Méthodes de recherche - Research Methods M2 MIAGE
Section outline
-
This class provides an introduction to research methods. Upon completion of the module, the students will be able to answer the following questions:
- What is research and what types of research exist?
- Why research is important?
- What are the main phases of a research project?
- How to choose a research topic/problem?
- How to define a research question and how to check if it is a good one?
- How to define an appropriate research methodology in order to answer this question?
The following requirements have to be fulfilled in order to validate this module:
- Presence. (Non-justified absence for 2x half day invalidates the module!)
- Individual/Group Assignment: Presentation of a research methodology (see below)
- Tutoring session 1: presentation of a prospective research project in the class (see below)
-
-
1.3 MB
-
1.3 MB
-
3.1 MB
-
2.1 MB
-
8.1 MB
-
QUESTIONS OF THE CLASS:
What types of RQ exist?
What makes a good RQ?
What are research hypothesis? Why do we need them?see also:
What is Conceptual Framework? Why do we need it?CHECKLIST FOR YOUR RQ:
- Focused
- Researchable
- Feasible
- Specific
- Complex
- Relevant
HOMEWORK:
Work on your RQ in the shared Drive document
-
BIBLIOGRAPHY
n Methodology References 1 Controlled Experiment Basili, V. R., Selby, R. W., & Hutchens, D. H. (1986). Experimentation in software engineering. IEEE Transactions on software engineering, (7), 733-743.
Pfleeger, S.L. Experimental design and analysis in software engineering. Ann Software Eng 1, 219–253 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF022490522 Proof of Concept (POC) Elliott, S. (2021). Proof of Concept Research. Philosophy of Science, 88(2), 258-280. doi:10.1086/711503.
Kendig, C. E. (2016). What is Proof of Concept Research and how does it Generate Epistemic and Ethical Categories for Future Scientific Practice? Science and Engineering Ethics, 22(3), 735–753. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-015-9654-0
Wieringa, R. (2014). Design Science Methodology for Information Systems and Software Engineering. Springer.3 Case study Kitchenham, B., Pickard, L., & Pfleeger, S. L. (1995). Case Studies for Method and Tool Evaluation. IEEE Software, 12(4), 52–62. https://doi.org/10.1109/52.391832
Runeson, Per, and Martin Höst. "Guidelines for conducting and reporting case study research in software engineering." Empirical software engineering 14 (2009): 131-164.4 Action research Mackenzie, J., Tan, P-L., Hoverman, S., Baldwin, C., Article 2: The Value and Limitations
of Participatory Action Research Methodology, Journal of Hydrology (2012)5 Design Science Research Hevner, Alan R., et al. "Design science in information systems research." MIS quarterly (2004): 75-105.
Ken Peffers , Tuure Tuunanen , Marcus A. Rothenberger & Samir Chatterjee (2007) A Design Science Research Methodology for Information Systems Research, Journal of Management Information Systems, 24:3, 45-77
Wieringa, R. (2014). Design Science Methodology for Information Systems and Software Engineering. Springer.6 Interview Turner III, Daniel W., and Nicole Hagstrom-Schmidt. "Qualitative interview design." Howdy or Hello? Technical and professional communication (2022).
Adams, William C. "Conducting semi‐structured interviews." Handbook of practical program evaluation (2015): 492-505.
Rubin, Herbert J., and I. S. Rubin. "Interviewing: The art of hearing data." Thousand Oaks, CA (2005).
Qu, Sandy Q., and John Dumay. "The qualitative research interview." Qualitative research in accounting & management8, no. 3 (2011): 238-264.7 Survey Linåker, Johan; Sulaman, Sardar Muhammad; Maiani de Mello, Rafael; Höst, M. (2015). Guidelines for conducting surveys in software engineering v. 1.1. June, 0–63.
Kitchenham, B. A., & Pfleeger, S. L. (2008). Kitchenham_and_Pfleeger_2008_Personal Opinion Surveys
De Mello, R. M., & Travassos, G. H. (2016). Surveys in Software Engineering: Identifying Representative Samples. International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement, 08-09-September-2016(June 2021). https://doi.org/10.1145/2961111.29626328 Systematic literature review (SLR) Kitchenham, Barbara, and Stuart Charters. "Guidelines for performing systematic literature reviews in software engineering." (2007).
Keele, Staffs. Guidelines for performing systematic literature reviews in software engineering. Vol. 5. Technical report, Ver. 2.3 EBSE Technical Report. EBSE, 2007.9 Systematic mapping study (SMS) Petersen, K., Vakkalanka, S., & Kuzniarz, L. (2015). Guidelines for conducting systematic mapping studies in software engineering: An update. Information and Software Technology, 64, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2015.03.007
Kai Petersen, Robert Feldt, Shahid Mujtaba, and Michael Mattsson.(2008). Systematic mapping studies in software engineering. In Proceedings of the 12th international conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering (EASE'08). BCS Learning & Development Ltd., Swindon, GBR, 68–77.10 Multivocal literature review (MLR) Garousi, Vahid, Michael Felderer, and Mika V. Mäntylä. "Guidelines for including grey literature and conducting multivocal literature reviews in software engineering." Information and software technology 106 (2019): 101-121. Lecture notes / Supporting materials:
-
Outline
1. Scientific writing and plagiarism
2. Validity of research
Indicative structure of a scientific report:
See examples of SMS/SLR above for the structure and organisation. Do not hesitate to reproduce!
Abstract1. Introduction- motivation / problem setting- outline of your contribution- presentation of the remainder of the document2. Background / Related works- background: explains the main terms- related works: demonstrate the problem relevance and justify the need for new research- positioning: explains how your work is different from related works3. Research methodology- presentation/justification of choice of methodology- definition of a research protocol- definition of RQ4. Solution/results/ analysis (following a protocol from 3.)- Data collection- Data analysis- Answering each RQ from 35. Validation/discussion of results- threats of validity / mitigation strategies----- E.g.: applicability, generalisability, relevance, reproducibility etc.7. Conclusion/future work- openings for the future researchBibliographyAppendicesLecture notes/supporting materials
-
The objective of this tutoring session is to validate your research problem and research strategy that you will later implement following a corresponding research protocol. See the template below.
Organisation of the session:
5-7 min presentation of your research problem + 5 min question
-
904.1 KB
-
Background Colour
Font Face
Font Kerning
Font Size
Image Visibility
Letter Spacing
Line Height
Link Highlight
Text Alignment
Text Colour
