Part iv: Survey of Developers. Available online at: https://web.archive.org/web/20060715124127/http://www.infonomics.nl/FLOSS/report/index.htm (accessed June 5, 2019). Google Scholar Graeber, D. (2001). Toward an Anthropological Theory of Value: The False Coin of Our Own Dreams. London: Springer. doi: 10.1057/9780312299064 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Greenstein, S., and Nagle, F. (2014). Digital dark matter and the economic contribution of Apache. Res. Policy 43, 623–631. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2014.01.003 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Grewal, R., Lilien, G., and Mallapragada, G. (2006). Location, location, location: how network embeddedness affects project success in open source systems. Manage. Sci. 52, 1043–1056. doi: 10.1287/mnsc.1060.0550 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Gyimothy, T., Ferenc, R., and Siket, I. (2005). Empirical validation of object-oriented metrics on open source software for fault prediction. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 31, 897–910. doi: 10.1109/TSE.2005.112 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Hackman, J., and Morris, C. (1975). Group tasks, group interaction process, and group performance effectiveness: a review and proposed integration. Adv. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 8, 45–99. doi: 10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60248-8 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Haklay, M., Basiouka, S., Antoniou, V., and Ather, A. (2010). How many volunteers does it take to map an area well? The validity of Linus' law to volunteered geographic information. Cartograph. J. 47, 315–322. doi: 10.1179/000870410X12911304958827 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Hardt, M., and Negri, A. (2001). Empire. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. doi: 10.2307/j.ctvjnrw54 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Howison, J., and Crowston, K. (2014). Collaboration through open superposition: a theory of the open source way. MIS Q. 38, 29–50. doi: 10.25300/MISQ/2014/38.1.02 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Ilgen, D. R., Hollenbeck, J. R., Johnson, M., and Jundt, D. (2005). Teams in organizations: from input-process-output models to IMOI models. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 56, 517–543. doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.56.091103.070250 PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Jemielniak, D. (2014). Common Knowledge? An Ethnography of Wikipedia. Stanford University Press. doi: 10.1515/9780804791205 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Kittur, A., Chi, E., Pendleton, B. A., Suh, B., and Mytkowicz, T. (2007). “Power of the few vs. wisdom of the crowd: Wikipedia and the rise of the bourgeoisie,” in Proceedings of the 25th Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI 2007). Google Scholar Koch, S., and Schneider, G. (2002). Effort, co-operation and co-ordination in an open source software project: GNOME. Inform. Syst. J. 12, 27–42. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2575.2002.00110.x CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Kostakis, V. (2010). Peer governance and Wikipedia: identifying and understanding the problems of Wikipedia's governance. First Monday 15. doi: 10.5210/fm.v15i3.2613 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Krogh, G., and Von Hippel, E. (2006). The promise of research on open source software. Manage. Sci. 52, 975–983. doi: 10.1287/mnsc.1060.0560 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Lakhani, K., and Von Hippel, E. (2004). “How open source software works:free user-to-user assistance,” in Produktentwicklung mit virtuellen Communities (New York, NY: Springer). doi: 10.1007/978-3-322-84540-5_13 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Lakhani, K., and Wolf, R. (2003). Why Hackers Do What They Do: Understanding Motivation and Effort in Free/Open Source Software Projects. MIT Sloan working paper No. 4425–03 (New York, NY: SSRN). doi: 10.2139/ssrn.443040 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Lerner, J., and Tirole, J. (2002). Some simple economics of open source. J. Ind. Econ. 50, 197–234. doi: 10.1111/1467-6451.00174 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Linebaugh, P. (2008). The Magna Carta Manifesto: Liberties and Commons for All. University of California Press. doi: 10.1525/9780520932708 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Luthiger, B. (2005). “Fun and software development,” in Proceedings of the First International Conference on Open Source Systems (Genova). Google Scholar MacCormack, A., Rusnak, J., and Baldwin, C. Y. (2006). Exploring the structure of complex software designs: an empirical study of open source and proprietary code. Manage. Sci. 52, 1015–1030. doi: 10.1287/mnsc.1060.0552 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Markham, A., and Buchanan, E. (2012). Ethical Decision-Making and Internet Research: Recommendations From the AoIR Ethics Working Committee. Available online at: http://aoir.org/reports/ethics2.pdf (accessed June 5, 2019). Marlow, J., Dabbish, L., and Herbsleb, J. (2013). “Impression formation in online peer production: activity traces and personal profiles in github,” in Proceedings of the 2013 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (San Antonio, TX). doi: 10.1145/2441776.2441792 