Engineering Gender-Inclusivity into Software: Ten Teams' Tales from the Trenches

Although the need for gender-inclusivity in software is gaining attention among SE researchers and SE practitioners, and at least one method (GenderMag) has been published to help, little has been reported on how to make such methods work in real-world settings. Real-world teams are ever-mindful of the practicalities of adding new methods on top of their existing processes. For example, how can they keep the time costs viable? How can they maximize impacts of using it? What about controversies that can arise in talking about gender? To find out how software teams “in the trenches” handle these and similar questions, we collected the GenderMag-based processes of 10 real-world software teams—more than 50 people—for periods ranging from 5 months to 3.5 years. We present these teams' insights and experiences in the form of 9 practices, 2 potential pitfalls, and 2 open issues, so as to provide their insights to other real-world software teams trying to engineer gender-inclusivity into their software products.

[1]  Philip J. Guo,et al.  Paradise unplugged: identifying barriers for female participation on stack overflow , 2016, SIGSOFT FSE.

[2]  Nicola Marsden,et al.  Cognitive walkthrough of a learning management system with gendered personas , 2018, GenderIT.

[3]  Gillian R. Hayes.  Knowing by Doing: Action Research as an Approach to HCI , 2014, Ways of Knowing in HCI.

[4]  Gemma Catolino,et al.  Gender Diversity and Women in Software Teams: How Do They Affect Community Smells? , 2019, 2019 IEEE/ACM 41st International Conference on Software Engineering: Software Engineering in Society (ICSE-SEIS).

[5]  Margaret M. Burnett,et al.  Gender in Open Source Software: What the Tools Tell , 2018, 2018 IEEE/ACM 1st International Workshop on Gender Equality in Software Engineering (GE).

[6]  Margaret M. Burnett,et al.  GenderMag experiences in the field: The whole, the parts, and the workload , 2016, 2016 IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing (VL/HCC).

[7]  Gregorio Robles,et al.  OpenStack Gender Diversity Report , 2019, IEEE Software.

[8]  Cathleen Wharton,et al.  The cognitive walkthrough method: a practitioner's guide , 1994 .

[9]  G. Charness,et al.  Strong Evidence for Gender Differences in Risk Taking , 2012 .

[10]  Austin Henderson,et al.  Interaction design: beyond human-computer interaction , 2002, UBIQ.

[11]  Catarina Gralha,et al.  Analysing Gender Differences in Building Social Goal Models: A Quasi-Experiment , 2019, 2019 IEEE 27th International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE).

[12]  David M. Nichols,et al.  Supporting Gender-Neutral Digital Library Creation: A Case Study Using the GenderMag Toolkit , 2016, ICADL.

[13]  Chris Parnin,et al.  Someone like me: How does peer parity influence participation of women on stack overflow? , 2017, 2017 IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing (VL/HCC).

[14]  Emerson R. Murphy-Hill,et al.  Investigating the Effects of Gender Bias on GitHub , 2019, 2019 IEEE/ACM 41st International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE).

[15]  Simone Stumpf,et al.  From GenderMag to InclusiveMag: An Inclusive Design Meta-Method , 2019, 2019 IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing (VL/HCC).

[16]  GurungAnil,et al.  Role of gender, self-efficacy, anxiety and testing formats in learning spreadsheets , 2013 .

[17]  Christophe Kolski,et al.  State of the Art on the Cognitive Walkthrough Method, Its Variants and Evolutions , 2010, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact..

[18]  Claes Wohlin,et al.  Experimentation in software engineering: an introduction , 2000 .

[19]  Margaret M. Burnett,et al.  GenderMag: A Method for Evaluating Software's Gender Inclusiveness , 2016, Interact. Comput..

[20]  Jonas Hallström,et al.  Gender and technology in free play in Swedish early childhood education , 2015 .

[21]  Jeffrey C. Carver,et al.  FLOSS Participants' Perceptions About Gender and Inclusiveness: A Survey , 2019, 2019 IEEE/ACM 41st International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE).

[22]  Joan Meyers-Levy,et al.  Revisiting gender differences: What we know and what lies ahead☆ , 2015 .

[23]  Richard E. Ladner,et al.  AccessComputing Promotes Teaching Accessibility , 2016, Inroads.

[24]  Kazi Zakia Sultana,et al.  Diversity and Inclusion in Open Source Software (OSS) Projects: Where Do We Stand? , 2019, 2019 ACM/IEEE International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement (ESEM).

[25]  Margaret M. Burnett,et al.  Gender pluralism in problem-solving software , 2011, Interact. Comput..

[26]  K. Lewin,et al.  Group decision and social change. , 1999 .

[27]  Gary Charness,et al.  Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization , 2022 .

[28]  A. Falk,et al.  Individual Risk Attitudes: Measurement, Determinants and Behavioral Consequences , 2009 .

[29]  Gayna Williams,et al.  Are you sure your software is gender-neutral? , 2014, INTR.

[30]  Kazi Zakia Sultana,et al.  Expressions of Sentiments during Code Reviews: Male vs. Female , 2018, 2019 IEEE 26th International Conference on Software Analysis, Evolution and Reengineering (SANER).

[31]  Premkumar T. Devanbu,et al.  Gender and Tenure Diversity in GitHub Teams , 2015, CHI.

[32]  Yi Wang,et al.  Competence-Confidence Gap: A Threat to Female Developers' Contribution on GitHub , 2018, 2018 IEEE/ACM 40th International Conference on Software Engineering: Software Engineering in Society (ICSE-SEIS).

[33]  Dawn Nafus,et al.  ‘Patches don’t have gender’: What is not open in open source software , 2012, New Media Soc..

[34]  Margaret M. Burnett,et al.  Open Source Barriers to Entry, Revisited: A Sociotechnical Perspective , 2018, 2018 IEEE/ACM 40th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE).

[35]  Jacques Nantel,et al.  Uncovering the Nature of Information Processing of Men and Women Online: The Comparison of Two Models Using the Think-Aloud Method , 2012, J. Theor. Appl. Electron. Commer. Res..

[36]  Rick Spencer,et al.  The streamlined cognitive walkthrough method, working around social constraints encountered in a software development company , 2000, CHI.

[37]  Margaret Burnett,et al.  From Gender Biases to Gender-Inclusive Design: An Empirical Investigation , 2019, CHI.

[38]  Anil Singh,et al.  Role of gender, self-efficacy, anxiety and testing formats in learning spreadsheets , 2013, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[39]  Margaret M. Burnett,et al.  Pedagogical Content Knowledge for Teaching Inclusive Design , 2018, ICER.

[40]  Yvonne Rogers,et al.  Interaction Design: Beyond Human-Computer Interaction , 2002 .

[41]  Emerson R. Murphy-Hill,et al.  Gender bias in open source: Pull request acceptance of women versus men , 2016, PeerJ Prepr..

[42]  Margaret M. Burnett,et al.  Tinkering and gender in end-user programmers' debugging , 2006, CHI.

[43]  Margaret M. Burnett,et al.  Gender HCl and microsoft: Highlights from a longitudinal study , 2017, 2017 IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing (VL/HCC).

[44]  Margaret M. Burnett,et al.  Finding Gender-Inclusiveness Software Issues with GenderMag: A Field Investigation , 2016, CHI.

[45]  Mary Czerwinski,et al.  Gender differences and programming environments: across programming populations , 2010, ESEM '10.

[46]  Eric Gilbert,et al.  Specialization, homophily, and gender in a social curation site: findings from pinterest , 2014, CSCW.