keynote

Software designers, are you biased?

Author:

Antony TangAuthors Info & Claims

SHARK '11: Proceedings of the 6th International Workshop on SHAring and Reusing Architectural Knowledge

Pages 1 - 8

https://doi.org/10.1145/1988676.1988678

Published: 24 May 2011 Publication History

Abstract

Methods of representing and capturing design rationale have been studied in past years. Many meta-models, methods and techniques have been proposed. Are these software engineering methods sufficient to help designers make logical and appropriate design decisions? Studies have shown that people make biased decisions, software designers may also be subjected to such cognitive biases. In this paper, I give an overview of how cognitive biases and reasoning failures may lead to unsound design decisions. I conjecture that in order to improve the overall quality of software design, we as a community need to improve our understanding and teaching of software design reasoning.

References

[1]

J. R. Anderson, The Architecture of Cognition: Psychology Press, 1995.

Digital Library

[2]

A. Baker and A. van der Hoek, "Ideas, subjects, and cycles as lenses for understanding the software design process," Design Studies, vol. 31(6), pp. 590--613.

[3]

L. J. Ball, B. Onarheim, and B. T. Christensen, "Design requirements, epistemic uncertainty and solution development strategies in software design," Design Studies, vol. 31(6), pp. 567--589.

[4]

L. Bass, P. Clements, and R. Kazman, Software Architecture in Practice, 2nd ed. Boston: Addison Wesley, 2003.

Digital Library

[5]

M. v. d. Berg, A. Tang, and R. Farenhorst, "A Constraint-Oriented Approach to Software Architecture Design," in Proceedings of the Quality Software International Conference (QSIC 2009), 2009, pp. 396--405.

Digital Library

[6]

J. Bosch, "Software Architecture: The Next Step," in Software Architecture: First European Workshop, EWSA 2004, St Andrews, UK., 2004, pp. 194--199.

[7]

J. Burge, "Software Engineering Using design RATionale," in Computer Science: Worcester Polytechnic Institute, 2005, p. 211.

[8]

R. C. de Boer, R. Farenhorst, P. Lago, H. van Vliet, V. Clerc, and A. Jansen, "Architectural Knowledge: Getting to the Core," in 3rd International Conference on the Quality of Software Architectures (QoSA), 2007.

Digital Library

[9]

T. Dingsøyr, P. Lago, and H. V. Vliet, "Rationale promotes Learning about Architectural Knowledge," in 8th International Workshop on Learning Software Organizations (LSO 2006), 2006, pp. 59--67.

[10]

N. Epley and T. Gilovich, "The anchoring-and-adjustment heuristic," Psychological Science, vol. 17(4), p. 311, 2006.

[11]

J. Evans, "Heuristic and analytic processes in reasoning," British Journal of Psychology, vol. 75 pp. 451--468, 1984.

[12]

J. S. Evans, "In two minds: dual-process accounts of reasoning," Trends in Cognitive Sciences, vol. 7(10), pp. 454--459, 2003.

[13]

F. Shipman III and R. McCall, "Integrating different perspectives on design rationale: Supporting the emergence of design rationale from design communication," Artificial Intelligence in Engineering Design, Analysis, and Manufacturing, vol. 11(2), pp. 141--154, 1997.

[14]

U. v. Heesch and P. Avgeriou, " - A Descriptive SurveyNaive Architecting - Understanding the Reasoning Process of Students," in Software Architecture. vol. 6285: Springer Berlin / Heidelberg, 2010, pp. 24--37.

Digital Library

[15]

P. J. Hurley, A concise introduction to logic. Belmont, Calif.: Thomson Wadsworth, 2006.

[16]

D. Kahneman and A. Tversky, "Subjective probability: A judgment of representativeness," Cognitive Psychology, vol. 3(3), pp. 430--454, 1972.

[17]

D. Kahneman, A. Tversky, and P. Slovic, Judgment under uncertainty heuristics and biases. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1982.

[18]

R. Kazman, M. Klein, M. Barbacci, T. Longstaff, H. Lipson, and J. Carriere, "The architecture tradeoff analysis method," in Proceedings of the Fourth IEEE International Conference on Engineering of Complex Computer Systems (ICECCS '98), 1998, pp. 68--78.

[19]

W. Kunz and H. Rittel, Issues as Elements of Information Systems: Center for Planning and Development Research,University of California at Berkeley, 1970.

[20]

P. Lago and H. van Vliet, "Explicit assumptions enrich architectural models," in Proceedings 27th International Conference on Software Engineering {ICSE}, 2005, pp. 206--214.

