research-article

Are there gender differences when interacting with social goal models?: A quasi-experiment

Authors:

Catarina Gralha,

Miguel Goulão,

João AraujoAuthors Info & Claims

Empirical Software Engineering, Volume 25, Issue 6

Pages 5416 - 5453

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10664-020-09883-y

Published: 01 November 2020 Publication History

Abstract

Context

Research has shown gender differences in problem-solving, and gender biases in how software supports it. GenderMag has five problem-solving facets related to gender-inclusiveness: motivation for using software, information processing style, computer self-efficacy, attitude towards risk, and ways of learning new technology. Some facet values are more frequent in women, others in men. The role these facets may play when interacting with social goal models is unexplored.

Objectives

We evaluated the impact of different levels of GenderMag facets on creating, modifying, understanding, and reviewing iStar 2.0 models.

Methods

We performed a quasi-experiment and characterised 180 participants according to each GenderMag facet. Participants performed creation, modification, understanding, and reviewing tasks on iStar 2.0. We measured their accuracy, speed, and ease, using metrics of task success, time, and effort, collected with eye-tracking, EEG and EDA sensors, and participants’ feedback.

Results

Although participants with facet levels frequently seen in women had lower speed when compared to those with facet levels more often observed in men, their accuracy was higher. There were also statistically significant differences in visual and mental effort, and stress. Overall, participants were able to create, modify, and understand the models reasonably well, but struggled when reviewing them.

Conclusions

Participants with a comprehensive information processing style and a conservative attitude towards risk (characteristics frequently seen in female) solved the tasks with lower speed but higher accuracy. Participants with a selective information processing style (characteristic frequently seen in males) were able to better separate what was relevant from what was not. The complementarity of results suggests there is more gain in leveraging people’s diversity.

References

[1]

Andreassi JL Psychophysiology: human behavior & physiological response 2013 London Psychology Press

[2]

Appel M, Kronberger N, and Aronson J Stereotype threat impairs ability building: Effects on test preparation among women in science and technology Eur J Soc Psychol 2011 41 7 904-913

[3]

Basili VR and Rombach HD The TAME project: Towards improvement-oriented software environments IEEE Trans Softw Eng 1988 14 6 758-773

[4]

Beckwith L, Burnett M, Wiedenbeck S, Cook C, Sorte S, Hastings M (2005) Effectiveness of end-user debugging software features: are there gender issues?. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems, ACM, pp 869–878

[5]

Beckwith L, Kissinger C, Burnett M, Wiedenbeck S, Lawrance J, Blackwell A, Cook C (2006) Tinkering and gender in end-user programmers’ debugging. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems, ACM, pp 231–240

[6]

BioSignalsPlux Wristband (2020) BioSignalsPlus Wearables. https://biosignalsplux.com/. (Last access: May, 2020)

[7]

BITalino (2020) BITalino - Biomedical Equipement Low-cost Toolkit. http://bitalino.com/. (Last access: May, 2020)

[8]

Burnett M, Counts R, Lawrence R, Hanson H (2017) Gender hci and microsoft: Highlights from a longitudinal study. In: 2017 IEEE symposium on visual languages and human-centric computing (VL/HCC), IEEE, pp 139–143

[9]

Burnett M, Fleming SD, Iqbal S, Venolia G, Rajaram V, Farooq U, Grigoreanu V, Czerwinski M (2010) Gender differences and programming environments: across programming populations. In: Proceedings of the 2010 ACM-IEEE international symposium on empirical software engineering and measurement, pp 1–10

[10]

Burnett M, Horvath A, Oleson A (2020) Gendermag personas foundations document. http://eusesconsortium.org/gender/GenderMagPersona-FoundationDocuments/Foundations.html

[11]

Burnett M, Stumpf S, Macbeth J, Makri S, Beckwith L, Kwan I, Peters A, and Jernigan W Gendermag: A method for evaluating software’s gender inclusiveness Interact Comput 2016 28 6 760-787

[12]

