一句话：用有序网络分析（ONA）刻画软件工程课程项目中四类队友的沟通模式差异，并指出早期干预的必要性。
软件工程团队的成功高度依赖有效沟通，但课程项目中学生参与度不足会导致冲突、工作量不均和学习体验下降，Couch Potato、Hitchhiker、Lone Wolf、Good Teammate 等队友类型会加剧这些问题。本文在一门软件工程测试课程项目中收集团队对话数据，采用有序网络分析（Ordered Network Analysis, ONA）比较被同伴正面评价（如 Good Teammate）与负面评价（如 Couch Potato、Hitchhiker、Lone Wolf）的学生的沟通模式。结果显示：Good Teammate 与 Couch Potato 讨论的内容相似，但前者的沟通更频繁且贯穿项目始终；Lone Wolf 很少寒暄，体现任务导向；Hitchhiker 极少实质性参与技术讨论（如 pull request），多通过寒暄互动。这些模式表明，需要通过早期干预和沟通规划来促进责任分担与有效协作。
Effective communication is vital for the success of professional software engineering (SE) teams. As SE courses teach essential industry skills like teamwork and collaboration, ensuring effective communication becomes important in student projects. However, poor engagement from team members can lead to conflicts, uneven workloads, and diminished learning experiences. Teammate types such as Couch Potatoes, who contribute minimally, and Hitchhikers, who rely on others while taking credit, exacerbate these issues. In contrast, Lone Wolves work independently, potentially isolating themselves, while Good Teammates actively collaborate and contribute fairly, driving team success. In this study, we aimed to investigate the communication patterns of teammate types such as Couch Potato, Hitchhiker, Lone Wolf, or Good Teammate during a SE testing course. We applied Ordered Network Analysis (ONA) to the conversational data of the teams to examine the distinct communication patterns of students whose contributions were either perceived positively (e.g., Good Teammates) or negatively (e.g., Couch Potato, Hitchhiker, Lone Wolf) by their peers. The findings reveal distinct communication behaviors across teammate types. While Good Teammates and Couch Potatoes discussed similar content, Good Teammates communicated more frequently and consistently throughout the project. Lone Wolves seldom engaged in pleasantries, reflecting a task-focused approach, whereas Hitchhikers rarely contributed substantively to technical discussions, such as pull requests, often interacted through pleasantries. These patterns emphasize the need for early interventions and communication planning to promote accountability balance and effective student collaboration during class projects.
@inproceedings{LutherNCM0T25,
title = {Analyzing the Communication Patterns of Different Teammate Types in a Software Engineering Course Project},
author = {Yanye Luther and Lindsey Nielsen and Logan Cadman and Marcia Moraes and Sudipto Ghosh and Bianca Trinkenreich},
booktitle = {FSE},
year = {2025},
doi = {10.1145/3696630.3727232}
}