Research Design

Chapter
Part of the SpringerBriefs in Information Systems book series (BRIEFSINORMAT)

Abstract

Scientific research usually is conducted based on a set of explicit or implicit assumptions and by pursuing one or more methods. Basic philosophical assumptions and the chosen methods constitute the research design. The method should be chosen wisely in advance to achieve one’s aims. It is the only guarantee to obtain knowledge that is “valid, reliable and thus scientific”. The following sections explain the methods used, and sketch the research process. This research design “reflects decisions about the priority being given to a range of dimensions of the research”. It also is important as it enables other to understand, validate, or—if desired—reproduce and possibly falsify the research. A much longer discussion of the research’s philosophical underpinnings and the research design have been included in the author’s dissertation thesis.

Keywords

Software Testing Expert Interview Symbolic Execution Design Science Organizational Aspect 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    Becker, J.; Holten, R.; Knackstedt, R.; Niehaves, B.: Forschungsmethodische positionierung in der Wirtschaftsinformatik-epistemologische, ontologische und linguistische Leitfragen. In: Becker, J., Grob, H., Klein, S., Kuchen, H., Müller-Funk, H., Vossen, G. (eds.) Arbeitsbericht Nr. 93. Institut für Wirtschaftsinformatik, WWU, Münster (2003)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Braun, R.: Forschungsdesign in der Wirtschaftsinformatik. WISU—Das Wirtschaftsstudium 36(1), S.61–S.66 (2007)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Williams, M., May, T.: Introduction to the Philosophy of Social Research. University College London Press, London (1996)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bryman, A., Bell, E.: Business Research Methods. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2007)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chalmers, A.F.: What is this Thing Called Science? 3rd edn. Hacket Publishing, Cambridge (1999)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Braun, R., Esswein, W.: Eine Methode zur Konzeption von Forschungsdesigns in der konzeptuellen Modellierungsforschung. In: Integration, Informationslogistik und Architektur Proceedings der DW2006 (2006)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Majchrzak, T.A.: Technical and organizational aspects of testing software. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Münster, Münster (2011)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hevner, A., Chatterjee, S.: Design Research in Information Systems: Theory and Practice Integrated Series in Information Systems. Springer, Dordrecht (2010)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Burrell, G., Morgan, G.: Sociological Paradigms and Organizational Analysis: Elements of the Sociology of Corporate Life. Ashgate Publishing, London (1979)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Becker, J., Niehaves, B.: Epistemological perspectives on IS research—a framework for analyzing and systematizing epistemological assumptions. Inf. Syst. J. 17(2), 197–214 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hirschheim, R., Klein, H.K.: Four paradigms of information systems development. Commun. ACM 32(10), 1199–1216 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Wilde, T., Hess, T.: Forschungsmethoden der Wirtschaftsinformatik. Wirtschaftsinformatik 49(4), 280–287 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Frank, U.: Zur methodischen Fundierung der Forschung in der Wirtschaftsinformatik. In: Österle, H., Winter, R., Brenner, W. (eds.) Gestaltungsorientierte Wirtschaftsinformatik: Ein Plädoyer für Rigor und Relevanz, pp. 35–44. Infowerk, St. Gallen (2010)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Guba, E.G., Lincoln, Y.S.: Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In: Denzin, N.K., Lincoln, Y.S. (eds.) The Landscape of Qualitative Research, pp. 195–220. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks (1998)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Applegate, L.: Rigor and relevance in MIS research: introduction. MIS Q. 23(1), 1–2 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    March, S.T., Smith, G.F.: Design and natural science research on information technology. Decis. Support Syst. 15(4), 251–266 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hevner, A.R., March, S.T., Park, J., Ram, S.: Design science in information systems research. MIS Q. 28(1), 75–105 (2004)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Simon, H.A.: The Sciences of the Artificial, 3rd edn. MIT Press, Cambridge (1996)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Purao, S.: Design research in the technology of information systems: truth or dare. GSU Department of CIS Working Paper, Atlanta (2002). http://iris.nyit.edu/~kkhoo/Spring2008/Topics/DS/000DesignSc_TechISResearch-2002.pdf
  20. 20.