Burnett MM, Beckwith L, Wiedenbeck S, Fleming SD, Cao J, Park TH, Grigoreanu V, and Rector K Gender pluralism in problem-solving software Interact Comput 2011 23 5 450-460

[13]

Byrnes JP, Miller DC, and Schafer WD Gender differences in risk taking: a meta-analysis Psychol Bull 1999 125 3 367

[14]

Cafferata P and Tybout AM Gender differences in information processing: a selectivity interpretation. Cognitive and affective responses to advertising 1989 Lanham Lexington Books

[15]

Cagiltay NE, Tokdemir G, Kilic O, and Topalli D Performing and analyzing non-formal inspections of entity relationship diagram (erd) J Syst Softw 2013 86 8 2184-2195

[16]

Cao A, Chintamani KK, Pandya AK, and Ellis RD NASA TLX: Software for assessing subjective mental workload Behav Res Methods 2009 41 1 113-117

[17]

Carlson NR Physiology of Behavior 2019 12th edn. London Pearson

[18]

Charness G and Gneezy U Strong evidence for gender differences in risk taking J Econ Behav Organ 2012 83 1 50-58

[19]

Cohen J A power primer Psychol Bull 1992 112 1 155

[20]

Crosby ME and Stelovsky J How do we read algorithms? a case study Computer 1990 23 1 25-35

[21]

Dalpiaz F, Franch X, Horkoff J (2016) iStar 2.0 language guide arXiv:1605.07767v3

[22]

Dishman RK, Nakamura Y, Garcia ME, Thompson RW, Dunn AL, and Blair SN Heart rate variability, trait anxiety, and perceived stress among physically fit men and women Int J Psychophysiol 2000 37 2 121-133

[23]

Dohmen T, Falk A, Huffman D, Sunde U, Schupp J, and Wagner GG Individual risk attitudes: Measurement, determinants, and behavioral consequences J Eur Econ Assoc 2011 9 3 522-550

[24]

Duchowski A (2007) Eye tracking methodology: Theory and practice, vol 373, Springer Science & Business Media, Berlin

[25]

Durndell A and Haag Z Computer self efficacy, computer anxiety, attitudes towards the internet and reported experience with the internet, by gender, in an east european sample Comput Human Behav 2002 18 5 521-535

[26]

Ekman P, Levenson RW, and Friesen WV Autonomic nervous system activity distinguishes among emotions Science 1983 221 4616 1208-1210

[27]

Fisher A, Margolis J (2003) Unlocking the clubhouse: women in computing. In: Grissom S, Knox D, Joyce DT, Dann W (eds) Proceedings of the 34th SIGCSE technical symposium on computer science education, 2003, ACM, p 23

[28]

Fisher M, Cox A, Zhao L (2006) Using sex differences to link spatial cognition and program comprehension. In: 2006 22nd IEEE international conference on software maintenance, IEEE, pp 289–298

[29]

Fritz T, Begel A, Müller SC, Yigit-Elliott S, Züger M (2014) Using psycho-physiological measures to assess task difficulty in software development. In: Proceedings of the 36th international conference on software engineering, ACM, pp 402–413

[30]

Galhotra S, Brun Y, Meliou A (2017) Fairness testing: testing software for discrimination. In: Proceedings of the 11th joint meeting on foundations of software engineering, ACM, pp 498–510

[31]

Goldberg JH and Kotval XP Computer interface evaluation using eye movements: methods and constructs Int J Ind Ergon 1999 24 6 631-645

[32]

Gralha C (2019) iStarLab Tool. http://microlina.github.io/Framework/tools/iStarLab2.0/ (Last access: May 2020)

[33]

Gralha C (2019) Quality evaluation of requirements models: The case of goal models and scenarios. Ph.D. thesis, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Portugal

[34]

Gralha C, Goulão M, Araújo J (2019) Analysing gender differences in building social goal models: a quasi-experiment. In: Proceedings of the IEEE 27th international requirements engineering conference (RE 2019), IEEE, pp 165–176

[35]

Gralha C, Goulão M, Araújo J (2019) Are there gender differences when interacting with social goal models? Supplemental Material. 10.5281/zenodo.3819208 (Last access: May 2020)

