In two minds: how reflections influence software design thinking

Journal of Software: Evolution and Process

Volumn 28, Issue 6, 2016, Pages 394-426

  Razavian, Maryam ^a,b   Tang, Antony ^c   Capilla, Rafael ^d   Lago, Patricia ^a  

^a VU UNIVERSITY AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

^b EINDHOVEN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Netherlands)

^c SWINBURNE UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Australia)

^d UNIVERSIDAD REY JUAN CARLOS   (Spain)

Author keywords

behavioral software engineering; design reasoning; reflection; software design

Indexed keywords

PROBLEM SOLVING; REFLECTION; SOFTWARE ENGINEERING;

DESIGN DISCOURSE; DESIGN REASONINGS; DESIGN THINKING; EXTERNAL REFLECTION; MULTIPLE-CASE STUDY; PROBLEM-SOLVING ABILITIES; QUALITY OF DESIGN; SOFTWARE DESIGNERS;

SOFTWARE DESIGN;

EID: 84971350192     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20477481     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/smr.1776     Document Type: Article

References (83)

1. Guindon R, Krasner H, Curtis B. Breakdowns and Processes During the Early Activities of Software Design by Professionals. Ablex Publishing Corp., 1987; 65–82 54973.
2. Simon HA. The structure of ill structured problems. Artificial Intelligence 1973; 4(3-4):181–201.
3. Stacy W, MacMillan J. Cognitive bias in software engineering. Communications of the ACM 1995; 38:57–63.
4. Tang A. Software designers, are you biased? In: Proceeding of the 6th international workshop on SHAring and Reusing architectural Knowledge. SHARK '11. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 2011; pp. 1–8.
5. Epley N, Gilovich T. The anchoring-and-adjustment heuristic. Psychological Science 2006; 17(4):311.
6. Tang A, Tran MH, Han J, van Vliet H. Design reasoning improves software design quality. In: 4th International Conference on the Quality of Software-Architectures (QoSA), 2008; pp. 28–42.
7. Boud D, Keogh R, Walker D. Reflection: Turning Experience into Learning. Routledge: London and New York, 1985.
8. Moon JA. Reflection in Learning and Professional Development: Theory and Practice. Psychology Press: New York, 1999.
9. Rittel HWJ, Webber MM. Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences 1973; 4(2):155–169.
10. Tang A, van Vliet H. Software Designers Satisfice. Vol. 9278 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer International Publishing book section 9, 2015; 105–120.
11. Hofmeister C, Kruchten P, Nord RL, Obbink H, Ran A, America, P. Generalizing a model of software architecture design from five industrial approaches. In: Fifth Working IEEE / IFIP Conference on Software Architecture (WICSA 2005), 2005; pp. 77–88.
12. Talby D, Hazzan O, Dubinsky Y, Keren A. Reflections on reflection in agile software development. In: Agile Conference, 2006. IEEE, 2006; pp. 11–112.
13. Dorst K. The core of ‘design thinking’ and its application. Design Studies 2011; 32(6):521–532, interpreting Design Thinking.
14. Budgen D. Software Design. Pearson Education: Harlow, 2003.
15. Petre M, van der Hoek A, Baker A. Editorial. Design studies. Special Issue Studying Professional Software Design 2010; 31(6):533–544.
16. Tversky A, Kahneman D. Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Science 1974; 185(4157):1124–1131.
17. Kahneman D, Tversky A. Subjective probability: a judgment of representativeness. Cognitive Psychology 1972; 3(3):430–454.
18. Tang A, Aleti A, Burge J, van Vliet H. What makes software design effective? Design Studies 2010; 31(6):614–640.
19. Oswald ME, Grosjean S. Confirmation bias. Psychology Press: Hove, 2004; 77–96.
20. Calikli G, Bener A, Arslan B. An analysis of the effects of company culture, education and experience on confirmation bias levels of software developers and testers. In: Proceedings of the 32nd ACM/ IEEE International Conference on Software Engineering - Volume 2. ICSE '10. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 2010; pp. 187–190.
21. Hergovich A, Schott R, Burger C. Biased evaluation of abstracts depending on topic and conclusion: further evidence of a confirmation bias within scientific psychology. Current Psychology 2010; 29:188–209.
22. Paul R, Niewoehner R, Elder L. The Thinker's Guide to Engineering Reasoning. Foundation for Critical Thinking: Dillon Beach, CA, 2006.
23. Dorst K. Design problems and design paradoxes. Design issues 2006; 22(3):4–17.
24. Simon H. The Sciences of the Artificial. MIT Press, 1996.
