Question Quality in Community Question Answering Forums:A survey

Community Question Answering websites (CQA) offer a new opportunity for users to provide, search and share knowledge. Although the idea of receiving a direct, targeted response to a question sounds very attractive, the quality of the question itself can have an important effect on the likelihood of getting useful answers. High quality questions improve the CQA experience and therefore it is essential for CQA forums to better understand what characterizes questions that are more appealing for the forum community. In this survey, we review existing research on question quality in CQA websites. We discuss the possible measures of question quality and the question features that have been shown to influence question quality

EFFECTS OF LABEL USAGE ON QUESTION LIFECYCLE IN Q&A COMMUNITY

Community question answering (CQA) sites have developed into vast collections of valuable knowledge. Questions, as CQA’s central component, go through several phases after they are posted, which are often referred to as the questions’ lifecycle or questions’ lifespan. Different questions have different lifecycles, which are closely linked to the topics of the questions that can be determined by their attached labels. We conduct an empirical analysis based on the dynamic panel data of a Q&A website and propose a framework for explaining the time sensitivity of topic labels. By applying a Discrete Fourier Transform and a Knee point detection method, we demonstrate the existence of three broad label clusters based on their recurring features and four common question lifecycle patterns. We further prove that the lifecycles of questions in disparate clusters vary significantly. The findings support our hypothesis that questions with more time-sensitive labels are more likely to hit their saturation point sooner than questions with less time-sensitive labels. The research results could be applied for better CQA interface design and more efficient digital resources management

Holistic recommender systems for software engineering

The knowledge possessed by developers is often not sufficient to overcome a programming problem. Short of talking to teammates, when available, developers often gather additional knowledge from development artifacts (e.g., project documentation), as well as online resources. The web has become an essential component in the modern developer’s daily life, providing a plethora of information from sources like forums, tutorials, Q&A websites, API documentation, and even video tutorials. Recommender Systems for Software Engineering (RSSE) provide developers with assistance to navigate the information space, automatically suggest useful items, and reduce the time required to locate the needed information. Current RSSEs consider development artifacts as containers of homogeneous information in form of pure text. However, text is a means to represent heterogeneous information provided by, for example, natural language, source code, interchange formats (e.g., XML, JSON), and stack traces. Interpreting the information from a pure textual point of view misses the intrinsic heterogeneity of the artifacts, thus leading to a reductionist approach. We propose the concept of Holistic Recommender Systems for Software Engineering (H-RSSE), i.e., RSSEs that go beyond the textual interpretation of the information contained in development artifacts. Our thesis is that modeling and aggregating information in a holistic fashion enables novel and advanced analyses of development artifacts. To validate our thesis we developed a framework to extract, model and analyze information contained in development artifacts in a reusable meta- information model. We show how RSSEs benefit from a meta-information model, since it enables customized and novel analyses built on top of our framework. The information can be thus reinterpreted from an holistic point of view, preserving its multi-dimensionality, and opening the path towards the concept of holistic recommender systems for software engineering

Gender Differences in Participation and Reward on Stack Overflow

Programming is a valuable skill in the labor market, making the underrepresentation of women in computing an increasingly important issue. Online question and answer platforms serve a dual purpose in this field: they form a body of knowledge useful as a reference and learning tool, and they provide opportunities for individuals to demonstrate credible, verifiable expertise. Issues, such as male-oriented site design or overrepresentation of men among the site's elite may therefore compound the issue of women's underrepresentation in IT. In this paper we audit the differences in behavior and outcomes between men and women on Stack Overflow, the most popular of these Q&A sites. We observe significant differences in how men and women participate in the platform and how successful they are. For example, the average woman has roughly half of the reputation points, the primary measure of success on the site, of the average man. Using an Oaxaca-Blinder decomposition, an econometric technique commonly applied to analyze differences in wages between groups, we find that most of the gap in success between men and women can be explained by differences in their activity on the site and differences in how these activities are rewarded. Specifically, 1) men give more answers than women and 2) are rewarded more for their answers on average, even when controlling for possible confounders such as tenure or buy-in to the site. Women ask more questions and gain more reward per question. We conclude with a hypothetical redesign of the site's scoring system based on these behavioral differences, cutting the reputation gap in half