Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Design Science Paradigm as a Frame for Empirical Software Engineering

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Contemporary Empirical Methods in Software Engineering

Abstract

Software engineering research aims to help improve real-world practice. With the adoption of empirical software engineering research methods, the understanding of real-world needs and validation of solution proposals have evolved. However, the philosophical perspective on what constitutes theoretical knowledge and research contributions in software engineering is less discussed in the community. In this chapter, we use the design science paradigm as a frame for articulating and communicating prescriptive software engineering research contributions. Design science embraces problem conceptualization, solution (or artifact) design, and validation of solution proposals, with recommendations for practice phrased as technological rules. Design science is used in related research areas, particularly information systems and management theory. We elaborate the constructs of design science for software engineering, relate them to different conceptualizations of design science, and provide examples of possible research methods. We outline how the assessment of research contributions, industry–academia communication, and theoretical knowledge building may be supported by the design science paradigm. Finally, we provide examples of software engineering research presented through a design science lens.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Ali NB, Engström E, Taromirad M, Mousavi MR, Minhas NM, Helgesson D, Kunze S, Varshosaz M (2019) On the search for industry-relevant regression testing research. Empir Softw Eng 24(4):2020–2055

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Basili VR (1992) The experimental paradigm in software engineering. In: Rombach HD, Basili VR, Selby RW (eds) Proceedings of experimental software engineering issues: critical assessment and future directions, international workshop, Dagstuhl Castle, September 14–18, 1992. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 706. Springer, Berlin, pp 3–12

    Google Scholar 

  • Basili VR, Selby RW, Hutchens DH (1986) Experimentation in software engineering. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 12(7):733–743

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Basili VR, Shull F, Lanubile F (1999) Building knowledge through families of experiments. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 25(4):456–473

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borg M, Runeson P, Ardö A (2014) Recovering from a decade: a systematic map of information retrieval approaches to software traceability. Empir Softw Eng 19(6):1565–1616

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Briand LC, Bianculli D, Nejati S, Pastore F, Sabetzadeh M (2017) The case for context-driven software engineering research: generalizability is overrated. IEEE Softw 34(5):72–75

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bunge M (1998) Philosophy of science: volume 2, from explanation to justification, 1st edn. Routledge, New Brunswick

    Google Scholar 

  • Cartaxo B, Pinto G, Vieira E, Soares S (2016) Evidence briefings: towards a medium to transfer knowledge from systematic reviews to practitioners. In: Proceedings of the 10th ACM/IEEE international symposium on empirical software engineering and measurement, pp 57:1–57:10

    Google Scholar 

  • Deming WE (1986) Out of the crisis. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Center for Advanced Engineering Study, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Easterbrook S, Singer J, Storey M-A, Damian D (2008) Selecting empirical methods for software engineering research. In: Shull F, Singer J, Sjøberg DIK (eds) Guide to advanced empirical software engineering. Springer, London, pp 285–311

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Engström E, Petersen K, Ali NB, Bjarnason E, (2017) SERP-test: a taxonomy for supporting industry–academia communication. Softw Qual J 25(4):1269–1305

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Engström E, Storey M-A, Runeson P, Höst M, Baldassarre M (2020) How software engineering research aligns with design science: a review. Empir Softw Eng. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10664-020-09818-7

  • Garousi V, Pfahl D, Fernandes JM, Felderer M, Mäntylä MV, Shepherd D, Arcuri A, CoÅŸkunçay A, Tekinerdogan B (2019) Characterizing industry-academia collaborations in software engineering: evidence from 101 projects. Empir Softw Eng 24(4):2540–2602

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gorschek T, Garre P, Larsson S, Wohlin C (2006) A model for technology transfer in practice. IEEE Softw 23(6):88–95

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gregor S, Hevner AR (2013) Positioning and presenting design science research for maximum impact. MIS Q 37(2):337–356

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall M, Frank E, Holmes G, Pfahringer B, Reutemann P, Witten IH (2009) The WEKA data mining software: an update. ACM SIGKDD Explor Newsl 11(1):10–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hevner AR (2007) A three cycle view of design science research. Scand J Inf Syst 19(2):87–92

    Google Scholar 

  • Hevner AR, Chatterjee S (2010) Design research in information systems: theory and practice. Springer, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hevner AR, March ST, Park J, Ram S (2004) Design science in information systems research. MIS Q 28(1):75–105

