Workshops‎ > ‎

CHASE 2018

11th International Workshop on Cooperative and Human Aspects of Software Engineering
(CHASE 2018)
An ICSE 2018 Workshop
Gothenburg, Sweden

Workshop Overview

Software is created for and with a wide range of stakeholders, from customers to management from value-added providers to customer service personnel, and from engineers to designers. These stakeholders work with teams of software engineers to develop and evolve software systems. All of these people and their interactions are central to software development. It is crucial to investigate the human and cooperative aspects of software development to understand current software practices, processes, and tools as well as their impact. In turn, this enables us to design and build support mechanisms (e.g., tools, processes) to improve all aspects of software development, and the use and evolution of deployed software systems. 

Researchers and practitioners have long recognized the need to investigate these aspects. However, their articles have been scattered across many conferences and communities. This workshop provides a unified forum for discussing high quality research studies, models, methods, and tools for human and cooperative aspects of software engineering. We provide a meeting place for academic, industry, and practitioner communities interested in this area, and for those who are curious to see what it is all about. 

This will be the 11th in a series of workshops held at ICSE focusing on this theme. The visualization of CHASE history and CHASE authors' network can be viewed in the following link: http://chasevis.azurewebsites.net/.

Workshop Program


Session Presentation type (duration in min.) Paper Title
09:00-09:30 Welcome and Madness Plenary (30)
09:30-10:15
Paper presentations
Full (15) Psychological Safety and Norm Clarity in Software Engineering Teams
  Short (10) How Do Practitioners Perceive Assurance Cases in Safety-Critical Software Systems?
  Short (10) The Structure of Software Design Discussions
  Short (10) Researching Cooperation and Communication in Continuous Software Engineering
10:15-10:30
Open discussion
Plenary (15)  
10:30-11:00   Coffee break (30) 
11:00-12:25
Paper presentations
Full (15) Some reasons why actual cross-fertilization in cross-functional agile teams is difficult
  Short (10) A Framework for Understanding Chatbots and their Future
11:30-12:30
Joint keynote with CSI-SE workshop
Joint keynote What would a science of software engineering look like?
12:30-14:00 Lunch break (90)  
14.00 to 14.45 Dynamic Table Rounds 1 Round table (45)  
14:45-15:15
Paper presentations
Short (10) Context in Programming: An Investigation of How Programmers Create Context
  Short (10) Who Gets a Patch Accepted First? Comparing the Contributions of Employees and Volunteers
  Short (10) Sketching with a Purpose: Moving from Supporting Modeling to Supporting Engineering Activities
15.15-15.30
Open discussion
Plenary (15)
15:30-16:00Coffee break (30)  
16.00-16.45 Dynamic Table Rounds 2 Round table (45)  
16:45-17:10
Paper presentations
Full (15) A Case Study of Distances in a Large Co-Located Software Development Organisation
  Short (10) Code review for newcomers: is it different?
17:10-17:30
Open discussion and final remarks
Plenary (20)