Digital Library

[21]

J. Lee and K. Lai, "What is Design Rationale?," in Design Rationale - Concepts, Techniques, and Use, T. Moran and J. Carroll, Eds. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1996, pp. 21--51.

Digital Library

[22]

A. Maclean, R. Young, V. Bellotti, and T. Moran, "Questions, Options and Criteria: Elements of Design Space Analysis," in Design Rationale - Concepts, Techniques, and Use, T. Moran and J. Carroll, Eds. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1996, pp. 53--105.

Digital Library

[23]

R. McCall, "Critical Conversations: Feedback as a Stimulus to a Creativity in Software Design," Human Technology, vol. 6(1), pp. 11--37, 2010.

[24]

E. R. Poort and H. v. Vliet, "Architecting as a Risk- and Cost Management Discipline," in Proceedings of the Ninth IEEE/IFIP Working Conference on Software Architecture, 2011.

Digital Library

[25]

H. W. J. Rittel and M. M. Webber, "Dilemmas in a general theory of planning," Policy Sciences, vol. 4(2), pp. 155--169, 1973.

[26]

D. A. Schön, "The reflective practitioner : how professionals think in action," Nueva York, EUA : Basic Books, 1983.

[27]

H. Simon and A. Newell, "Human Problem Solving: The State of The Theory in 1970," Carnegie-Mellon University, 1972.

Digital Library

[28]

H. A. Simon, "Bounded Rationality and Organizational Learning," Organization Science, vol. 2(1), pp. 125--134, 1991.

Digital Library

[29]

A. Tang, A. Aleti, J. Burge, and H. van Vliet, "What makes software design effective?," Design Studies, vol. 31(6), pp. 614--640, 2010.

[30]

A. Tang, P. Avgeriou, A. Jansen, R. Capilla, and M. Ali Babar, "A Comparative Study of Architecture Knowledge Management Tools," Journal of Systems and Software, vol. (2009).

Digital Library

[31]

A. Tang, T. d. Boer, and H. v. Vlient, "Building Roadmaps: A Knowledge Sharing Perspective," in Sixth Workshop SHAring and Reusing architectural Knowledge, Hawaii, 2011.

Digital Library

[32]

A. Tang and J. Han, "Architecture Rationalization: a Methodology for Architecture Verifiability, Traceability and Completeness," in 12th Annual IEEE International Conference and Workshop on the Engineering of Computer Based Systems ECBS 2005, U.S.A., 2005, pp. 135--144.

Digital Library

[33]

A. Tang and P. Lago, "Notes on Design Reasoning Techniques (V1.4)," Swinburne University of Technology Melbourne, 2010.

[34]

A. Tang, M. H. Tran, J. Han, and H. van Vliet, "Design Reasoning Improves Software Design Quality," in Proceedings of the Quality of Software-Architectures (QoSA 2008), 2008.

Digital Library

[35]

J. Tyree and A. Akerman, "Architecture Decisions: Demystifying Architecture," IEEE Software, vol. 22(2), pp. 19--27, 2005.

Digital Library

[36]

C. Zannier, M. Chiasson, and F. Maurer, "A model of design decision making based on empirical results of interviews with software designers," Information and Software Technology, vol. 49(6), pp. 637--653, 2007.

Digital Library

[37]

O. Zimmermann, J. Koehler, F. Leymann, R. Polley, and N. Schuster, "Managing architectural decision models with dependency relations, integrity constraints, and production rules," Journal of Systems and Software, vol. 82(8), pp. 1249--1267, 2009.

Digital Library

Cited By

Jimenez SGodot XPetronijevic JLassagne MDaille-Lefevre B(2024)Considering cognitive biases in designProcedia Computer Science10.1016/j.procs.2024.02.097232:C(2800-2809)Online publication date: 1-Jan-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1016/j.procs.2024.02.097
Pretorius CRazavian MEling KLangerak F(2024)When rationality meets intuition: A research agenda for software design decision‐makingJournal of Software: Evolution and Process10.1002/smr.266436:9Online publication date: 31-Mar-2024
https://doi.org/10.1002/smr.2664
Borowa KKamoda SOgrodnik PZalewski A(2023)Fixations in Agile Software Development TeamsFoundations of Computing and Decision Sciences10.2478/fcds-2023-000148:1(3-18)Online publication date: 19-Mar-2023
https://doi.org/10.2478/fcds-2023-0001
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

Software designers, are you biased?
1. Software and its engineering
  1. Software creation and management
    1. Designing software
      1. Requirements analysis
      2. Software implementation planning
        Software design techniques
    2. Software development process management

Recommendations

Software Engineering Education: Towards Ethical, Reliable, and Beautiful Software
Designing '24: Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Designing Software

