Action Research Can Swing the Balance in Experimental Software Engineering

Easterbrook, 2008, Selecting empirical methods for software engineering research Sjøberg, 2005, A survey of controlled experiments in software engineering, IEEE Trans. Software Eng., 31, 733, 10.1109/TSE.2005.97 Basili, 2006, Empirically driven SE research: state of the art and required maturity Höfer, 2007, Status of Empirical Research in Software Engineering Kampenes, 2009, A systematic review of quasi-experiments in software engineering, Inform. Software Technol., 51, 71, 10.1016/j.infsof.2008.04.006 Charters, 2009, Objectivity in research: challenges from the evidence-based paradigm, 73 Tichy, 1998, Should computer scientists experiment more?, IEEE Comput., 32, 10.1109/2.675631 Juristo, 2001 Basili, 1986, Experimentation in software engineering, IEEE Trans. Software Eng., 12, 733, 10.1109/TSE.1986.6312975 Basili, 1996, The role of experimentation: past, current, and future, 442 Shull, 2001, An empirical methodology for introducing software processes, 10.1145/503209.503248 Wöhlin, 2000 Harrison, 1999, Directions and methodologies for empirical software engineering research, Empirical Software Eng., 4, 405, 10.1023/A:1009877923978 Wöhlin, 2003, Empirical Research Methods in Software Engineering Zelkowitz, 2007, Techniques for Empirical validation Pfleeger, 1999, Albert Einstein and empirical software engineering, IEEE Comput., 32, 32, 10.1109/2.796106 Kitchenham, 2007, Empirical Paradigm – The Role of Experiments Argyris, 1985, Action Science Sjøberg, 2007, The future of empirical methods in software engineering research, 358 Kitchenham, 2004, Evidence-based software engineering, 273 Kitchenham, 2007, Large-scale software engineering questions—expert opinion or empirical evidence?, IET Software, 1, 161, 10.1049/iet-sen:20060052 Rainer, 2005, Software Practice versus evidence-based software engineering research, 10.1145/1082983.1083177 Baskerville, 1996, A critical perspective on Action Research as a method for information systems research, J. Inform. Technol., 11, 235, 10.1080/026839696345289 Carr, 2006, Philosophy, Methodology and Action Research, J. Philos. Educ. Special Issue Philos. Methodol. Educ. Res. 1, 40.2, 421 Reason, 2001, Introduction: inquiry and participation in search of a world worthy of human aspiration, 1 Dick, 2004, Action research literature: themes and trends, Action Res., 2, 425, 10.1177/1476750304047985 Burns, 2005, Action research: an evolving paradigm?, Lang. Teach., 38, 57, 10.1017/S0261444805002661 Baskerville, 1998, Diversity in information systems action research methods, Eur. J. Inform. Syst., 2, 90, 10.1057/palgrave.ejis.3000298 Susman, 1978, An assessment of the scientific merits of Action Research, Adm. Sci. Q., 23, 582, 10.2307/2392581 Davison, 2004, Principles of canonical action research, Inform. Syst. J., 14, 65, 10.1111/j.1365-2575.2004.00162.x Avison, 1999, Action Research, Commun. ACM, 42, 94, 10.1145/291469.291479 Guba, 1994, Competing paradigms in qualitative research, 105 Hathaway, 1995, Assumptions underlying quantitative and qualitative research: implications for institutional research, Res. Higher Educ., 36, 535, 10.1007/BF02208830 Healy, 2000, Comprehensive criteria to judge validity and reliability of qualitative research within the realism paradigm, Qual. Market Res. Int. J., 3, 118, 10.1108/13522750010333861 Ludema, 2001, Appreciative Inquiry: the power of the unconditional positive question, 1 Carr, 1986 Greenwood, 1998 Krauss, 2005, Research paradigms and meaning making: a primer, Qual. Rep., 10, 758 Näslund, 2002, Logistics needs qualitative research—especially Action Research, Int. J. Phys. Distrib. Logis. Manage., 32, 321, 10.1108/09600030210434143 Seaman, 1999, Qualitative methods in empirical studies of software engineering, IEEE Trans. Software Eng., 25, 557, 10.1109/32.799955 Thiollent, 2007 Baskerville, 2007, Educing theory from practice Checkland, 1998, Action Research: Its Nature and Validity, Syst. Pract. Action Res., 11, 9, 10.1023/A:1022908820784 Avison, 2001, Controlling action research projects, Inform. Technol. People, 14, 28, 10.1108/09593840110384762 Tripp, 2005, Action Research: a methodological introduction, Educação e Pesquisa, 443, 10.1590/S1517-97022005000300009 Santos, 2009, Action Research use in Software Engineering: an Initial Survey, 414 Lau, 1997, A review on the use of action research in information systems studies, 31 Abrahamsson, 2004, Extreme programming: a survey of empirical data from a controlled case study, 73 2002 Ramesh, 2004, Research in computer science: an empirical study, J. Syst. Sw., 165, 10.1016/S0164-1212(03)00015-3 Lindvall, 1996, Practical implications of traceability, J. SP&E, 26, 1161 Polo, 2002, Using a qualitative research method for building a software maintenance methodology, Software Pract. Exp., 32, 1239, 10.1002/spe.481 Canfora, 2006, Applying a framework for the improvement of the software process maturity in a software company, J. Software Pract. Exp., 36, 283, 10.1002/spe.697 Staron, 2008, Predicting weekly defect inflow in large software projects based on project planning and test status, Inform. Software Technol., 10.1016/j.infsof.2007.10.001 McCaffery, 2009, Improving software risk management in a medical device company, 152 Vigder, 2008, Supporting scientists' everyday work: automating scientific workflows, IEEE Software, 25, 52, 10.1109/MS.2008.97 Maiden, 2005, Developing use cases