List of Accepted Papers

Lucas GrenOn Gender, Ethnicity, and Culture in Empirical Software Engineering Research
Jinghui Cheng, Micayla Goodrum, Ronald Metoyer and Jane Cleland-Huang. How Do Practitioners Perceive Assurance Cases in Safety-Critical Software Systems?
Helena Barke and Lutz Prechelt. Some reasons why actual cross-fertilization in cross-functional agile teams is difficult
Wiesław Kopeć, Kinga Skorupska, Anna Jaskulska, Radoslaw Nielek and Adam Wierzbicki. Guidelines Towards Better Participation of Older Adults in Software Development Processes using a new SPIRAL Method and Participatory Approach
Giovanni Viviani, Calahan Janik-Jones, Michalis Famelis and Gail MurphyThe Structure of So ware Design Discussions
Vladimir Kovalenko and Alberto BacchelliCode review for newcomers: is it different?
Naomi Unkelos-Shpigel and Irit Hadar. Leveraging motivational theories for designing gamification for RE
Rafael Chanin, Afonso Sales, Alan Santos, Leandro Pompermaier and Rafael Prikladnicki. A Collaborative Approach to Teaching Software Startups: Findings From a Study Using Challenge Based Learning
Robert Biddle, Martin KroppAndreas Meier and Craig AnslowMyAgile: Sociological and Cultural Effects of Agile on Teams and their Members
Elizabeth Bjarnason, Baldvin Gislason Bern and Linda Svedberg. A Case Study of Distances in a Large Co-Located Software Development Organisation
Per Lenberg and Robert FeldtPsychological Safety and Norm Clarity in Software Engineering Teams
Jailton Coelho, Luciana Silva, Marco Tulio Valente and André Hora. How to Attract Core Developers to FLOSS?
Torgeir Dingsøyr, Finn Olav Bjørnson, Nils Brede Moe, Knut H. Rolland and Eva Amdahl Seim. Rethinking Coordination in Large-Scale Software Development
George Marsicano, Victor Oliveira, Leila Mariz and Fabio Da Silva. An Initial Understanding of Task Interdependence in So ware Engineering: A Case Study
Marta Cecilia Camacho Ojeda, Julio Ariel Hurtado Alegría and Francisco Javier Alvarez. An Exploratory Case Study for Scoping Software Product Lines in a Collaborative Way
Adam Alami, Yvonne Dittrich and Andrzej Wasowski. Influencers of Quality Assurance in an Open Source Community
Matthias Book and André van der HoekSketching with a Purpose: Moving from Supporting Modeling to Supporting Engineering Activities
Sai Datta Vishnubhotla, Emilia Mendes and Lars Lundberg. Designing a capability-centric web tool to support agile team composition and task allocation: A work in progress
Yvonne Dittrich, Jacob Nørbjerg, Paolo Tell and Lars Bendix. Researching Cooperation and Communication in Continuous Software Engineering
Álvaro Menezes and Rafael Prikladnicki. Diversity in Software Engineering
Gustavo PintoLuiz Felipe Fronchetti Dias and Igor SteinmacherWho Gets a Patch Accepted First? Comparing the Contributions of Employees and Volunteers
Elahe Paikari and Andre van der Hoek. A Framework for Understanding Chatbots and their Future
Adriana Meza-Soria and André van der HoekToward Collecting and Delivering Knowledge for Software Design at the Whiteboard
Souti Chattopadhyay, Nicholas Nelson, Thien Nam, Mckenzie Calvert and Anita Sarma. Context in Programming: An Investigation of How Programmers Create Context
Lalit Sanagavarapu and Y. Raghu ReddyCrowdsourcing Security - Opportunities and Challenges

Important Dates

  • Workshop paper submissions due: February 5th, 2018.
  • Notification to workshop paper authors: March 5th, 2018.
  • Camera Ready deadline: March 19th, 2018.
  • Workshop: May 27th, 2018.

Workshop Themes                                                      

Topics of interest are about the human, cooperative, and collaborative aspects of software engineering such as:

  • Software design or engineering philosophies, practices, and tools;
  • Adapting tools or processes to accommodate a range of organizational and cultural situations;
  • Sociological, cultural, psychological, or cognitive aspects of software design or engineering;
  • Managerial or organizational aspects focused on people and their interactions;
  • Teamwork, collaboration, or cooperation in or across various development teams and methodologies;
  • Community-based software development (e.g., Open Source, crowdsourcing, etc);
  • Coordination and knowledge sharing at different scales (e.g., distributed teams, semi-anonymous collaboration, “borderless” teams);
  • Stakeholder participation within and across phases;
  • Processes and tools to support communication, collaboration, and cooperation among stakeholders.

Possible contributions include:

  • Empirical studies of software engineering teams or individuals in situ;
  • Laboratory studies of individual or team software engineering behavior;
  • Novel tools or processes motivated by observed needs or empirical investigations; 
  • Use of analysis techniques or frameworks from disciplines outside software engineering, applied to empirical software engineering topics;
  • Meta-research topics.
Submissions

We have three paper categories: 

  • 8-page full papers.
  • 4-page short papers.
  • 2-page notes.
These different categories offer researchers who are at different stages in their research maturity the opportunity to benefit from workshop participation. Page limits include references. 

All paper and notes submissions will be reviewed by 3 program committee members. The authors of accepted submissions will be asked to join the workshop. We will encourage all participants to submit at least a 2-page note, but the workshop will be open. All interested parties are welcome to register, even without an accepted paper.

Submissions should be made at the following website: 

https://easychair.org/conferences/?conf=chase2018


Workshop proceedings will be prepared by IEEE CPS and published by ACM. Workshop papers must follow the ACM formatting instructionsAccepted papers will be hosted on a password-protected, CHASE-hosted, collaboration site to foster discussion prior to the workshop. The official publication date of the workshop proceedings is the date the proceedings are made available in the ACM Library. This date may be up to two weeks prior to the first day of ICSE 2018. The official publication date affects the deadline for any patent filings related to published work.

