Consensus in Software Engineering: A Cognitive Mapping Study

TL;DR

This study investigates the level of consensus among software engineering researchers regarding core concepts, revealing multiple emerging schools of thought and highlighting the potential for increased consensus through empirical and evidence-based approaches.

Contribution

It introduces a novel diagramming method to analyze implicit theories in software engineering and identifies emerging clusters of thought within the community.

Findings

Multiple schools of thought are forming among researchers.

Over one third of researchers do not align with any identified cluster.

Low consensus is common but can be improved with empirical practices.

Abstract

Background: Philosophers of science including Collins, Feyerabend, Kuhn and Latour have all emphasized the importance of consensus within scientific communities of practice. Consensus is important for maintaining legitimacy with outsiders, orchestrating future research, developing educational curricula and agreeing industry standards. Low consensus contrastingly undermines a field's reputation and hinders peer review. Aim: This paper aims to investigate the degree of consensus within the software engineering academic community concerning members' implicit theories of software engineering. Method: A convenience sample of 60 software engineering researchers produced diagrams describing their personal understanding of causal relationships between core software engineering constructs. The diagrams were then analyzed for patterns and clusters. Results: At least three schools of thought may be forming; however, their interpretation is unclear since they do not correspond to known divisions within the community (e.g. Agile vs. Plan-Driven methods). Furthermore, over one third of participants do not belong to any cluster. Conclusion: Although low consensus is common in social sciences, the rapid pace of innovation observed in software engineering suggests that high consensus is achievable given renewed commitment to empiricism and evidence-based practice.