and scenarios in the requirements process, Proc. ICSE, 2005, 561 Napier, 2009, Combining perceptions and prescriptions in requirements engineering process assessment: an industrial case study, IEEE Trans. Software Eng., 35, 593, 10.1109/TSE.2009.33 Kauppinen, 2004, Implementing requirements engineering processes throughout organizations: success factors and challenges, Inform. Software Technol., 46, 937, 10.1016/j.infsof.2004.04.002 Bosch, 2010, Toward Compositional Software Product Lines, IEEE Software, 27, 29, 10.1109/MS.2010.32 Gutierrez, 2009, The practical application of a process for eliciting and designing security in web service systems, Inform. Software Technol., 51, 1712, 10.1016/j.infsof.2009.05.004 Bengtsson, 1999, Haemo dialysis software architecture design experiences, 516 Mattsson, 2009, Linking model-driven development and software architecture: a case study software engineering, IEEE Trans. Software Eng., 35, 83, 10.1109/TSE.2008.87 Fernández-Medina, 2005, Designing secure databases, Inform. Software Technol., 47, 463, 10.1016/j.infsof.2004.09.013 Lycett, 2001, Understanding ‘Variation’ in component-based development: case findings from practice, Inform. Software Technol., 43, 203, 10.1016/S0950-5849(00)00159-2 Fitzgerald, 1999, A Longitudinal study of software process improvement, IEEE Software, 16, 37, 10.1109/52.765785 Kautz, 2000, Applying and adjusting a software process improvement model in practice: the use of the IDEAL model in a small software enterprise, 626 Salo, 2005 Nielsen, 2010, Social networks in software process improvement, J. Software Maintenance Evol. Res. Pract., 22, 33, 10.1002/spip.419 Pino, 2010, Assessment methodology for software process improvement in small organizations Inform, Software Technol, 52, 1044, 10.1016/j.infsof.2010.04.004 Staron, 2009, A framework for developing measurement systems and its industrial evaluation, Inform. Software Technol., 51, 721, 10.1016/j.infsof.2008.10.001 Kazman, 2002, Making architecture reviews work in the real world, IEEE Software, 19, 62, 10.1109/52.976943 2007 Travassos, 2009, iMPS 2009: characterization and performance variation of software organizations that adopted the MPS model, Association for Promotion of the Excellence the Brazilian Software—SOFTEX 2009 1999 Crupi, 2001 Bennet, 2000, Software maintenance and evolution: a roadmap, 73 Mens, 2004, A survey of software refactoring, IEEE Trans. Software Eng., 30, 126, 10.1109/TSE.2004.1265817 Dunsmore, 2003, Practical code inspection techniques for object-oriented systems: an experimental comparison, IEEE Software, 20, 21, 10.1109/MS.2003.1207450 Mäntylä, 2005, An experiment on subjective evolvability evaluation of object-oriented software: explaining factors and interrater agreement, 277 Mäntylä, 2006, Drivers for software refactoring decisions, 297 Basili, 1994, The goal question metric approach, 528 Strauss, 1990 Baskerville, 1999, Grounded action research: a method for understanding IT in practice, Account. Manage. Inform. Technol., 9, 1, 10.1016/S0959-8022(98)00017-4 Sjøberg, 2008, Building theories in software engineering Fowler, 1999 Parnin, 2008, A catalogue of lightweight visualizations to support code smell inspection, 10.1145/1409720.1409733 Ruthruff, 2008, Predicting accurate and actionable static analysis warnings: an experimental approach, 341 Baskerville, 1999, Investigating information systems with action research, 10.17705/1CAIS.00219 McKay, 2007, Driven by two masters, serving both Heatwole, 1976, Action research and public policy analysis: sharpening the political perspectives of public policy research, Political Res. Q., 29, 597, 10.1177/106591297602900410 Holter, 1993, Action research: what is it? How has it been used and how can it be used in nursing?, J. Adv. Nurs., 18, 298, 10.1046/j.1365-2648.1993.18020298.x Meyer, 1993, New paradigm research in practice: the trials and tribulations of action research, J. Adv. Nurs., 18, 1066, 10.1046/j.1365-2648.1993.18071066.x Ottosson, 2003, Participation action research: a key to improved knowledge of management, Int. J. Technol. Innov. Entrepreneurship Technol. Manage., 23, 87 Westbrooke, 1995, Action Research: a new paradigm for research in production and operations management, Int. J. Operations Prod. Manage., 15, 6, 10.1108/01443579510104466 Ballantyne, 2004, Action Research reviewed: a market-oriented approach, Eur. J. Market., 38, 321, 10.1108/03090560410518576 Kates, 2004, Adapting action research to marketing, Eur. J. Market., 38, 418, 10.1108/03090560410518620 Hearn, 2005, Action research in the design of new media and ICT systems Rus, 2002, Knowledge management in software engineering, IEEE Software, 26, 10.1109/MS.2002.1003450 Schein, 1994, The process of dialogue: creating effective communication, Syst. Thinker, 5, 1 Boehm, 1976, Software engineering, IEEE Trans. Comput., 1.226, 10.1109/TC.1976.1674590 Falbo, 1998, A systematic approach for building ontologies, 10.1007/3-540-49795-1_31 Higgs, 2001, Integrating clinical reasoning and evidence-based practice, AACN Clin. Issues, 12, 482, 10.1097/00044067-200111000-00005 Santos, 2010, Quality inspection in use case descriptions: an experimental evaluations in a real project, 261 Latum, 1998, Adopting GQM-based measurement in an industrial environment, IEEE Software, 15, 78, 10.1109/52.646887 Polanyi, 1966 Glass, 2009, Making research more relevant while not diminishing its rigor, IEEE Software, 26, 96, 10.1109/MS.2009.40