Cargando…
Developing research questions in conversation with the literature: operationalization & tool support
Empirical Software Engineering rests on the understanding of practical problems and their solution counterparts. Frequently, solutions are not absolute but relative to the context where the problem is observed. This tends to imply that the solution and the problem unveil gradually together, and henc...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer US
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9486795/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36159891 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10664-022-10204-8 |
_version_ | 1784792357304008704 |
---|---|
author | Díaz, Oscar Contell, Jeremías P. |
author_facet | Díaz, Oscar Contell, Jeremías P. |
author_sort | Díaz, Oscar |
collection | PubMed |
description | Empirical Software Engineering rests on the understanding of practical problems and their solution counterparts. Frequently, solutions are not absolute but relative to the context where the problem is observed. This tends to imply that the solution and the problem unveil gradually together, and hence, researchers are not always in the position to state the research question (RQ) at the onset. Like software engineers when facing blurred requirements, researchers might not be familiar enough with the problem in the early phases of a research to properly scope their RQs (hereafter referred to as RQ Scoping). Here, the literature may play the role of the stakeholders in Agile methods: keeping the focus on the aspects that are essential (vs. accidental) of the RQ. Informed by Inductive Top-Down Theorizing, this article acknowledges RQ Scoping as iterative and incremental, entailing a conversation between the experimental work and literature reviewing. Yet, for literature reviewing to become “Agile” it is not only required to be driven by the RQ but also to have tool support. Tools might bring transparency and traceability, both factors especially welcome in a scenario characterized by testing (is my RQ relevant?) and adjustment (how can I make my RQ relevant?). Specifically, the advent of the RQ in close relationship with the literature advises for “Agile” literature reviewing to be conducted at the place where the literature is naturally kept: the Reference Management System (e.g., Mendeley). This article introduces the theoretical underpinnings, design principles, proof of concept and evaluation for FRAMEndeley, a Mendeley-integrated utility for RQ Scoping. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9486795 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Springer US |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-94867952022-09-21 Developing research questions in conversation with the literature: operationalization & tool support Díaz, Oscar Contell, Jeremías P. Empir Softw Eng Article Empirical Software Engineering rests on the understanding of practical problems and their solution counterparts. Frequently, solutions are not absolute but relative to the context where the problem is observed. This tends to imply that the solution and the problem unveil gradually together, and hence, researchers are not always in the position to state the research question (RQ) at the onset. Like software engineers when facing blurred requirements, researchers might not be familiar enough with the problem in the early phases of a research to properly scope their RQs (hereafter referred to as RQ Scoping). Here, the literature may play the role of the stakeholders in Agile methods: keeping the focus on the aspects that are essential (vs. accidental) of the RQ. Informed by Inductive Top-Down Theorizing, this article acknowledges RQ Scoping as iterative and incremental, entailing a conversation between the experimental work and literature reviewing. Yet, for literature reviewing to become “Agile” it is not only required to be driven by the RQ but also to have tool support. Tools might bring transparency and traceability, both factors especially welcome in a scenario characterized by testing (is my RQ relevant?) and adjustment (how can I make my RQ relevant?). Specifically, the advent of the RQ in close relationship with the literature advises for “Agile” literature reviewing to be conducted at the place where the literature is naturally kept: the Reference Management System (e.g., Mendeley). This article introduces the theoretical underpinnings, design principles, proof of concept and evaluation for FRAMEndeley, a Mendeley-integrated utility for RQ Scoping. Springer US 2022-09-20 2022 /pmc/articles/PMC9486795/ /pubmed/36159891 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10664-022-10204-8 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Article Díaz, Oscar Contell, Jeremías P. Developing research questions in conversation with the literature: operationalization & tool support |
title | Developing research questions in conversation with the literature: operationalization & tool support |
title_full | Developing research questions in conversation with the literature: operationalization & tool support |
title_fullStr | Developing research questions in conversation with the literature: operationalization & tool support |
title_full_unstemmed | Developing research questions in conversation with the literature: operationalization & tool support |
title_short | Developing research questions in conversation with the literature: operationalization & tool support |
title_sort | developing research questions in conversation with the literature: operationalization & tool support |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9486795/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36159891 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10664-022-10204-8 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT diazoscar developingresearchquestionsinconversationwiththeliteratureoperationalizationtoolsupport AT contelljeremiasp developingresearchquestionsinconversationwiththeliteratureoperationalizationtoolsupport |