    Simon, H.A.: Rational choice and the structure of the environment. Psychol. Rev. 63(2), 129–138 (1956)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Oates, B.J.: Researching Information Systems and Computing. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks (2005)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Vaishnavi, V.K., Kuechler, W., Jr.: Design Science Research Methods and Patterns: Innovating Information and Communication Technology. Auerbach Publications, Boston (2007)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Doets, K.: From Logic to Logic Programming. MIT Press, Cambridge (1994)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Bramer, M.: Logic Programming with Prolog. Springer, Secaucus (2005)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Antoy, S., Hanus, M.: Functional logic programming. Commun. ACM 53(4), 74–85 (2010). http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1721654.1721675 Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Hanus, M., Kuchen, H., Moreno-Navarro, J.: Curry: A Truly Functional Logic Language. In: Proceedings ILPS ’95, pp. 95–107 (1995)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Tsang, E.: Foundations of Constraint Satisfaction. Academic Press, London (1993)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    López-Fraguas, F.J., Rodríguez-Artalejo, M., Vírseda, R.V.: Constraint functional logic programming revisited. Electr. Notes Theor. Comput. Sci. 117, 5–50 (2005). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.entcs.2004.06.030
  29. 29.
    Comon, H., Dincbas, M., Jouannaud, J.P., Kirchner, C.: A methodological view of constraint solving. Constraints 4(4), 337–361 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Aho, A.V., Lam, M.S., Sethi, R., Ullman, J.D.: Compilers: Principles, Techniques, and Tools with Gradiance, 2nd edn. Addison-Wesley, Essex (2007)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Srikant, Y.N., Shankar , P. (eds.): The Compiler Design Handbook: Optimizations and Machine Code Generation. CRC Press, Boca Raton (2002)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Niehaves, B., Stahl, B.: Criticality, epistemology, and behaviour versus design—information systems research across different sets of paradigms. In: 14th European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS 2006). Gothberg, Sweden (2006)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Morrison, J., George, J.: Exploring the software engineering component in MIS research. Commun. ACM 38(7), 80–91 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Hevner, A.R.: The three cycle view of design science. Scand. J. Inf. Syst. 19(2), 87–92 (2007)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Marcos, E.: Software engineering research versus software development. SIGSOFT Softw. Eng. Notes 30(4), 1–7 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
  37. 37.
  38. 38.
  39. 39.
    Greening, T., Kay, J.: Undergraduate research experience in computer science education. SIGCSE Bull. 34(3), 151–155 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Clear, T.: Valuing computer science education research? In: Proceedings of the 6th Baltic Sea Conference on Computing Education Research: Koli Calling 2006, Baltic Sea ’06, pp. 8–18. ACM, New York (2006)Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Hazzan, O., Dubinsky, Y., Eidelman, L., Sakhnini, V., Teif, M.: Qualitative research in computer science education. SIGCSE Bull. 38(1), 408–412 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Gregg, D.G., Kulkarni, U.R., Vinzé, A.S.: Understanding the philosophical underpinnings of software engineering research in information systems. Inf. Syst. Front. 3(2), 169–183 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Tichy, W.F., Lukowicz, P., Prechelt, L., Heinz, E.A.: Experimental evaluation in computer science: a quantitative study. J. Syst. Softw. 28(1), 9–18 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Wainer, J., Novoa Barsottini, C.G., Lacerda, D., Magalhães de Marco, L.R.: Empirical evaluation in computer science research published by ACM. Inf. Softw. Technol. 51(6), 1081–1085 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Wohlin, C., Runeson, P., Höst, M., Ohlsson, M.C., Regnell, B., Wesslén, A.: Experimentation in Software Engineering: an Introduction. Kluwer, Norwell (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Mueller, R.A., Lembeck, C., Kuchen, H.: GlassTT—a symbolic java virtual machine using constraint solving techniques for glass-box test case generation. Technical Report, No. 102, Department of Information Systems, Arbeitsbericht Universitaet Muenster (2003)Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Lembeck, C., Caballero, R., Mueller, R.A., Kuchen, H.: Constraint solving for generating glass-box test cases. In: Proceedings WFLP ’04, pp. 19–32 (2004)Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Mueller, R.A., Lembeck, C., Kuchen, H.: Generating glass-box test cases using a symbolic virtual machine. In: Proceedings IASTED SE 2004 (2004)Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Oracle: How to Write Doc Comments for the Javadoc Tool (2004). http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/documentation/index-137868.html
  50. 50.