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Marx, K., and Engels, F. (1990). Capital: A Critique of Political Economy, Vol. 1. Harmondsworth: Penguin. Google Scholar Mason, J. (2002). Qualitative Researching. London: Sage. Google Scholar Matei, S. A., and Bruno, R. J. (2015). Pareto's 80/20 law and social differentiation: a social entropy perspective. Public Relat. Rev. 41, 178–186. doi: 10.1016/j.pubrev.2014.11.006 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Mateos-García, J., and Steinmueller, W. E. (2008). The institutions of open source software: examining the Debian community. Inform. Econ. Policy 20, 333–344. doi: 10.1016/j.infoecopol.2008.06.001 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Neis, P., and Zipf, A. (2012). Analyzing the contributor activity of a volunteered geographic information project – the case of OpenStreetMap. ISPRS Int. J. Geoinform. 1, 146–165. doi: 10.3390/ijgi1020146 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Nordin, D. (2014). Motivation and Collaboration in an Open Source Project: A Qualitative Study of the Drupal Community. Waltham, MA: Bentley University. Palys, T. (2008). “Purposive sampling,” in The Sage Encyclopedia of Qualitative Research Methods, Vol. 2, ed L. M. Given (Los Angeles, CA: Sage), 697–698. Pazaitis, A., De Filippi, P., and Kostakis, V. (2017). Blockchain and value systems in the sharing economy: the illustrative case of backfeed. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 125, 105–115. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2017.05.025 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Robbins, C. A., Korkmaz, G., Calderón, J. B. S., Chen, D., Kelling, C., Shipp, S., et al. (2018). “Open source software as intangible capital: measuring the cost and impact of free digital tools,” in Paper From 6th IMF Statistical Forum on Measuring Economic Welfare in the Digital Age: What and How (Washington, DC), 19–20. Google Scholar Roberts, J. A., Hann, I. H., and Slaughter, S. A. (2006). Understanding the motivations, participation, and performance of open source software developers: a longitudinal study of the Apache projects. Manage. Sci. 52, 984–999. doi: 10.1287/mnsc.1060.0554 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Robertson, H. M., and Taylor, W. L. (1957). Adam Smith's approach to the theory of value. Econ. J. 67, 181–198. doi: 10.2307/2227781 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Robles, G., González-Barahona, J. M., and Michlmayr, M. (2005). “Evolution of volunteer participation in libre software projects: evidence from Debian,” in Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Open Source Systems (Genoa). Google Scholar Rozas, D. (2017). Self-organisation in commons-based peer production. drupal: ‘the drop is always moving’ (Doctoral thesis), University of Surrey, California. Available online at: http://epubs.surrey.ac.uk/845121/ (accessed June 5, 2019). Google Scholar Rozas, D., and Huckle, S. (2021). Loosen control without losing control: formalization and decentralization within commons-based peer production. J. Assoc. Inform. Sci. Technol. 72, 204–223. doi: 10.1002/asi.24393 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Rozas, D., Tenorio-Fornés, A., Díaz-Molina, S., and Hassan, S. (2021). When Ostrom Meets Blockchain: Exploring the Potentials of Blockchain for Commons Governance. Sage Open. Samoladas, I., Stamelos, I., Angelis, L., and Oikonomou, A. (2004). Open source software development should strive for even greater code maintainability. Commun. ACM 47, 83–87. doi: 10.1145/1022594.1022598 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Shaikh, M., and Henfridsson, O. (2017). Governing open source software through coordination processes. Inform. Organ. 27, 116–135. doi: 10.1016/j.infoandorg.2017.04.001 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Sims, J. (2013). Interactive Engagement With an Open Source Community: A Study of the Relationships Between Organizations and an Open Source Software Community. Austin, TX: University of Texas. Google Scholar Stenborg, M. (2004). Explaining Open Source. Helsinki: The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy. Google Scholar Stewart, D. (2005). Social status in an open-source community. Am. Sociol. Rev. 70, 823–842. doi: 10.1177/000312240507000505 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Txoler, P. (2014). “Making the third industrial revolution,” in FabLab: Of Machines, Makers and Inventors, eds J. Walter-Herrmann, and C. Büching (Bielefeld: Transcript Verlag), 181–194. Google Scholar Viégas, F. B., Wattenberg, M., and McKeon, M. M. (2007). “The hidden order of Wikipedia,” in Online Communities and Social Computing: Second International Conference, OCSC 2007, Held as Part of HCI International 2007 (Beijing), 445–454. doi: 10.1007/978-3-540-73257-0_49 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Wittel, A. (2013). Counter-commodification: the economy of contribution in the digital commons. Cult. Organ. 19, 325, 327–328. doi: 10.1080/14759551.2013.827422 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Zilouchian-Moghaddam, R., Twidale, M., and Bongen, K. (2011). “Open source interface politics: identity, acceptance, trust, and lobbying,” in CHI'11 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Vancouver, CA). doi: 10.1145/1979742.1979835 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar
URI
https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14352/7933
Collections
Artículos