The Neuroscience and Psychology of Open Source

Healthy open source communities are vital to the success and growth of an open source project. Those with toxic, closed communities will find it more difficult to be innovative, to attract contributors (and in some cases, users), and to keep up with expanding technologies. Because people are complex, diverse creatures, ensuring that your community is healthy, vibrant, and welcoming can be challenging.

The good news is, science can help you understand how people think and why they act the way they do. Knowing the effect your words and actions have on your fellow community members can guide the way you interact with, and shape the communities in which you're a member.

In this talk, we will discuss cognitive biases such as negativity bias, rejection sensitivity, in-group favoritism, illusion of transparency, and impostor syndrome. We will also talk about the neural and chemical affects of feeling misunderstood and disrespected, social bonding, and tribalism.

You'll come away from this talk with a better understanding of yourself and your fellow humans, an increased feeling of empathy, and the knowledge to improve personal interactions and your communities.

Transcript

1. The Neuroscience g PSYCHOLOGY of Open Source ; ;
2. What Makes Open Source Open?
3. What Makes Open Source Open? People Code g ; ;
4. What Makes Open Source Open? g S People Code g ; ;
5. How People Make Open Source: Individuals working in groups, collaborating together online.
6. How People Make Open Source individuals
7. How People Make Open Source individuals working in groups
8. How People Make Open Source individuals working in groups collaborating
9. How People Make Open Source individuals working in groups collaborating ONLINE
10. How People Make Open Source individuals S
11. Cognitive Biases (The ways in which we commonly act irrationally.1) 107 Y Y
12. #58: Negativity Bias We place more importance on negative experiences and feedback.2
13. #58: Negativity Bias Negative experiences register quicker, and they go into our long term memory faster.3
14. #58: Negativity Bias Negative experiences have a greater impact on us.4
15. #58: Negativity Bias Negative experiences adversely affect our happiness by more than 2 times over positive experiences.5
16. #58: Negativity Bias We learn faster from negative experiences.6
17. #58: Negativity Bias We have 5 times more neural networks dedicated to negative affect over positive affect.7
19. #58: Negativity Bias problem solvers Y Y
20. #58: Negativity Bias “The fundamental difference between creating and problem solving is simple. In problem solving, we seek to make something we do not like go away. In creating, we seek to make what we truly care about exist.” - Peter Senge, Systems Scientist
21. #26: Dunning-Kruger We aren’t very good at judging our own expertise.8 see also: impostor syndrome9
22. #15: Confirmation Bias We see what we want to see and we focus on what jives with our beliefs.10,11
23. #15: Confirmation Bias t Dorsolateral Prefrontal Cortex activates when irrelevant information should be filtered. Anterior Cingulate Cortex activates when something is very wrong.
24. #107: Illusion of Transparency We overestimate the ability for others to know what’s in our head, and our ability to know what’s in theirs.12, 13
25. #21: Curse of Knowledge The more we learn, the harder it is for us to empathize with beginners.14,15
26. #100: False Consensus Effect We overestimate how much people agree with us, and we assume our beliefs, habits, and values are “normal.”16
27. Rejection Sensitivity Rejection Sensitivity: The degree to which we are affected by social rejection.17
28. Rejection Sensitivity Overlapping areas of the brain become active when we experience physical pain and social rejection.18,19, 20
29. Rejection Sensitivity Our brain releases the same pain killers.18, 20
30. INDIVIDUALS It’s complicated.
31. How People Make Open Source individuals working in groups S
32. In-Group Favoritism In-group favoritism (or out-group bias) refers to our tendency to give preference to those in our group, and have negative feelings toward those who are not.21
33. In-Group Favoritism When we process information about in-group people versus out- group people, we use different parts of our brain.22
34. Tribalism When we identify so heavily with one group, we are more loyal to them than other social groups (including friends or family).23
35. Feeling Understood When we feel understood, the parts of our brain associated with reward and social connection become active.24
36. Feeling Understood When we feel misunderstood, the parts of our brain associated with negative affect become active.24
37. Feeling Understood Our attitudes toward feeling understood are moderated by our sensitivity to rejection.24
38. Belonging We are so driven to bond socially, when we change to fit the norms of our group, electrophysiological changes happen in our brains.25
39. Group Dynamics It’s complicated.
40. How People Make Open Source individuals working in groups collaborating S
41. 5 Domains of SCARF SCARF helps us understand what motivates people in groups who are working toward a common goal.26
42. 5 Domains of SCARF “The domains of SCARF all affect the extent to which a person feels threatened or rewarded in social settings, and therefore the extent to which a person is able to collaborate effectively with others.” 26
43. 5 Domains of SCARF Status Certainty Autonomy Relatedness Fairness
