Apples, Oranges, and Software Engineering: Study Selection Challenges for Secondary Research on Latent Variables

被引:0
作者
Wyrich, Marvin [1 ]
Baron, Marvin Munoz [2 ]
Bogner, Justus [3 ]
机构
[1] Saarland Univ, Saarbrucken, Germany
[2] Univ Stuttgart, Stuttgart, Germany
[3] Vrije Univ Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
来源
PROCEEDINGS OF THE 2024 IEEE/ACM INTERNATIONAL WORKSHOP ON METHODOLOGICAL ISSUES WITH EMPIRICAL STUDIES IN SOFTWARE ENGINEERING, WSESE 2024 | 2024年
关键词
Secondary research; concepts; constructs; unobserved variables; experience report; SYSTEMATIC LITERATURE-REVIEWS; CONSTRUCT-VALIDITY; REPLICATIONS; METAANALYSIS; TRIALS;
D O I
10.1145/3643664.3648213
中图分类号
TP31 [计算机软件];
学科分类号
081202 ; 0835 ;
摘要
Software engineering (SE) is full of abstract concepts that are crucial for both researchers and practitioners, such as programming experience, team productivity, code comprehension, and system security. Secondary studies aimed at summarizing research on the influences and consequences of such concepts would therefore be of great value. However, the inability to measure abstract concepts directly poses a challenge for secondary studies: primary studies in SE can operationalize such concepts in many ways. Standardized measurement instruments are rarely available, and even if they are, many researchers do not use them or do not even provide a definition for the studied concept. SE researchers conducting secondary studies therefore have to decide a) which primary studies intended to measure the same construct, and b) how to compare and aggregate vastly different measurements for the same construct. In this experience report, we discuss the challenge of study selection in SE secondary research on latent variables. We report on two instances where we found it particularly challenging to decide which primary studies should be included for comparison and synthesis, so as not to end up comparing apples with oranges. Our report aims to spark a conversation about developing strategies to address this issue systematically and pave the way for more efficient and rigorous secondary studies in software engineering.
引用
收藏
页码:42 / 47
页数:6
相关论文
共 48 条
  • [1] Anunciacao L., 2018, Journal for ReAttach Therapy and Developmental Diversities, V1, P44, DOI [10.26407/2018jrtdd.1.6, DOI 10.26407/2018JRTDD.1.6, 10.26407/2018JRTDD.1.6]
  • [2] Baron Marvin Munoz, 2020, P 14 ACM IEEE INT S, DOI DOI 10.1145/3382494.3410636
  • [3] Lessons from applying the systematic literature review process within the software engineering domain
    Brereton, Pearl
    Kitchenham, Barbara A.
    Budgen, David
    Turner, Mark
    Khalil, Mohamed
    [J]. JOURNAL OF SYSTEMS AND SOFTWARE, 2007, 80 (04) : 571 - 583
  • [4] Briand L., 1996, Empirical Software Engineering, V1, P61, DOI 10.1007/BF00125812
  • [5] Brown T. A., 2015, CONFIRMATORY FACTOR
  • [6] Eye Movements in Code Reading: Relaxing the Linear Order
    Busjahn, Teresa
    Bednarik, Roman
    Begel, Andrew
    Crosby, Martha
    Paterson, James H.
    Schulte, Carsten
    Sharif, Bonita
    Tamm, Sascha
    [J]. 2015 IEEE 23RD INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON PROGRAM COMPREHENSION ICPC 2015, 2015, : 255 - 265
  • [7] Carroll J. B., 2005, CONT INTELLECTUAL AS
  • [8] Replications of software engineering experiments
    Carver, Jeffrey C.
    Juristo, Natalia
    Baldassarre, Maria Teresa
    Vegas, Sira
    [J]. EMPIRICAL SOFTWARE ENGINEERING, 2014, 19 (02) : 267 - 276
  • [9] The rise of quantitative methods in psychology
    Cousineau, Denis
    [J]. TUTORIALS IN QUANTITATIVE METHODS FOR PSYCHOLOGY, 2005, 1 (01) : 1 - 3
  • [10] CONSTRUCT VALIDITY IN PSYCHOLOGICAL TESTS
    CRONBACH, LJ
    MEEHL, PE
    [J]. PSYCHOLOGICAL BULLETIN, 1955, 52 (04) : 281 - 302