[36]

Grigoreanu V, Burnett M, Wiedenbeck S, Cao J, Rector K, and Kwan I End-user debugging strategies: A sensemaking perspective ACM Trans Comput Human Interact 2012 19 1 5

[37]

Haag A, Goronzy S, Schaich P, Williams J (2004) Emotion recognition using bio-sensors: First steps towards an automatic system. In: Proceedings of the tutorial and research workshop on affective dialogue system (ASD 2004). Springer, New York, pp 36–48, 10.1007/978-3-540-24842-2_4

[38]

Hancock PA, Chignell MH (1986) Toward a theory of mental workload: Stress and adaptability in human-machine systems. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics pp 378–383

[39]

Handy TC Event-related potentials: A methods handbook 2005 Cambridge MIT Press

[40]

Hart SG (2006) Nasa-task load index (nasa-tlx); 20 years later. In: Proceedings of the human factors and ergonomics society annual meeting, vol 50. SAGE Publications, New York, pp 904–908, 10.1177/154193120605000909

[41]

Hart SG and Staveland LE Development of nasa-tlx (task load index): Results of empirical and theoretical research Adv Psychol 1988 52 139-183

[42]

Hartzel K How self-efficacy and gender issues affect software adoption and use Commun ACM 2003 46 167-171

[43]

Hou W, Kaur M, Komlodi A, Lutters WG, Boot L, Cotten SR, Morrell C, Ozok AA, Tufekci Z (2006) Girls don’t waste time:pre-adolescent attitudes toward ICT. In: Olson GM, Jeffries R (eds) Extended abstracts proceedings of the 2006 conference on human factors in computing systems, CHI 2006, ACM, pp 875–880

[44]

Huffman AH, Whetten J, and Huffman WH Using technology in higher education: the influence of gender roles on technology self-efficacy Comput Hum Behav 2013 29 4 1779-1786

[45]

Ikutani Y, Uwano H (2014) Brain activity measurement during program comprehension with nirs. In: Proceedings of the 15th IEEE/ACIS international conference on software engineering, artificial intelligence, networking and parallel/distributed computing (SNPD 2014), IEEE, pp 1–6, 10.1109/SNPD.2014.6888727

[46]

Jernigan W, Horvath A, Lee M, Burnett M, Cuilty T, Kuttal S, Peters A, Kwan I, Bahmani F, Ko A (2015) A principled evaluation for a principled idea garden. In: IEEE Symposium on visual languages and human-centric computing, IEEE, pp 235–243

[47]

Kitchenham B, Madeyski L, Brereton P (2019) Problems with statistical practice in human-centric software engineering experiments. In: Proceedings of the evaluation and assessment on software engineering, pp 134–143

[48]

Kitchenham B, Madeyski L, Budgen D, Keung J, Brereton P, Charters S, Gibbs S, and Pohthong A Robust statistical methods for empirical software engineering Empir Softw Eng 2017 22 2 579-630

[49]

Kramer AF (1991) Physiological metrics of mental workload: A review of recent progress. In: Damos DL (ed) Multiple-task performance. 1st edn. Taylor & francis, New York, pp 279–328

[50]

Li M, Lu BL (2009) Emotion classification based on gamma-band eeg. In: Proceedings of the international conference of the IEEE engineering in medicine and biology society, IEEE, pp 1223–1226, 10.1109/IEMBS.2009.5334139

[51]

Luque-Casado A, Perales JC, Cárdenas D, and Sanabria D Heart rate variability and cognitive processing: the autonomic response to task demands Biol Psychol 2016 113 83-90

[52]

Martini FH, Bartholomew EF (2016) Essentials of anatomy and physiology, 7th edn., Pearson, London

[53]

Meyers-Levy J and Loken B Revisiting gender differences: What we know and what lies ahead J Consum Psychol 2015 25 1 129-149

[54]

Meyers-Levy J and Maheswaran D Exploring differences in males and females processing strategies J Consum Res 1991 18 1 63-70

[55]

Müller SC, Fritz T (2015) Stuck and frustrated or in flow and happy: sensing developers’ emotions and progress. In: 2015 IEEE/ACM 37Th IEEE international conference on software engineering, IEEE, vol 1, pp 688–699

[56]

Murugappan M, Nagarajan R, Yaacob S (2009) Modified energy based time-frequency features for classifying human emotions using eeg. In: International conference on man-machine systems, pp 1–5

[57]

Nasa (2020) TLX@NASA Ames - NASA TLX Paper/Pencil Version. https://humansystems.arc.nasa.gov/groups/TLX/tlxpaperpencil.php. (Last access: May)

[58]

NeuroSky MindWave EEG headset (2020) EEG Sensors - EEG Headsets NeuroSky MindWave. http://neurosky.com/biosensors/eeg-sensor/biosensors/. (Last access: May, 2020)

[59]

Nourbakhsh N, Wang Y, Chen F, Calvo RA (2012) Using galvanic skin response for cognitive load measurement in arithmetic and reading tasks. In: Proceedings of the 24th Australian computer-human interaction conference, ACM, pp 420–423

[60]

O’Donnell E and Johnson E Gender effects on processing effort during analytical procedures Int J Auditing 2001 5 91-105

[61]

Paas FGWC and Van Merriënboer JJG The efficiency of instructional conditions: an approach to combine mental effort and performance measures Human Factors J Human Factors Ergonom Soc 1993 35 4 737-743

[62]

Paas FGWC and Van Merriënboer JJG Instructional control of cognitive load in the training of complex cognitive tasks Educ Psychol Rev 1994 6 4 351-371

[63]

Pajares F and Miller MD Role of self-efficacy and self-concept beliefs in mathematical problem solving: a path analysis J Educ Psychol 1994 86 2 193

[64]

Pereira R (2020) Avaliação da qualidade de user stories. Master’s thesis, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Portugal

[65]

Petrusel R, Mendling J (2013) Eye-tracking the factors of process model comprehension tasks. In: Proceedings of the 25th international conference on advanced information systems engineering, pp 224–239, 10.1007/978-3-642-38709-8_15

[66]

Pimentel J, Castro J (2018) Pistar tool – a pluggable online tool for goal modeling. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international requirements engineering conference (RE 2018), IEEE, pp 498–499, 10.1109/RE.2018.00071

[67]

Poole A and Ball LJ Eye tracking in HCI and usability research Encyclopedia Human Comput Interact 2006 1 211-219

[68]

Porras GC and Guéhéneuc YG An empirical study on the efficiency of different design pattern representations in uml class diagrams Empir Softw Eng 2010 15 5 493-522

[69]

Radach R, Hyona J, Deubel H (2003) The Mind’s eye: Cognitive and applied aspects of eye movement research, 1st edn., Elsevier, New York

[70]

Rayner K Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research Psychol Bull 1998 124 3 372-422

[71]

Rosner D, Bean J (2009) Learning from ikea hacking: i’m not one to decoupage a tabletop and call it a day. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems, pp 419–422

[72]

Runeson P, Host M, Rainer A, and Regnell B Case study research in software engineering: Guidelines and examples 2012 New York Wiley

[73]

Santos M, Gralha C, Goulão M, Araujo J, Moreira A (2018) On the impact of semantic transparency on understanding and reviewing social goal models. In: Proceedings of the IEEE 26th international requirements engineering conference (RE 2018), IEEE, pp 228–239

[74]

Santos M, Gralha C, Goulão M, Araújo J, Moreira A, Cambeiro J (2016) What is the impact of bad layout in the understandability of social goal models?. In: Proceedings of the IEEE 24th international requirements engineering conference (RE 2016), IEEE, pp 206–215

[75]

Sharafi Z, Marchetto A, Susi A, Antoniol G, Guéhéneuc YG (2013) An empirical study on the efficiency of graphical vs. textual representations in requirements comprehension. In: Proceedings of the 21st international conference on program comprehension, IEEE, pp 33–42

[76]

Sharafi Z, Shaffer T, Sharif B, et al. (2015) Eye-tracking metrics in software engineering. In: 2015 Asia-pacific software engineering conference (APSEC), IEEE, pp 96–103