25. Burge JE, Brinkman B. Using rationale to assist student cognitive and intellectual development. Human Technology 2010; 6(1).
26. Zannier C, Chiasson M, Maurer F. A model of design decision making based on empirical results of interviews with software designers. Information and Software Technology 2007; 49(6):637–653 qualitative Software Engineering Research.
27. Hall J, Jackson M, Laney R, Nuseibeh B, Rapanotti, L. Relating Software Requirements and Architectures Using Problem Frames. In: IEEE Joint International Conference on Requirements Engineering, 2002; pp. 137–144.
28. Nuseibeh B. Weaving together requirements and architecture. IEEE Computer 2001; 34(3):115–119.
29. Maher ML, Poon J, Boulanger S. Formalising Design Exploration as Co-Evolution: A Combined Gene Approach. University of Sydney: Tech. rep., 1996.
30. Dorst K, Cross N. Creativity in the design space: co-evolution of problem-solution. Design Studies 2001; 22(5):425–437.
31. Björklund TA. Initial mental representations of design problems: differences between experts and novices. Design Studies 2013; 34(2):135–160.
32. Langley A, Mintzberg H, Pitcher P, Posada E, Saint-Macary J. Opening up decision making: the view from the black stool. Organization Science 1995; 6(3):260–279.
33. Gero JS, Kannengiesser U. Design Studies 25 2004; (4):373–391.
34. Zimmermann O, Koehler J, Leymann F, Polley R, Schuster N. Managing architectural decision models with dependency relations, integrity constraints, and production rules. Journal of Systems and Software 2009; 82(8):1249–1267.
35. Tang A, van Vliet H. Software architecture design reasoning. Software Architecture Knowledge Management, Babar MA, Dingsyr T, Lago P, van Vliet H (eds.). Springer: Berlin Heidelberg Ch. 9, 2009b; 155–174.
36. Kruchten P, Lago P, Vliet H v. Building up and reasoning about architectural knowledge. Quality of Software Architecture (QoSA) Vol. LNCS 4214. Springer-Verlag: Heidelberg, 2006; 43–58.
37. Tang A, van Vliet, H. Modeling constraints improves software architecture design reasoning. In: Software Architecture, 2009 & European Conference on Software Architecture. WICSA/ECSA 2009. Joint Working IEEE/ IFIP Conference on. IEEE, 2009a; pp. 253–256.
38. Lago P, van Vliet, H. Explicit assumptions enrich architectural models. In: Proceedings 27th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE), 2005; pp. 206–214.
39. Poort ER, Vliet Hv. Architecting as a risk- and cost management discipline. In: Proceedings of the Ninth IEEE/ IFIP Working Conference on Software Architecture, 2011; pp. 2–11.
40. Kazman R, Klein MH, Barbacci M, Longstaff TA, Lipson HF, Carrière SJ. The Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method, ICECCS: In, 1998; 68–78.
41. Maclean A, Young R, Bellotti V, Moran T. Questions, options and criteria: elements of design space analysis. Design Rationale: Concepts, Techniques and Use, Moran T, Carroll J (eds.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: Mahwah, New Jersey, Ch. 3, pp., 1996; 53–106.
42. Conklin J, Begeman M. gIBIS: a hypertext tool for exploratory policy discussion. In: Proceedings ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work, 1988 pp. 140–152.
43. van Manen M. Linking ways of knowing with ways of being practical. Curriculum Inquiry 1977; 6(3):205–228.
44. Habermas J. The Theory of Communicative Action, vol. i. Beacon: Boston, 1984.
45. Schön DA. The Reflective Practitioner : How Professionals Think in Action, Basic Books: Nueva York, EUA, 1983.
46. Dyba T, Maiden N, Glass R. The reflective software engineer: reflective practice. IEEE Software 2014; 31(4):32–36.
47. McCall R. Critical conversations: feedback as a stimulus to a creativity in software design. Human Technology 2010; 6(1):11–37.
48. Valkenburg R, Dorst K. The reflective practice of design teams. Design Studies 1998; 19(3):249–271.
49. Reymen I, Hammer D, Kroes P, Van Aken J, Dorst C, Bax M, Basten T. A domain independent descriptive design model and its application to structured reflection on design processes. Research in Engineering Design 2006; 16(4):147–173.
50. Dingsoyr T, Lago P, van Vliet H. Rationale promotes learning about architectural knowledge. In: 8th International Workshop on Learning Software Organizations (LSO). ACM: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, sep 2006.
51. Bull CN, Whittle J. Supporting reflective practice in software engineering education through a studio-based approach. IEEE Software 2014; 31(4):44–50.