44. Status Status refers to people’s feeling of importance in relation to others in the group.
45. Status Research suggests that the role status plays in our interpersonal group lies in a conscious and subconscious level.27
46. Certainty Certainty refers to the known outcomes, processes, structures, goals, etc. of the group.
47. Certainty Increased certainty activates the reward and positive affect centers of the brain.28
48. Certainty Increased ambiguity (or, decreased certainty) activates the threat neural circuits of the brain.28
49. Certainty Ambiguous social situations can cause stress and anxiety (and higher levels of cortisol).29
50. Autonomy Autonomy refers to one’s feeling of control over life outcomes and events.
51. Autonomy Increased feelings of autonomy improve well-being, health, and cognitive functions.30
52. Autonomy People need either a sense of power over others, or a sense of choice. If they have neither, dissatisfaction is the result.31
53. Relatedness Relatedness refers to the sense of belonging and identification one has to the group.
54. Fairness Fairness relates to the perceived level of equality across outcomes.
55. Fairness The idea of “fairness” is emotional, not rational. It is affected by, and effects our moods and emotional state.32
56. Fairness When something is “unfair,” we will show a strong activity in the emotional and empathetic hotspot of the brain.32
57. collaborating It’s complicated.
58. How People Make Open Source individuals working in groups collaborating ONLINE S
59. Online Community Membership Lifecycle 1. Peripheral (Lurker) 2. Inbound (Novice) 3. Insider (Regular) 4. Boundary (Leader) 5. Outbound (Elder)
60. Online Community Membership Lifecycle How does SCARF relate to each group?
61. Online Disinhibition Effect What makes a troll, a troll?
62. Online Disinhibition Effect The Online Disinhibition Effect attempts to explain bad behaviors online.34, 35
63. Online Disinhibition Effect #1: You don’t know me
64. Online Disinhibition Effect #2: You can’t see me
65. Online Disinhibition Effect #3: See you later
66. Online Disinhibition Effect #4: It’s all in my head
67. Online Disinhibition Effect #5: It’s just a game
68. Online Disinhibition Effect #6: Your rules don’t apply here
69. Body Language We haven’t yet figured out an accurate percentage of communication that is non-verbal.36
70. Body Language But one could safely say that it’s nonzero.
71. ONLINE It’s complicated.
72. How People Make Open Source individuals working in groups collaborating ONLINE
73. TL;DR: There are hundreds of factors that affect how people work in open source.
74. Let’s keep our own biases and behaviors in check.
75. Let’s give each other a break. e ; ; @elizabethn
76. Resources for a Curious Mind 1.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cognitive_biases 2.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negativity_bias 3.http://www.rickhanson.net/how-your-brain-makes-you-easily-intimidated/ 4.http://www.carlsonschool.umn.edu/Assets/71516.pdf 5.http://hbr.org/2011/05/the-power-of-small-wins/ar/1 6.http://journals.lww.com/academicmedicine/Fulltext/2012/09000/ Perspective___The_Negativity_Bias,_Medical.19.aspx 7.http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/sept11/vol69/ num01/Respect%E2%80%94Where-Do-We-Start%C2%A2.aspx 8.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning-Kruger_effect 9.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impostor_syndrome 10.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias 11. http://www.wired.com/2009/12/fail_accept_defeat/all/
77. Resources for a Curious Mind 12. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illusion_of_transparency 13. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022103103000568 14. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curse_of_knowledge 15. http://www.gsigma.ufsc.br/~loss/download/km/Beyond-Knowledge %20Management.pdf 16. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_consensus_effect 17. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_rejection#Rejection_sensitivity 18. http://www.nature.com/mp/journal/v18/n11/full/mp201396a.html 19. http://www.scn.ucla.edu/pdf/Lieberman%20&%20Eisenberger %20(2008)%20Neuroleadership.pdf 20. http://socialrelations.psych.columbia.edu/images/stories/docs/ publications/(14)RS_Intimate_Relationships.pdf 21. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In-group_favoritism 22. http://rstb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/364/1521/1309 23. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tribalism
78. Resources for a Curious Mind 24. http://scan.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2014/02/14/scan.nst191.full? sid=41b7e2f1-9e94-41b2-9c14-e167d219ac76 25. http://scan.oxfordjournals.org/content/8/7/756.abstract 26. http://www.davidrock.net/files/09_SCARF_in_2012_US.pdf 27. http://pages.uoregon.edu/sanjay/pubs/poweraccuracy.pdf 28. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2723053/ 29. https://psycnet.apa.org/journals/psp/98/3/405/ 30. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20565185 31. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21705519 32. http://jom.sagepub.com/content/37/1/248.abstract 33. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20822437 34. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_disinhibition_effect 35. http://online.liebertpub.com/doi/abs/10.1089/1094931041291295 36. http://www.spring.org.uk/2007/05/busting-myth-93-of-communication- is.php