If I'd have to give a personnal guess to explain it, I'd say that the common structure of OTP behaviours and applications tend to give some stricter modularity constraints to a system, on top of wrapping common behaviours under very well known patterns.
I would quite agree with this - it applies across quite a few of the results from your poll, (Importance of OTP, Time to adapt, Factors in maintenance, Knowledge of OTP, etc.)
While not a guarantee, the odds are that the more OTP-like the code, the more likely that a reasonable "Separation of Concerns" has been maintained, with "distribution" and "business logic" being somewhat distinct.
There are also a whole bunch of second-order effects that come into play - if you're using OTP, you probably spent some time figuring out how to actually accomplish the task at hand (w/ the obligatory hierarchy of gen_server, gen_fsm, and gen_event usage :-) ), etc., which definitely makes other people's lives easier if they have to live/work with your code...
Cheers
p.s. Thanks for the yeoman's work Fred!
That Tall Bald Indian Guy...