52. Babb J, Hoda R, Norbjerg J. Embedding reflection and learning into agile software development. IEEE Software 2014; 31(4):51–57.
53. Schwaber K, Beedle M. Agile Software Development with Scrum. 2002.
54. Lamoreux M. Improving agile team learning by improving team reflections [agile software development]. In: Agile Conference, 2005. Proceedings IEEE, 2005; pp. 139–144.
55. Nerur S, Balijepally V. Theoretical reflections on agile development methodologies. Communications of the ACM 2007; 50(3):79–83.
56. Santos V, Goldman A, Guerra E, Cleidson DS, Sharp H. A pattern language for inter-team knowledge sharing in agile software development, 2–21. 2013.
57. Lockyer J, Gondocz ST, Thivierge RL. Knowledge translation: the role and place of practice reflection. Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions 2004; 24(1):50–56.
58. Singley M, Carroll J. Synthesis by analysis: five modes of reasoning that guide design. Design Rationale: Concepts, Techniques and Use, Moran T, Carroll J (eds.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: Mahwah, New Jersey, Ch. 8, 1996; 241–265.
59. Tang A, Han J, Vasa R. Software architecture design reasoning: a case for improved methodology support. IEEE Software Mar/ Apr 2009; 2009:43–49.
60. Kahneman D. Thinking, Fast and Slow. Penguin: New York, 2011.
61. Tang A, van Vliet H. Design strategy and software design effectiveness. IEEE Software Jan-Feb, 2012; 51–55.
62. Tang A, Lau MF. Software architecture review by association. Journal of Systems and Software 2014; 88(0):87–101.
63. Shaw M. The role of design spaces. Software, IEEE 2012; 29(1):46–50.
64. Curtis B, Krasner H, Iscoe N. A field study of the software design process for large systems. Communications of the ACM 1988; 31(11):1268–1287.
65. Poort ER, van Vliet H. Rcda: architecting as a risk- and cost management discipline. Journal of Systems and Software 2012; 85(9):1995–2013.
66. Berg M. v. d, Tang A, Farenhorst R. A constraint-oriented approach to software architecture design. In: Proceedings of the Quality Software International Conference (QSIC 2009), 2009; pp. 396–405.
67. Tang A, Lago P. Notes on design reasoning techniques (v1.4). Tech. Rep. Swinburne University of Technology: Melbourne, Australia, 2010.
68. Yin RK. Case Study Research: Design and Methods, 4th edn. Sage Publications, 2008.
69. Kitchenham BA, Pfleeger SL, Pickard LM, Jones PW, Hoaglin DC, El Emam K, Rosenberg J. Preliminary guidelines for empirical research in software engineering. Software Engineering, IEEE Transactions on 2002; 28(8):721–734.
70. Runeson P, Höst M. Guidelines for conducting and reporting case study research in software engineering. Empirical Software Engineering 2009; 14(2):131–164.
71. Gu Q, Lago P, van Vliet H. A template for soa design decision making in an educational setting. In: Software Engineering and Advanced Applications (SEAA), 2010 36th EUROMICRO Conference on, 2010; pp. 175–182.
72. Wohlin C, Runeson P, Höst M, Ohlsson MC, Regnell B, Wesslén A. Experimentation in Software Engineering. Springer: Heidelberg, 2012.
73. Miles MB, Huberman AM. Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook. Sage, 1994.
74. Haran U, Moore DA, Morewedge CK. A simple remedy for overprecision in judgment. Judgment and Decision Making 2010; 5(7):467–476.
75. Cohen J. Weighted kappa: nominal scale agreement provision for scaled disagreement or partial credit. Psychological Bulletin 1968; 70(4):213.
76. Donner A, Koval JJ. The estimation of intraclass correlation in the analysis of family data. Biometrics 1980; 36(1):19–25.
77. Lincoln YS, Guba EG. Naturalistic Inquiry, vol. 75. Sage Publications, 1985.
78. Lloyd P. Storytelling and the development of discourse in the engineering design process. Design Studies 2000; 21(4):357–373.
79. Nickerson JV, Yu L. Going meta-design space and evaluation space in software design. Software Designers in Action: A Human-centric Look at Design WorkPetre M, Hoek AVD (eds.). Chapman & Hall/ CRC: Ch, 2013; 19.
80. Capretz LF, Ahmed F. Why do we need personality diversity in software engineering? SIGSOFT softw. Eng. Notes 2010; 35(2):1–11.
81. Razavian M, Lago P. Feminine expertise in architecting teams. Software, IEEE, 2015.
82. Sonnentag S. Expertise in professional software design: a process study. Journal of Applied Psychology 1998; 83(5):703–715.
83. McAvoy J, Butler T. The role of project management in ineffective decision making within agile software development projects. European Journal of Information Systems 2009; 18(4):372–383.