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johannesson P, Perjons E (2014) An introduction to design science. Springer, Berlin

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Jonsson L, Borg M, Broman D, Sandahl K, Eldh S, Runeson P (2016) Automated bug assignment: ensemble-based machine learning in large scale industrial contexts. Empir Softw Eng 21(4):1579–1585

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kitchenham BA, DybÃ¥ T, Jørgensen M (2004) Evidence-based software engineering. In: Finkelstein A, Estublier J, Rosenblum DS (eds) 26th international conference on software engineering (ICSE). IEEE Computer Society, Edinburgh, pp 273–281

    Google Scholar 

  • Kitchenham BA, Budgen D, Brereton P (2015) Evidence-based software engineering and systematic reviews. Chapman and Hall/CRC, London

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Méndez Fernández D, Passoth J-H (2019) Empirical software engineering: from discipline to interdiscipline. J Syst Softw 148:170–179

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer M, Sedlmair M, Quinan PS, Munzner T (2015) The nested blocks and guidelines model. Inf Vis 14(3):234–249

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Munzner T (2009) A nested model for visualization design and validation. IEEE Trans Vis Comput Graph 15(6):921–928

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Naur P, Randell B (1969) Software engineering: report on a conference sponsored by the NATO science committee. Technical report, Scientific Affairs Division, NATO, Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  • Petersen K, Engström E (2014) Finding relevant research solutions for practical problems: the SERP taxonomy architecture. In: Proceedings of the 2014 international workshop on long-term industrial collaboration on software engineering. ACM, New York, pp 13–20

    Google Scholar 

  • Petersen K, Wohlin C (2009) Context in industrial software engineering research. In: Proceedings of the third international symposium on empirical software engineering and measurement, ESEM 2009, October 15–16, 2009, Lake Buena Vista. IEEE Computer Society, Silver Spring, pp 401–404

    Google Scholar 

  • Runeson P, Höst M, Rainer A, Regnell B (2012) Case study research in software engineering—guidelines and examples. Wiley, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Simon HA (1969) The sciences of the artificial. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Storey M-A, Engström E, Höst M, Runeson P, Bjarnason E (2017) Using a visual abstract as a lens for communicating and promoting design science research in software engineering. In: ACM/IEEE international symposium on empirical software engineering and measurement (ESEM), pp 181–186

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Aken JE (2004) Management research based on the paradigm of the design sciences: the quest for field-tested and grounded technological rules. J Manag Stud 41(2):219–246

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Aken JE (2005) Management research as a design science: articulating the research products of mode 2 knowledge production in management. Br J Manag 16(1):19–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wieringa RJ (2009) Design science as nested problem solving. In: Proceedings of the 4th international conference on design science research in information systems and technology. ACM, New York, pp 8:1–8:12

    Google Scholar 

  • Wieringa RJ (2014a) Design science methodology for information systems and software engineering. Springer, Berlin

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Wieringa RJ (2014b) Empirical research methods for technology validation: scaling up to practice. J Syst Softw 95:19–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wieringa RJ, Daneva M (2015) Six strategies for generalizing software engineering theories. Sci Comput Program 101:136–152

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wieringa RJ, Moralı A (2012) Technical action research as a validation method in information systems design science. In: Peffers K, Rothenberger M, Kuechler B (eds) Design science research in information systems. Advances in theory and practice. Springer, Berlin, pp 220–238

    Google Scholar 

  • Wohlin C, Aurum A (2015) Towards a decision-making structure for selecting a research design in empirical software engineering. Empir Softw Eng 20(6):1427–1455

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Lund University, Lund, Sweden

    Per Runeson & Emelie Engström

  2. University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada

    Margaret-Anne Storey

Authors
  1. Per Runeson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Emelie Engström
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Margaret-Anne Storey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Per Runeson .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Computer Science, University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria

    Michael Felderer

  2. Systems Engineering and Computer Science, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

    Guilherme Horta Travassos

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Runeson, P., Engström, E., Storey, MA. (2020). The Design Science Paradigm as a Frame for Empirical Software Engineering. In: Felderer, M., Travassos, G. (eds) Contemporary Empirical Methods in Software Engineering. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-32489-6_5

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-32489-6_5

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-32488-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-32489-6

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation