论文标题

探索对堆栈溢出的研究兴趣 - 系统的映射研究和质量评估

Exploring Research Interest in Stack Overflow -- A Systematic Mapping Study and Quality Evaluation

论文作者

Meldrum, Sarah, Licorish, Sherlock A., Savarimuthu, Bastin Tony Roy

论文摘要

诸如堆栈溢出之类的平台可供软件从业人员征求其挑战和知识需求的解决方案。然而,其中的实践却引发了与质量相关的问题。考虑到众多软件开发人员使用堆栈溢出平台时,这是一个值得注意的问题。学术研究倾向于为Stack Overflow和其他此类论坛所采用的实践和过程提供验证。但是,以前的工作没有回顾对此原因的科学关注规模。继续从初步工作开始,我们进行了一项系统的映射研究,涉及来自六个相关数据库的265篇论文以解决这一差距。在这项工作中,我们探讨了堆栈溢出的学术兴趣水平,针对性的出版物场所,所研究的主题,所使用的方法,贡献的类型以及有关堆栈溢出的出版物的质量。结果表明,多年来,堆栈溢出吸引了研究的兴趣,其主题与社区动态和人为因素以及技术问题有关。此外,研究在很大程度上是评估或拟议的解决方案。但是,后一种方法往往缺乏验证。这些研究的贡献通常是对特定问题的技术或答案。评估所有专门用于软件编程的研究的质量(58篇论文),我们的结果表明,平均仅满足了开发质量标准的58%。尽管研究不断旨在了解堆栈溢出和其他类似社区,但仍需要进行进一步的研究以验证此类研究及其提出的解决方案。

Platforms such as Stack Overflow are available for software practitioners to solicit solutions to their challenges and knowledge needs. The practices therein have in recent times however triggered quality related concerns. This is a noteworthy issue when considering that the Stack Overflow platform is used by numerous software developers. Academic research tends to provide validation for the practices and processes employed by Stack Overflow and other such forums. However, previous work did not review the scale of scientific attention that is given to this cause. Continuing from our preliminary work, we conducted a Systematic Mapping study involving 265 papers from six relevant databases to address this gap. In this work, we explored the level of academic interest Stack Overflow has generated, the publication venues that are targeted, the topics that are studied, approaches used, types of contributions and the quality of the publications that are written about Stack Overflow. Outcomes show that Stack Overflow has attracted increasing research interest over the years, with topics relating to both community dynamics and human factors, and technical issues. In addition, research studies have been largely evaluative or proposed solutions; however, the latter approach tends to lack validation. The contributions of these studies are often techniques or answers to a specific problem. Evaluating the quality of all studies that were dedicated to software programming (58 papers), our outcomes show that on average only 58% of the developed quality criteria were met. Notwithstanding that research is continually aiming to understand Stack Overflow and other similar communities, further investigations are required to validate such studies and the solutions they propose.

扫码加入交流群

加入微信交流群

微信交流群二维码

扫码加入学术交流群,获取更多资源