In scientific research, evidence is often based on empirical data. Scholars tend to rely on students as participants in experiments in order to validate their thesis. They are an obvious choice when it comes to scientific research: They are usually willing to participate and are often themselves pursuing an education in the experiment’s domain. The software engineering domain is no exception. However, readers, authors, and reviewers do sometimes question the validity of experimental data that is gathered in controlled experiments from students. This is why we will address this difficult-to-answer question: Are students a proper substitute for experienced professional engineers while performing experiments in a typical software engineering experiment. As we demonstrate in this paper, it is not a “yes or no” answer. In some aspects, students were not outperformed by professionals, but in others, students would not only give different answers compared to professionals, but their answers would also diverge. In this paper we will show and analyze the results of a controlled experiment in the source code quality domain in terms of comparing student and professional responses. We will show that authors have to be careful when employing students in experiments, especially when complex and advanced domains are addressed. However, they may be a proper substitution in cases, where non-advanced aspects are required.
Secure Software Engineering: A Knowledge Modeling based Approach for Inferring Association between Source Code and Design Artifacts