What Pulls the Strings? Understanding the Characteristics and Role of Argumentation in Open-Source Software Usability Discussions

TL;DR

This study analyzes argumentation in open-source software usability discussions, revealing that argument quality varies and impacts participant behavior, offering insights to enhance OSS usability and community collaboration.

Contribution

It provides a comprehensive analysis of argument discourse in OSS usability discussions, highlighting the variability in argument quality and its influence on community engagement.

Findings

Usability discussions are mainly argument-driven.

Issue comments have lower argument quality than posts.

Argument discourse affects participant behavior.

Abstract

The usability of open-source software (OSS) is important but frequently overlooked in favor of technical and functional complexity. Argumentation can be a pivotal device for diverse stakeholders in OSS usability discussions to express opinions and persuade others. However, the characteristics of argument discourse in those discussions remain unknown, resulting in difficulties in providing effective support for discussion participants. We address this through a comprehensive analysis of argument discourse and quality in five OSS projects. Our results indicated that usability discussions are predominantly argument-driven, although their qualities vary. Issue comments exhibit lower-quality arguments than the issue posts, suggesting a shortage of collective intelligence about usability in OSS communities. Moreover, argument discourse and quality have various impacts on the subsequent behavior of participants. Overall, this research offers insights to help OSS stakeholders build more effective arguments and eventually improve OSS usability. These insights can also inform studies about other distributed collaborative communities.