In this paper, we present our experience with an innovative pedagogical approach to software engineering in a graduate-level advanced software engineering course. Our approach to software engineering and software design education relies on six dimensions:...
Software design sketching with calico
ASE '10: Proceedings of the 25th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering

Despite the availability of a host of software design notations and associated tools, software developers are known to frequently turn to the whiteboard when faced with a specific design problem. There, they typically engage in an informal form of ...
A demonstration of a distributed software design sketching tool
ICSE '11: Proceedings of the 33rd International Conference on Software Engineering

Software designers frequently sketch when they design, particularly during the early phases of exploration of a design problem and its solution. In so doing, they shun formal design tools, the reason being that such tools impose conformity and precision ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

SHARK '11: Proceedings of the 6th International Workshop on SHAring and Reusing Architectural Knowledge

May 2011

62 pages

ISBN:9781450305969

DOI:10.1145/1988676

General Chairs:
Patricia Lago
VU University Amsterdam, the Netherlands
,
Paris Avgeriou
University of Groningen, the Netherlands
,
Philippe Kruchten
University of British Columbia, Canada

Copyright © 2011 ACM.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Sponsors

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 24 May 2011

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Keynote

Conference

ICSE11

Sponsor:

SIGSOFT

ICSE11: International Conference on Software Engineering

May 24, 2011

HI, Waikiki, Honolulu, USA

Upcoming Conference

ICSE 2025

2025 IEEE/ACM 46th International Conference on Software Engineering

April 26 - May 3, 2025

Ottawa , ON , Canada

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

34
Total Citations
View Citations
471
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)45
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)2

Reflects downloads up to 05 Mar 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Jimenez SGodot XPetronijevic JLassagne MDaille-Lefevre B(2024)Considering cognitive biases in designProcedia Computer Science10.1016/j.procs.2024.02.097232:C(2800-2809)Online publication date: 1-Jan-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1016/j.procs.2024.02.097
Pretorius CRazavian MEling KLangerak F(2024)When rationality meets intuition: A research agenda for software design decision‐makingJournal of Software: Evolution and Process10.1002/smr.266436:9Online publication date: 31-Mar-2024
https://doi.org/10.1002/smr.2664
Borowa KKamoda SOgrodnik PZalewski A(2023)Fixations in Agile Software Development TeamsFoundations of Computing and Decision Sciences10.2478/fcds-2023-000148:1(3-18)Online publication date: 19-Mar-2023
https://doi.org/10.2478/fcds-2023-0001
Mohanani RRalph PTurhan BMandic V(2022)How Templated Requirements Specifications Inhibit Creativity in Software EngineeringIEEE Transactions on Software Engineering10.1109/TSE.2021.311250348:10(4074-4086)Online publication date: 1-Oct-2022
https://doi.org/10.1109/TSE.2021.3112503
Borowa KJarek MMystkowska GPaszko WZalewski A(2022)Debiasing Architectural Decision-Making: A Workshop-Based Training ApproachSoftware Architecture10.1007/978-3-031-16697-6_11(159-166)Online publication date: 9-Sep-2022
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-16697-6_11
Borowa KDwornik RZalewski A(2022)Is Knowledge the Key? An Experiment on Debiasing Architectural Decision-Making - a Pilot StudyProduct-Focused Software Process Improvement10.1007/978-3-030-91452-3_14(207-214)Online publication date: 1-Jan-2022
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-91452-3_14
Bucaioni APelliccione PWohlrab R(2021)Aligning Architecture with Business Goals in the Automotive Domain2021 IEEE 18th International Conference on Software Architecture (ICSA)10.1109/ICSA51549.2021.00020(126-137)Online publication date: Mar-2021
https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSA51549.2021.00020
Borowa KZalewski AKijas S(2021)The Influence of Cognitive Biases on Architectural Technical Debt2021 IEEE 18th International Conference on Software Architecture (ICSA)10.1109/ICSA51549.2021.00019(115-125)Online publication date: Mar-2021
https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSA51549.2021.00019
Zalewski ABorowa KLisocki K(2021)Supporting Architectural Decision-Making with Data Retrieved from Online CommunitiesTheory and Engineering of Dependable Computer Systems and Networks10.1007/978-3-030-76773-0_48(496-509)Online publication date: 27-May-2021
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-76773-0_48
Ramin FRothermel GBae D(2020)The role of egocentric bias in undergraduate Agile software development teamsProceedings of the ACM/IEEE 42nd International Conference on Software Engineering: Companion Proceedings10.1145/3377812.3382167(122-124)Online publication date: 27-Jun-2020
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3377812.3382167
Show More Cited By

View Options

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Figures

Tables

Media

View Table of Conten