Given time limitations and the interactive nature of CHASE's workshop format (for instance, see the CHASE 2017 Program), only a subset of papers will be selected for presentations based on their representativeness and potential for generating discussion. All accepted papers may contribute a poster to a poster session. All interested parties are welcome to register, even without an accepted paper.

Workshop Organizers 

Program Committee

  • Maurício Aniche, Delft University of Technology, Netherlands
  • Sandeep Athavale, TCS TRDDC, India
  • Andrew Begel, Microsoft, United States
  • Tayana Conte, UFAM, Brazil
  • Steve Counsell, Brunel University, United Kingdom
  • Giuseppe Destefanis, University Of Hertfordshire, United Kingdom
  • Torgeir Dingsøyr, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Norway
  • Yvonne Dittrich, IT University of Copenhagen, Denmark
  • Neil Ernst, University of Victoria, Canada
  • Fabian Fagerholm, University of Helsinki, Finland
  • Robert Feldt, Chalmers University of Technology, Sweden
  • Daniel Méndez Fernández, Technical University of Munich, Germany
  • Fernando Figueira Filho, Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte, Brazil
  • Marco Gerosa, Northern Arizona University (NAU), United States
  • Irit Hadar, University of Haifa, Israel
  • Tracy Hall, Brunel University, United Kingdom
  • Hideaki Hata, Nara Institute of Science and Technology, Japan
  • Sandeep Kaur Kuttal, University of Tulsa, United States
  • Filippo Lanubile, University of Bari, Italy
  • Thomas Latoza, George Mason University, United States
  • Tamara Lopez, The Open University, United Kingdom
  • Walid Maalej, University of Hamburg, Germany
  • Sabrina Marczak, PUCRS, Brazil
  • Nicole Novielli, Dipartimento di Informatica, University of Bari, Italy
  • Rafael Prikladnicki, PUCRS, Brazil
  • Norsaremah Salleh, International Islamic University Malaysia, Malaysia
  • Anita Sarma, Oregon State University, United States
  • Alexander Serebrenik, Eindhoven University of Technology, Netherlands
  • Leif Singer, University of Victoria, Canada
  • Igor Steinmacher, Universidade Tecnológica Federal do Paraná, Brazil
  • Xiaofeng Wang, Free University of Bozen-Bolzano, Italy
  • Minghui Zhou, Peking University, China

    Open Science Practices

    CHASE 2018 continues its previous years' experimentation with encouraging authors to use open science to make their research, data and dissemination accessible to anybody in the world with an Internet connection. Here follow our guidelines and recommendations for open access, open data and open source, and signed peer review.


    The following guidelines are recommendations and not mandatory. Your choice to use open science or not will not affect the review process for your paper.

    Open Access

    We encourage CHASE authors to self-archive their pre- and postprints in open, preserved repositories. This is legal and allowed by all major publishers including ACM and IEEE (granted in the copyright transfer agreement), and it lets anybody in the world reach your paper.


    If the authors of your paper wish to do this, we recommend:

    1. Upon submission to CHASE, submit your paper to arXiv.org and choose the arXiv.org perpetual, non-exclusive license to distribute. The paper version at this point is before peer-reviewed, and it is called preprint.

    2. Upon acceptance to CHASE, revise your article according to the peers comments, generate a PDF version of it, and submit it to arXiv.org, which supports article versioning.

    3. Note that you are not allowed to self-archive the PDF of the published article, that is the one you can find in ACM DL or IEEE Xplore. Only self-archive your own generated PDFs.


    We encourage you to use a preserved, archived repository instead of your personal website. Personal websites are prone to changes and errors, and more than 30% of them will not work in a 4 years period.

    Open Data and Open Source

    We encourage authors of accepted papers to make their data public, in order to enhance the transparency of the process and the reproducibility of the results.


    If the authors of your paper wish to do this, we recommend:

    1. Archive their data on preserved archives such as zenodo.org and figshare.com, so that the data will receive a DOI and become citable.

    2. Use the CC0 dedication when publishing the data (automatic when using zenodo and figshare), as explained here.


    Similarly, we encourage authors to make their research software accessible as open source and citable.


    Similarly to our open access, we encourage you to avoid putting the data on your own websites or systems like Dropbox, since more than 30% of them will not work in a 4 years period.

    Signed Peer Review

    Reviewers of CHASE are allowed to sign their reports as a first step to experiment an open peer review process at ICSE venues.


    Comments