Endre søk
RefereraExporteraLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Referera
Referensformat
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Annet format
Fler format
Språk
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Annet språk
Fler språk
Utmatningsformat
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Empirical software engineering experts on the use of students and professionals in experiments
CalPoly, USA.
Universidad Politecnica de Madrid, ESP.
Blekinge Tekniska Högskola, Fakulteten för datavetenskaper, Institutionen för programvaruteknik.
Oulun Yliopisto, FIN.
Vise andre og tillknytning
2018 (engelsk)Inngår i: Journal of Empirical Software Engineering, ISSN 1382-3256, E-ISSN 1573-7616, Vol. 23, nr 1, s. 452-489Artikkel i tidsskrift (Fagfellevurdert) Published
Abstract [en]

[Context] Controlled experiments are an important empirical method to generate and validate theories. Many software engineering experiments are conducted with students. It is often claimed that the use of students as participants in experiments comes at the cost of low external validity while using professionals does not. [Objective] We believe a deeper understanding is needed on the external validity of software engineering experiments conducted with students or with professionals. We aim to gain insight about the pros and cons of using students and professionals in experiments. [Method] We performed an unconventional, focus group approach and a follow-up survey. First, during a session at ISERN 2014, 65 empirical researchers, including the seven authors, argued and discussed the use of students in experiments with an open mind. Afterwards, we revisited the topic and elicited experts’ opinions to foster discussions. Then we derived 14 statements and asked the ISERN attendees excluding the authors, to provide their level of agreement with the statements. Finally, we analyzed the researchers’ opinions and used the findings to further discuss the statements. [Results] Our survey results showed that, in general, the respondents disagreed with us about the drawbacks of professionals. We, on the contrary, strongly believe that no population (students, professionals, or others) can be deemed better than another in absolute terms. [Conclusion] Using students as participants remains a valid simplification of reality needed in laboratory contexts. It is an effective way to advance software engineering theories and technologies but, like any other aspect of study settings, should be carefully considered during the design, execution, interpretation, and reporting of an experiment. The key is to understand which developer population portion is being represented by the participants in an experiment. Thus, a proposal for describing experimental participants is put forward.

sted, utgiver, år, opplag, sider
Springer New York LLC , 2018. Vol. 23, nr 1, s. 452-489
Emneord [en]
Experimentation, Generalization, Participants in experiments, Subjects of experiments, Threats to validity, Education, Software engineering, Surveys, Controlled experiment, Empirical Software Engineering, External validities, Software engineering experiments, Software engineering theories, Students
HSV kategori
Identifikatorer
URN: urn:nbn:se:bth-14840DOI: 10.1007/s10664-017-9523-3ISI: 000424199400012Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85020375670OAI: oai:DiVA.org:bth-14840DiVA, id: diva2:1118952
Tilgjengelig fra: 2017-07-03 Laget: 2017-07-03 Sist oppdatert: 2018-02-16bibliografisk kontrollert

Open Access i DiVA

Fulltekst mangler i DiVA

Andre lenker

Forlagets fulltekstScopus

Personposter BETA

Wohlin, Claes

Søk i DiVA

Av forfatter/redaktør
Wohlin, Claes
Av organisasjonen
I samme tidsskrift
Journal of Empirical Software Engineering

Søk utenfor DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric

doi
urn-nbn
Totalt: 402 treff
RefereraExporteraLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Referera
Referensformat
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Annet format
Fler format
Språk
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Annet språk
Fler språk
Utmatningsformat
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf