Understanding the low inter-rater agreement on aggressiveness on the Linux Kernel Mailing List

IF 3.7 2区计算机科学 Q1 COMPUTER SCIENCE, SOFTWARE ENGINEERING

Journal of Systems and Software Pub Date : 2025-01-15 DOI:10.1016/j.jss.2025.112339

Thomas Bock , Niklas Schneider , Angelika Schmid , Sven Apel , Janet Siegmund

{"title":"Understanding the low inter-rater agreement on aggressiveness on the Linux Kernel Mailing List","authors":"Thomas Bock , Niklas Schneider , Angelika Schmid , Sven Apel , Janet Siegmund","doi":"10.1016/j.jss.2025.112339","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Communication among software developers plays an essential role in open-source software (OSS) projects. Not unexpectedly, previous studies have shown that the conversational tone and, in particular, aggressiveness influence the participation of developers in OSS projects. Therefore, we aimed at studying aggressive communication behavior on the Linux Kernel Mailing List (LKML), which is known for aggressive e-mails of some of its contributors. To that aim, we attempted to assess the extent of aggressiveness of 720 e-mails from the LKML with a human annotation study, involving multiple annotators, to select a suitable sentiment analysis tool.</div><div>The results of our annotation study revealed that there is substantial disagreement, even among humans, which uncovers a deeper methodological challenge of studying aggressiveness in the software-engineering domain. Adjusting our focus, we dug deeper and investigated why the agreement among humans is generally low, based on manual investigations of ambiguously rated e-mails. Our results illustrate that human perception is individual and context dependent, especially when it comes to technical content. Thus, when identifying aggressiveness in software-engineering texts, it is not sufficient to rely on aggregated measures of human annotations. Hence, sentiment analysis tools specifically trained on human-annotated data do not necessarily match human perception of aggressiveness, and corresponding results need to be taken with a grain of salt. By reporting our results and experience, we aim at confirming and raising additional awareness of this methodological challenge when studying aggressiveness (and sentiment, in general) in the software-engineering domain.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":51099,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Systems and Software","volume":"222 ","pages":"Article 112339"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Systems and Software","FirstCategoryId":"94","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016412122500007X","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"计算机科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, SOFTWARE ENGINEERING","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Communication among software developers plays an essential role in open-source software (OSS) projects. Not unexpectedly, previous studies have shown that the conversational tone and, in particular, aggressiveness influence the participation of developers in OSS projects. Therefore, we aimed at studying aggressive communication behavior on the Linux Kernel Mailing List (LKML), which is known for aggressive e-mails of some of its contributors. To that aim, we attempted to assess the extent of aggressiveness of 720 e-mails from the LKML with a human annotation study, involving multiple annotators, to select a suitable sentiment analysis tool.

The results of our annotation study revealed that there is substantial disagreement, even among humans, which uncovers a deeper methodological challenge of studying aggressiveness in the software-engineering domain. Adjusting our focus, we dug deeper and investigated why the agreement among humans is generally low, based on manual investigations of ambiguously rated e-mails. Our results illustrate that human perception is individual and context dependent, especially when it comes to technical content. Thus, when identifying aggressiveness in software-engineering texts, it is not sufficient to rely on aggregated measures of human annotations. Hence, sentiment analysis tools specifically trained on human-annotated data do not necessarily match human perception of aggressiveness, and corresponding results need to be taken with a grain of salt. By reporting our results and experience, we aim at confirming and raising additional awareness of this methodological challenge when studying aggressiveness (and sentiment, in general) in the software-engineering domain.

查看原文本刊更多论文

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Journal of Systems and Software 工程技术-计算机：理论方法

CiteScore

8.60

自引率

5.70%

发文量

193

审稿时长

16 weeks

期刊介绍： The Journal of Systems and Software publishes papers covering all aspects of software engineering and related hardware-software-systems issues. All articles should include a validation of the idea presented, e.g. through case studies, experiments, or systematic comparisons with other approaches already in practice. Topics of interest include, but are not limited to: •Methods and tools for, and empirical studies on, software requirements, design, architecture, verification and validation, maintenance and evolution •Agile, model-driven, service-oriented, open source and global software development •Approaches for mobile, multiprocessing, real-time, distributed, cloud-based, dependable and virtualized systems •Human factors and management concerns of software development •Data management and big data issues of software systems •Metrics and evaluation, data mining of software development resources •Business and economic aspects of software development processes The journal welcomes state-of-the-art surveys and reports of practical experience for all of these topics.