Belief & Evidence in Empirical Software Engineering

Premkumar T. Devanbu, Thomas Zimmermann, C. Bird
{"title":"Belief & Evidence in Empirical Software Engineering","authors":"Premkumar T. Devanbu, Thomas Zimmermann, C. Bird","doi":"10.1145/2884781.2884812","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Empirical software engineering has produced a steady stream of evidence-based results concerning the factors that affect important outcomes such as cost, quality, and interval. However, programmers often also have strongly-held a priori opinions about these issues. These opinions are important, since developers are highlytrained professionals whose beliefs would doubtless affect their practice. As in evidence-based medicine, disseminating empirical findings to developers is a key step in ensuring that the findings impact practice. In this paper, we describe a case study, on the prior beliefs of developers at Microsoft, and the relationship of these beliefs to actual empirical data on the projects in which these developers work. Our findings are that a) programmers do indeed have very strong beliefs on certain topics b) their beliefs are primarily formed based on personal experience, rather than on findings in empirical research and c) beliefs can vary with each project, but do not necessarily correspond with actual evidence in that project. Our findings suggest that more effort should be taken to disseminate empirical findings to developers and that more in-depth study the interplay of belief and evidence in software practice is needed.","PeriodicalId":6485,"journal":{"name":"2016 IEEE/ACM 38th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE)","volume":"2 1","pages":"108-119"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-05-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"156","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2016 IEEE/ACM 38th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/2884781.2884812","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 156

Abstract

Empirical software engineering has produced a steady stream of evidence-based results concerning the factors that affect important outcomes such as cost, quality, and interval. However, programmers often also have strongly-held a priori opinions about these issues. These opinions are important, since developers are highlytrained professionals whose beliefs would doubtless affect their practice. As in evidence-based medicine, disseminating empirical findings to developers is a key step in ensuring that the findings impact practice. In this paper, we describe a case study, on the prior beliefs of developers at Microsoft, and the relationship of these beliefs to actual empirical data on the projects in which these developers work. Our findings are that a) programmers do indeed have very strong beliefs on certain topics b) their beliefs are primarily formed based on personal experience, rather than on findings in empirical research and c) beliefs can vary with each project, but do not necessarily correspond with actual evidence in that project. Our findings suggest that more effort should be taken to disseminate empirical findings to developers and that more in-depth study the interplay of belief and evidence in software practice is needed.
实证软件工程中的信念与证据
经验软件工程已经产生了稳定的基于证据的结果流,这些结果涉及影响重要结果的因素,如成本、质量和间隔。然而,程序员也经常对这些问题持有强烈的先验观点。这些意见很重要,因为开发人员是训练有素的专业人员,他们的信念无疑会影响他们的实践。与循证医学一样,向开发人员传播经验发现是确保这些发现影响实践的关键步骤。在本文中,我们描述了一个案例研究,关于微软开发人员的先验信念,以及这些信念与这些开发人员工作的项目的实际经验数据之间的关系。我们的发现是:a)程序员确实对某些主题有非常强烈的信念;b)他们的信念主要是基于个人经验形成的,而不是基于经验研究的发现;c)信念可能随着每个项目而变化,但不一定与项目中的实际证据相对应。我们的研究结果表明,应该付出更多的努力向开发人员传播经验发现,并且需要更深入地研究软件实践中信念和证据的相互作用。
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信