  51. 51.
    Bloch, J.: Effective Java, 2nd edn. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River (2008)Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Dias-Neto, A.C., Travassos, G.H.: Model-based testing approaches selection for software projects. Inf. Softw. Technol. 51(11), 1487–1504 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Dias Neto, A.C., Subramanyan, R., Vieira, M., Travassos, G.H.: A survey on model-based testing approaches: a systematic review. In: Proceedings of the 1st ACM international Workshop on Empirical Assessment of Software Engineering Languages and Technologies, WEASELTech ’07, pp. 31–36. ACM, New York (2007)Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Pretschner, A., Prenninger, W., Wagner, S., Kühnel, C., Baumgartner, M., Sostawa, B., Zölch, R., Stauner, T.: One evaluation of model-based testing and its automation. In: Proceedings of the 27th International Conference on Software Engineering, ICSE ’05, pp. 392–401. ACM, New York (2005)Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Utting, M., Legeard, B.: Practical Model-Based Testing: a Tools Approach. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (2006)Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Jääskeläinen, A., Katara, M., Kervinen, A., Heiskanen, H., Maunumaa, M., Pääkkönen, T.: Model-based testing service on the web. In: Proceedings of the 20th IFIP TC 6/WG 6.1 International Conference on Testing of Software and Communicating Systems: 8th International Workshop, TestCom ’08/FATES ’08, pp. 38–53. Springer, Berlin (2008)Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Nguyen, D.H., Strooper, P., Suess, J.G.: Model-based testing of multiple GUI variants using the GUI test generator. In: Proceedings of the 5th Workshop on Automation of Software Test, AST ’10, pp. 24–30. ACM, New York (2010)Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Conrad, M., Fey, I., Sadeghipour, S.: Systematic model-based testing of embedded automotive software. Electr. Notes Theor. Comput. Sci. 111, 13–26 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Jacky, J., Veanes, M., Campbell, C., Schulte, W.: Model-Based Software Testing and Analysis with C#. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2007)Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Bouquet, F., Grandpierre, C., Legeard, B., Peureux, F., Vacelet, N., Utting, M.: A subset of precise UML for model-based testing. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop on Advances in Model-based Testing, A-MOST ’07, pp. 95–104. ACM, New York (2007)Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Utting, M.: The role of model-based testing. In: Meyer, B., Woodcock, J. (eds.) Verified Software: Theories, Tools, Experiments, pp. 510–517. Springer, Berlin (2008)Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Santos-Neto, P., Resende, R.F., Pádua, C.: An evaluation of a model-based testing method for information systems. In: Proceedings of the 2008 ACM Symposium on Applied Computing, SAC ’08, pp. 770–776. ACM, New York (2008)Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Sarma, M., Murthy, P.V.R., Jell, S., Ulrich, A.: Model-based testing in industry: a case study with two MBT tools. In: Proceedings of the 5th Workshop on Automation of Software Test, AST’10, pp. 87–90. ACM, New York (2010)Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    March, S.T., Vogus, T.J.: Design science in the management disciplines. In: Hevner, A., Chatterjee, S. (eds.) Design Research in Information Systems: Theory and Practice (Integrated Series in Information Systems). Springer, Heidelberg (2010)Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Myers, M.D.: Qualitative research in information systems. MIS Q. 21(2), 241–242 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Lamnek, S.: Qualitative Sozialforschung, 4th edn. Beltz, Weinheim (2005)Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Bogner, A., Littig, B., Menz, W. (eds.): Das Experteninterview: Theorie, Methode, Anwendung, 2nd edn. VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, Wiesbaden (2002)Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Gläser, J., Laudel, G.: Experteninterviews und Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse, 3rd edn. VS Verlag, Wiesbaden (2009)Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Majchrzak, T.A., Kuchen, H.: Handlungsempfehlungen für erfolgreiches Testen von Software in Unternehmen. In: Becker, J., Grob, H., Hellingrath, B., Klein, S., Kuchen, H., Müller-Funk, U., Vossen, G. (eds.) Arbeitsbericht Nr. 127. Institut für Wirtschaftsinformatik, WWU Münster, Münster (2010)Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    Veal, A.J.: Business Research Methods: a Managerial Approach, 2nd edn. Pearson Addison Wesley, South Melbourne (2005)Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    Pfadenhauer, M.: Auf gleicher Augenhöhe reden—Das Experteninterview—ein Gespräch zwischen Experte und Quasi-Experte. In: Bogner, A., Littig, B., Menz, W. (eds.) Das Experteninterview: Theorie, Methode, Anwendung, 2nd edn. VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, Wiesbaden (2002)Google Scholar
  72. 72.