[77]

Sharafi Z, Soh Z, and Guéhéneuc YG A systematic literature review on the usage of eye-tracking in software engineering Inf Softw Technol 2015 67 79-107

[78]

Sharafi Z, Soh Z, Guéhéneuc YG, Antoniol G (2012) Women and men – different but equal: on the impact of identifier style on source code reading. In: 20th IEEE international conference on program comprehension (ICPC), IEEE, pp 27–36

[79]

Sharif B (2011) Empirical assessment of uml class diagram layouts based on architectural importance. In: Proceeding of the 27th international conference on software maintenance, IEEE, pp 544–549, 10.1109/ICSM.2011.6080828

[80]

Sharif B, Maletic J (2010) An eye tracking study on the effects of layout in understanding the role of design patterns. In: Proceedings of the 26th IEEE international conference on software maintenance, IEEE, pp 1–10, 10.1109/ICSM.2010.5609582

[81]

Shi Y, Ruiz N, Taib R, Choi E, Chen F (2007) Galvanic skin response (gsr) as an index of cognitive load, pp 2651–2656

[82]

Showkat D, Grimm C (2018) Identifying gender differences in information processing style, self-efficacy, and tinkering for robot tele-operation. In: Proceedings of the 15th international conference on ubiquitous robots, IEEE, pp 443–448

[83]

Siegmund J, Kästner C, Apel S, Parnin C, Bethmann A, Leich T, Saake G, Brechmann A (2014) Understanding understanding source code with functional magnetic resonance imaging. In: Proceedings of the 36th international conference on software engineering (CAiSE 2014), ACM, pp 378–389, 10.1145/2568225.2568252

[84]

Simon SJ The impact of culture and gender on web sites: an empirical study Data Base 2001 32 1 18-37

[85]

Sloan RP, Shapiro PA, Bagiella E, Boni SM, Paik M, Bigger JT Jr, Steinman RC, and Gorman JM Effect of mental stress throughout the day on cardiac autonomic control Biol Psychol 1994 37 2 89-99

[86]

de Smet B, Lempereur L, Sharafi Z, Guéhéneuc YG, Antoniol G, and Habra N Taupe: Visualizing and analyzing eye-tracking data Sci Comput Program 2014 79 260-278

[87]

Smith ME, Gevins A (2005) Neurophysiologic monitoring of mental workload and fatigue during operation of a flight simulator. In: Biomonitoring for physiological and cognitive performance during military operations, International society for optics and photonics, vol 5797, pp 116–127

[88]

Störrle H, Baltsen N, Christoffersen H, Maier A (2014) On the impact of diagram layout: How are models actually read?. In: International conference on model driven engineering languages and systems (moDELS), pp 31–35

[89]

Szafir D, Mutlu B (2012) Pay attention!: designing adaptive agents that monitor and improve user engagement. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems, ACM, pp 11–20

[90]

Tan DS, Czerwinski M, Robertson G (2003) Women go with the (optical) flow. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems, ACM, pp 209–215

[91]

Tatum WO Handbook of EEG Interpretation 2014 2nd edn. New York Demos Medical Publishing

[92]

The Eye Tribe (2020) The Eye Tribe eye-tracker. https://theeyetribe.com/. (Last access: May, 2020)

[93]

Torkzadeh G and Koufteros X Factorial validity of a computer self-efficacy scale and the impact of computer training Educ Psychol Measure 1994 54 3 813-821

[94]

Vegas S, Apa C, and Juristo N Crossover designs in software engineering experiments: Benefits and perils IEEE Trans Softw Eng 2016 42 2 120-135

[95]

Vorvoreanu M, Zhang L, Huang Y, Hilderbrand C, Steine-Hanson Z, Burnett M (2019) From gender biases to gender-inclusive design: an empirical investigation. In: ACM SIGCHI

[96]

Weber EU, Blais AR, and Betz NE A domain-specific risk-attitude scale: Measuring risk perceptions and risk behaviors J Behav Decision Making 2002 15 4 263-290

[97]

