Toward the use of blog articles as a source of evidence for software engineering research

A. Williams, A. Rainer
{"title":"Toward the use of blog articles as a source of evidence for software engineering research","authors":"A. Williams, A. Rainer","doi":"10.1145/3084226.3084268","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Blog articles have potential value as a source of practitioner-generated evidence to complement already accepted sources of evidence in software engineering research e.g. interviews and surveys. To be valuable to research, a method for extracting the high quality articles from the vast quantity available needs to be developed. Objective: To better define the benefits and challenges, scope the problem, develop a set of criteria for evaluating blog articles to be used in the method, and propose research questions. Method: We conducted a two-phase pilot study, using a preliminary set of criteria, to explore the challenges of classifying blog articles. We analyse credibility criteria that have been used in previous research, and cross reference those criteria with previous research in evidence-based software engineering. Results: Based on our analysis, we decide that blog articles need to be rigorous, relevant, well written and experience based for them to be considered credible to researchers. Conclusion: Our work provides an overview of the problem domain, as well as presenting criteria and suggested measurements for these criteria. These can be used by others to find blog articles of potential value to their research.","PeriodicalId":192290,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-06-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"13","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3084226.3084268","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 13

Abstract

Background: Blog articles have potential value as a source of practitioner-generated evidence to complement already accepted sources of evidence in software engineering research e.g. interviews and surveys. To be valuable to research, a method for extracting the high quality articles from the vast quantity available needs to be developed. Objective: To better define the benefits and challenges, scope the problem, develop a set of criteria for evaluating blog articles to be used in the method, and propose research questions. Method: We conducted a two-phase pilot study, using a preliminary set of criteria, to explore the challenges of classifying blog articles. We analyse credibility criteria that have been used in previous research, and cross reference those criteria with previous research in evidence-based software engineering. Results: Based on our analysis, we decide that blog articles need to be rigorous, relevant, well written and experience based for them to be considered credible to researchers. Conclusion: Our work provides an overview of the problem domain, as well as presenting criteria and suggested measurements for these criteria. These can be used by others to find blog articles of potential value to their research.
将博客文章作为软件工程研究的证据来源
背景:博客文章具有潜在的价值,可以作为实践者生成证据的来源,以补充软件工程研究中已被接受的证据来源,例如访谈和调查。为了使研究有价值,需要开发一种从大量可用文章中提取高质量文章的方法。目的:为了更好地定义的好处和挑战,范围的问题,制定一套标准,评估博客文章将在该方法中使用,并提出研究问题。方法:我们进行了一个两阶段的试点研究,使用一套初步的标准,探索分类博客文章的挑战。我们分析了以前研究中使用的可信度标准,并将这些标准与以前在循证软件工程中的研究交叉参考。结果:根据我们的分析,我们认为博客文章需要严谨、相关、写得好、基于经验,才能被研究人员认为是可信的。结论:我们的工作提供了问题领域的概述,以及提出的标准和这些标准的建议度量。这些可以被其他人用来寻找对他们的研究有潜在价值的博客文章。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信