    Bogner, A., Merz, W.: Expertenwissen und Forschungspraxis: die modernisierungstheoretische und die methodische Debatte um die Experten. In: Bogner, A., Littig, B., Menz, W. (eds.) Das Experteninterview: Theorie, Methode, Anwendung, 2nd edn. VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, Wiesbaden (2002)Google Scholar
  73. 73.
    Majchrzak, T.A., Kuchen, H.: IHK-Projekt Softwaretests: Auswertung. In: Working Papers, No. 2. Förderkreis der Angewandten Informatik an der Westfälischen Wilhelms-Universität Münster e.V., Münster (2010)Google Scholar
  74. 74.
    Majchrzak, T.A.: Technische Aspekte des erfolgreichen Testens von Software in Unternehmen. In: Knoop, J., Prantl, A. (eds.) Schriftenreihe des Instituts für Computersprachen, Bericht 2009-X-1: 15. Kolloquium Programmiersprachen und Grundlagen der Programmierung, pp. 193–207. Technische Universität Wien, Maria Taferl, Vienna (2009)Google Scholar
  75. 75.
    Majchrzak, T.A.: Best practices for the organizational implementation of software testing. In: Proceedings of the 43th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS-43), pp. 1–10. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC (2010) Google Scholar
  76. 76.
    Majchrzak, T.A.: Improving the technical aspects of software testing in enterprises. Int. J. Adv. Comput. Sci. Appl. 1(4), 1–10 (2010)Google Scholar
  77. 77.
    Majchrzak, T.A.: Status quo of software testing—regional findings and global inductions. J. Inf. Sci. Technol. 7(2), S.72–S.84 (2010)Google Scholar
  78. 78.
    Crisp, G.: The e-Assessment Handbook. Continuum, London (2007)Google Scholar
  79. 79.
    Iskander, M.: Innovative Techniques in Instruction Technology, E-learning, E-assessment and Education. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Gruttmann, S.: Formatives E-assessment in der Hochschullehre—Computerunterstützte Lernfortschrittskontrollen im informatikstudium. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Münster, Münster (2010)Google Scholar
  81. 81.
    Gruttmann, S., Böhm, D., Kuchen, H.: E-assessment of mathematical proofs: chances and challenges for students and tutors. In: Proceedings of the 2008 International Conference on Computer Science and Software Engineering, Volume 05, CSSE ’08, pp. 612–615. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC (2008)Google Scholar
  82. 82.
    Straub, D., Gefen, D., Boudreau, M.C.: The ISWorld Quantitative, Positivist Research Methods Website (2004). http://dstraub.cis.gsu.edu:88/quant/
  83. 83.
    Creswell, J.W.: Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches, 3rd edn. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks (2008)Google Scholar
  84. 84.
    Neuman, L.W.: Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches, 5th edn. Allyn & Bacon, Needham Heights (2002)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg  2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institut für WirtschaftsinformatikWestfälische Wilhelms-UniversitätMünsterGermany

Personalised recommendations