Jürgen Börstler , Nauman bin Ali , Kai Petersen , Emelie Engström
{"title":"软件工程中的接受行为理论和模型--映射研究","authors":"Jürgen Börstler , Nauman bin Ali , Kai Petersen , Emelie Engström","doi":"10.1016/j.infsof.2024.107469","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Context:</h3><p>The adoption or acceptance of new technologies or ways of working in software development activities is a recurrent topic in the software engineering literature. The topic has, therefore, been empirically investigated extensively. It is, however, unclear which theoretical frames of reference are used in this research to explain acceptance behaviors.</p></div><div><h3>Objective:</h3><p>In this study, we explore how major theories and models of acceptance behavior have been used in the software engineering literature to empirically investigate acceptance behavior.</p></div><div><h3>Method:</h3><p>We conduct a systematic mapping study of empirical studies using acceptance behavior theories in software engineering.</p></div><div><h3>Results:</h3><p>We identified 47 primary studies covering 56 theory uses. The theories were categorized into six groups. Technology acceptance models (TAM and its extensions) were used in 29 of the 47 primary studies, innovation theories in 10, and the theories of planned behavior/ reasoned action (TPB/TRA) in six. All other theories were used in at most two of the primary studies. The usage and operationalization of the theories were, in many cases, inconsistent with the underlying theories. Furthermore, we identified 77 constructs used by these studies of which many lack clear definitions.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions:</h3><p>Our results show that software engineering researchers are aware of some of the leading theories and models of acceptance behavior, which indicates an attempt to have more theoretical foundations. However, we identified issues related to theory usage that make it difficult to aggregate and synthesize results across studies. We propose mitigation actions that encourage the consistent use of theories and emphasize the measurement of key constructs.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":54983,"journal":{"name":"Information and Software Technology","volume":"172 ","pages":"Article 107469"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0950584924000740/pdfft?md5=2b39458871e60592c3bd5ed7e83cf658&pid=1-s2.0-S0950584924000740-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Acceptance behavior theories and models in software engineering — A mapping study\",\"authors\":\"Jürgen Börstler , Nauman bin Ali , Kai Petersen , Emelie Engström\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.infsof.2024.107469\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Context:</h3><p>The adoption or acceptance of new technologies or ways of working in software development activities is a recurrent topic in the software engineering literature. The topic has, therefore, been empirically investigated extensively. It is, however, unclear which theoretical frames of reference are used in this research to explain acceptance behaviors.</p></div><div><h3>Objective:</h3><p>In this study, we explore how major theories and models of acceptance behavior have been used in the software engineering literature to empirically investigate acceptance behavior.</p></div><div><h3>Method:</h3><p>We conduct a systematic mapping study of empirical studies using acceptance behavior theories in software engineering.</p></div><div><h3>Results:</h3><p>We identified 47 primary studies covering 56 theory uses. The theories were categorized into six groups. Technology acceptance models (TAM and its extensions) were used in 29 of the 47 primary studies, innovation theories in 10, and the theories of planned behavior/ reasoned action (TPB/TRA) in six. All other theories were used in at most two of the primary studies. The usage and operationalization of the theories were, in many cases, inconsistent with the underlying theories. Furthermore, we identified 77 constructs used by these studies of which many lack clear definitions.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions:</h3><p>Our results show that software engineering researchers are aware of some of the leading theories and models of acceptance behavior, which indicates an attempt to have more theoretical foundations. However, we identified issues related to theory usage that make it difficult to aggregate and synthesize results across studies. We propose mitigation actions that encourage the consistent use of theories and emphasize the measurement of key constructs.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54983,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Information and Software Technology\",\"volume\":\"172 \",\"pages\":\"Article 107469\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0950584924000740/pdfft?md5=2b39458871e60592c3bd5ed7e83cf658&pid=1-s2.0-S0950584924000740-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Information and Software Technology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"94\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0950584924000740\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"计算机科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Information and Software Technology","FirstCategoryId":"94","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0950584924000740","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"计算机科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Acceptance behavior theories and models in software engineering — A mapping study
Context:
The adoption or acceptance of new technologies or ways of working in software development activities is a recurrent topic in the software engineering literature. The topic has, therefore, been empirically investigated extensively. It is, however, unclear which theoretical frames of reference are used in this research to explain acceptance behaviors.
Objective:
In this study, we explore how major theories and models of acceptance behavior have been used in the software engineering literature to empirically investigate acceptance behavior.
Method:
We conduct a systematic mapping study of empirical studies using acceptance behavior theories in software engineering.
Results:
We identified 47 primary studies covering 56 theory uses. The theories were categorized into six groups. Technology acceptance models (TAM and its extensions) were used in 29 of the 47 primary studies, innovation theories in 10, and the theories of planned behavior/ reasoned action (TPB/TRA) in six. All other theories were used in at most two of the primary studies. The usage and operationalization of the theories were, in many cases, inconsistent with the underlying theories. Furthermore, we identified 77 constructs used by these studies of which many lack clear definitions.
Conclusions:
Our results show that software engineering researchers are aware of some of the leading theories and models of acceptance behavior, which indicates an attempt to have more theoretical foundations. However, we identified issues related to theory usage that make it difficult to aggregate and synthesize results across studies. We propose mitigation actions that encourage the consistent use of theories and emphasize the measurement of key constructs.
期刊介绍:
Information and Software Technology is the international archival journal focusing on research and experience that contributes to the improvement of software development practices. The journal''s scope includes methods and techniques to better engineer software and manage its development. Articles submitted for review should have a clear component of software engineering or address ways to improve the engineering and management of software development. Areas covered by the journal include:
• Software management, quality and metrics,
• Software processes,
• Software architecture, modelling, specification, design and programming
• Functional and non-functional software requirements
• Software testing and verification & validation
• Empirical studies of all aspects of engineering and managing software development
Short Communications is a new section dedicated to short papers addressing new ideas, controversial opinions, "Negative" results and much more. Read the Guide for authors for more information.
The journal encourages and welcomes submissions of systematic literature studies (reviews and maps) within the scope of the journal. Information and Software Technology is the premiere outlet for systematic literature studies in software engineering.