Motivation of software developers in Open Source projects: an Internet-based survey of contributors to the Linux kernel

By Guido Hertel, Sven Niedner, Stefanie Herrmann. 2003

1,446 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Communication, Computer Science Applications, Social Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/fb3d85882226dcb68b631005082a1024c7b24010

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Communication

In Computer Science Applications

In Social Psychology

Citations in the corpus

Motivation in Software Engineering: A systematic literature review (2008, background): “[87] considers whether two social science models (one focusing on voluntary action and one focusing on small teams) adequately explain OSS developers’ motivation.”
Code Reuse in Open Source Software (2008, methodology): “Developers of open source software are known to self-assign to tasks based on their preferences and ability (Benkler, 2002; Bonaccorsi and Rossi, 2003; Yamauchi, et al., 2000) and they seek a creative challenge and fun when writing software (Lakhani and Wolf, 2005; Hertel et al., 2003).”
Free revealing and the private-collective model for innovation incentives (2006, background): “The latter finding supports the earlier work by Hertel et al. (2003).”
Understanding the Motivations, Participation, and Performance of Open Source Software Developers: A Longitudinal Study of the Apache Projects (2006, background): “Indeed, empirical studies of OSS contributors find that the participants report a variety of reasons for participating in projects (Hertel et al. 2003).”
Predicting Continued Participation in Newsgroups (2006, background): “People contribute in part for extrinsic reasons: the reputation, education, and ﬁnancial compensation that sometimes results from participating in open-source development communities (Hertel, Niedner, & Herrmann, 2003; Lakhani & Hippel, 2003).”
Relationships Between Open Source Software Companies and Communities: Observations from Nordic Firms (2005, background): “Recent empirical work has shown that developers contribute as a result of both extrinsic and intrinsic sources of motivation ( Hertel et al., 2003; Hars and Ou, 2002; Lakhani et al., 2002).”
Women’s Participation in Open Source Software: A Survey of the Literature (2021, background): “Finally, an interesting case was Ideology, which was top-ranked in general surveys from the 2000s about motivation to join OSS [43, 50, 56, 64].”
Overcoming Mass Confusion: Collaborative Customer Co-Design in Online Communities (2005, background): “…code as a public good, because they can directly benefit from a customized product variant, but also due to factors of intrinsic motivation as well as the peer recognition and reputation they can gain in the community (Hars & Ou, 2002; Hertel, Niedner & Herrmann, 2003; Lakhani & von Hippel, 2000).”
Latent social structure in open source projects (2008, background): “While this is the prescribed venue for engineering discussions (due to it’s broadcast nature) [7, 22, 34, 46], we miss other potential developer interactions, such as private emails, irc channels, or discussions in bug reports.”
Selective revealing in open innovation processes: the case of embedded Linux (gekürzte Version) (2006, background): “1 See Hertel et al. (2003) and Lakhani and Wolf (2005) for empirical studies of individuals’ motives to contribute to public OSS projects.”
Defining Open Source Software Project Success (2003, background): “Scacchi (2002) examined the process of requirements engineering in open source projects and provided a comparison with traditional processes (e.g., Davis 1990; Jackson 1995).”
Challenges of open innovation: the paradox of firm investment in open‐source software (2006, positive): “Consistent with expectancy theory, empirical research (Hars and Ou, 2002; Hertel et al, 2003; Lakhani & von Hippel, 2003; Lerner and Tirole, 2002) found three classes of motivations: • direct utility, either to the individual or to one’s employer; • intrinsic benefit from the work, such as learning…”
Carrots and Rainbows: Motivation and Social Practice in Open Source Software Development (2012, background): “• Hertel et al. (2003) reported that own-use value had a significant effect on accepted patches and lines of code contributed.”
Exploring motivations for contributing to open source initiatives: The roles of contribution context and personal values (2008, background): “Do the strengths of these motivations differ across individuals? Are some people more likely to exhibit one type of motivation while others another? While the literature provides some insight into the motivations themselves (e.g. Bonaccorsi & Rossi, 2003; Bryant et al., 2005; Gu & Jarvenpaa, 2003; H”