关于堆栈溢出的众包知识:一个系统的映射研究

Sarah Meldrum, Sherlock A. Licorish, Bastin Tony Roy Savarimuthu
{"title":"关于堆栈溢出的众包知识:一个系统的映射研究","authors":"Sarah Meldrum, Sherlock A. Licorish, Bastin Tony Roy Savarimuthu","doi":"10.1145/3084226.3084267","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Platforms such as Stack Overflow are available for software practitioners to solicit help and solutions to their challenges and knowledge needs. This community's practices have in recent times however caused quality-related concerns. Academic work tends to provide validation for the practice and processes of these forums, however, previous work did not review the scale of scientific attention that is given to this cause. We conducted a Systematic Mapping study involving 266 papers from six relevant databases to address this gap. In this preliminary work we explored the level of academic interest Stack Overflow has generated, the publication venues, the topics studied and approaches used. Outcomes show that Stack Overflow has attracted increasing research interest, with topics relating to both community dynamics and human factors, and technical issues. In addition, research studies have been largely evaluative or proposed solutions, though this latter approach tends to lack validation. This signals the need for future work to explore the nature of Stack Overflow research contributions that are provided, and their quality. We outline our research agenda for continuing with such efforts.","PeriodicalId":192290,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering","volume":"17 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-06-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"33","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Crowdsourced Knowledge on Stack Overflow: A Systematic Mapping Study\",\"authors\":\"Sarah Meldrum, Sherlock A. Licorish, Bastin Tony Roy Savarimuthu\",\"doi\":\"10.1145/3084226.3084267\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Platforms such as Stack Overflow are available for software practitioners to solicit help and solutions to their challenges and knowledge needs. This community's practices have in recent times however caused quality-related concerns. Academic work tends to provide validation for the practice and processes of these forums, however, previous work did not review the scale of scientific attention that is given to this cause. We conducted a Systematic Mapping study involving 266 papers from six relevant databases to address this gap. In this preliminary work we explored the level of academic interest Stack Overflow has generated, the publication venues, the topics studied and approaches used. Outcomes show that Stack Overflow has attracted increasing research interest, with topics relating to both community dynamics and human factors, and technical issues. In addition, research studies have been largely evaluative or proposed solutions, though this latter approach tends to lack validation. This signals the need for future work to explore the nature of Stack Overflow research contributions that are provided, and their quality. We outline our research agenda for continuing with such efforts.\",\"PeriodicalId\":192290,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering\",\"volume\":\"17 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-06-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"33\",\"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/10.1145/3084226.3084267\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3084226.3084267","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 33

摘要

软件从业者可以使用Stack Overflow这样的平台来寻求帮助和解决方案,以应对他们的挑战和知识需求。然而,这个社区的做法最近引起了与质量相关的关注。学术工作倾向于为这些论坛的实践和过程提供验证,然而,以前的工作并没有审查对这一原因给予的科学关注的规模。为了解决这一差距,我们进行了一项系统测绘研究,涉及来自六个相关数据库的266篇论文。在这项初步工作中,我们探讨了Stack Overflow产生的学术兴趣水平、出版场所、研究主题和使用的方法。结果表明,Stack Overflow引起了越来越多的研究兴趣,其主题涉及社区动态和人为因素以及技术问题。此外,研究主要是评估或提出解决方案,尽管后一种方法往往缺乏验证。这表明未来的工作需要探索所提供的堆栈溢出研究贡献的性质及其质量。我们概述了继续进行这种努力的研究议程。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Crowdsourced Knowledge on Stack Overflow: A Systematic Mapping Study
Platforms such as Stack Overflow are available for software practitioners to solicit help and solutions to their challenges and knowledge needs. This community's practices have in recent times however caused quality-related concerns. Academic work tends to provide validation for the practice and processes of these forums, however, previous work did not review the scale of scientific attention that is given to this cause. We conducted a Systematic Mapping study involving 266 papers from six relevant databases to address this gap. In this preliminary work we explored the level of academic interest Stack Overflow has generated, the publication venues, the topics studied and approaches used. Outcomes show that Stack Overflow has attracted increasing research interest, with topics relating to both community dynamics and human factors, and technical issues. In addition, research studies have been largely evaluative or proposed solutions, though this latter approach tends to lack validation. This signals the need for future work to explore the nature of Stack Overflow research contributions that are provided, and their quality. We outline our research agenda for continuing with such efforts.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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