Re:New study: Software teams with more women communicate better
by itsdrewmiller on Thursday April 02, 2020 @04:51PM
(#22763654)
Here's the preprint: https://www.win.tue.nl/~aserebre/IEEESWGenderSmells-preprint...
Pro tip - you can almost always find a paper on google from one of the authors' personal sites. Or sci-hub. Or worst case, just email them.
Re:New study: Software teams with more women communicate better
by Pfhreak on Thursday April 02, 2020 @04:48PM
(#22763612)
This appears to be it: https://www.win.tue.nl/~aserebre/IEEESWGenderSmells-preprint...
Re:New study: Software teams with more women communicate better
by ghostpepper on Thursday April 02, 2020 @04:52PM
(#22763679)
Has this been proof-read? There's a grammatical error in the second sentence on the first page.
> we found [...] a strictly connection between gender diversity and communication patterns
Obviously this doesn't necessarily reflect the quality of the research but it is jarring to the reader and makes one question what else about the paper has not been checked over before publication
Re:New study: Software teams with more women communicate better
by Pfhreak on Thursday April 02, 2020 @04:55PM
(#22763715)
I'm not sure. I found it by Googling. I think, given there are several authors listed that, yes, it has been proof-read.
Generally I wouldn't consider the occasional typo to be indicative of the quality of the underlying research. Zooming in on a minor detail in an attempt to paint the paper negatively seems needlessly pedantic, but that's just my opinion.
Re:New study: Software teams with more women communicate better
by ghostpepper on Thursday April 02, 2020 @05:58PM
(#22764330)
I wasn't attempting to paint anything. Quality issues are extra-egregious when they're visible on the first page, but that's just my opinion.
Re:New study: Software teams with more women communicate better
by blululu on Thursday April 02, 2020 @04:56PM
(#22763727)
Possibly, but being charitable, this is a preprint written by someone how specializes in software engineering, and it is written in their second language.
A typo seems like a fair mistake in these circumstances.
----
For the study, the authors looked at four types of community smells:
1. Organizational Silos. Groups in the community don’t communicate with each other, except through one or two of their respective members.
2. Black Clouds. Community members are overloaded with information because communication isn’t structured well.
3. Lone Wolves. Defiant, disrespectful contributors won’t listen to others.
4. Bottlenecks. One team member wants to be the only way information moves between sub-communities.
Previous studies have shown that women are fundamental to reducing community smells and avoiding accumulating social debt for teams in other industries. But these studies show that women increase team efficiency and organizational quality on software engineering teams specifically. Teams with no women have 7 mean community smells compared to 3 for teams with at least one woman. These results are statistically significant (p-value < 0.05) and have a large effect size (d=0.68).
----