Welford AT Mental workload as a function of demand, capacity, strategy and skill Ergonomics 1978 21 3 151-167

[98]

Wohlin C, Runeson P, Höst M, Ohlsson MC, Regnell B, and Wesslén A Experimentation in software engineering 2012 2nd edn. London Springer

[99]

Yeh YY and Wickens CD Dissociation of performance and subjective measures of workload Human Factors J Human Factors Ergonom Soc 1988 30 1 111-120

[100]

Yu E (1995) Modelling strategic relationships for process reengineering. Ph.D. thesis, University of Toronto, Canada

[101]

Yu E (1997) Towards modelling and reasoning support for early-phase requirements engineering. In: Proceedings of ISRE’97: 3rd IEEE international symposium on requirements engineering, IEEE, pp 226–235

[102]

Yusuf S, Kagdi H, Maletic J, et al. (2007) Assessing the comprehension of uml class diagrams via eye tracking. In: Proceeding of the 15th international conference on program comprehension, IEEE, pp 113–122

Cited By

Anderson AGuevara JMoussaoui FLi TVorvoreanu MBurnett M(2024)Measuring User Experience Inclusivity in Human-AI Interaction via Five User Problem-Solving StylesACM Transactions on Interactive Intelligent Systems10.1145/366374014:3(1-90)Online publication date: 24-Sep-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3663740
Krüger JÇalıklı GBershadskyy DOtto SZabel SHeyer R(2024)Guidelines for using financial incentives in software-engineering experimentationEmpirical Software Engineering10.1007/s10664-024-10517-w29:5Online publication date: 10-Aug-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s10664-024-10517-w
Gralha CPereira RGoulão MAraujo J(2022)Assessing user stories: the influence of template differences and gender-related problem-solving stylesRequirements Engineering10.1007/s00766-022-00389-127:4(521-544)Online publication date: 1-Dec-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s00766-022-00389-1

Recommendations

Gender and Help Seeking by Older Adults When Learning New Technologies
ASSETS '19: Proceedings of the 21st International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility

A gender stereotype that has some basis in research is that men are more reluctant to ask for directions than women. We wanted to investigate whether this stereotype applies to technology-related contexts, affecting older adults' abilities to learn new ...
Intersections of gender and sexual minority status

The present study refined existing bullying literature by examining differences in risk of three types of bullying victimization (offline only, cyberbullying only, and co-occurring victimization) for four different gender-sexual minority status groups ...
The Influence of Gender-Ethnic Intersectionality on Gender Stereotypes about IT Skills and Knowledge

One line of investigation in attempting to better understand the gender imbalance in the information technology (IT) field is to examine gender stereotypes about the skills and knowledge in the IT profession. A survey of 4046 university students in the ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image Empirical Software Engineering

Empirical Software Engineering Volume 25, Issue 6

Nov 2020

1119 pages

ISSN:1382-3256

Issue’s Table of Contents

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2020.

Publisher

Kluwer Academic Publishers

United States

Publication History

Published: 01 November 2020

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Funding Sources

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

3
Total Citations
View Citations
0
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)0
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

Reflects downloads up to 31 Jan 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Anderson AGuevara JMoussaoui FLi TVorvoreanu MBurnett M(2024)Measuring User Experience Inclusivity in Human-AI Interaction via Five User Problem-Solving StylesACM Transactions on Interactive Intelligent Systems10.1145/366374014:3(1-90)Online publication date: 24-Sep-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3663740
Krüger JÇalıklı GBershadskyy DOtto SZabel SHeyer R(2024)Guidelines for using financial incentives in software-engineering experimentationEmpirical Software Engineering10.1007/s10664-024-10517-w29:5Online publication date: 10-Aug-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s10664-024-10517-w
Gralha CPereira RGoulão MAraujo J(2022)Assessing user stories: the influence of template differences and gender-related problem-solving stylesRequirements Engineering10.1007/s00766-022-00389-127:4(521-544)Online publication date: 1-Dec-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s00766-022-00389-1

View Options

View options

Figures

Tables

Media

View Issue’s Table of Contents