[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/ skip to main content
10.1145/1852786.1852824acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesesemConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Gender differences and programming environments: across programming populations

Published: 16 September 2010 Publication History

Abstract

Although there has been significant research into gender regarding educational and workplace practices, there has been little investigation of gender differences pertaining to problem solving with programming tools and environments. As a result, there is little evidence as to what role gender plays in programming tools---and what little evidence there is has involved mainly novice and end-user programmers in academic studies. This paper therefore investigates how widespread such phenomena are in industrial programming situations, considering three disparate programming populations involving almost 3000 people and three different programming platforms in industry. To accomplish this, we analyzed four industry "legacy" studies from a gender perspective, triangulating results against each other and against a new fifth study, also in industry. We investigated gender differences in software feature usage and in tinkering/exploring software features. Furthermore, we examined how such differences tied to confidence. Our results showed significant gender differences in all three factors---across all populations and platforms.

References

[1]
Bandura, A. Social Foundations of Thought and Action. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA, 1986.
[2]
Bardzell, S. Feminist HCI: Taking stock and outlining an agenda for design, In Proc. ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, ACM (2010), 1301--1310.
[3]
Beckwith, L. and Burnett, M., Gender: An important factor in end-user programming environments? In Proc. IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing, IEEE (2004), 107--114.
[4]
Beckwith, L., Burnett, M., Wiedenbeck, S., Cook, C., Sorte, S., and Hastings, M. Effectiveness of end-user debugging software features: Are there gender issues? In Proc. ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, ACM (2005). 869--878.
[5]
Beckwith, L., Kissinger, C., Burnett, M., Wiedenbeck, S., Lawrance, J., Blackwell, A., and Cook, C., Tinkering and gender in end-user programmers' debugging, In Proc. ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, ACM (2006), 231--240.
[6]
Beckwith, L., Inman, D., Rector, K., and Burnett, M. On to the real world: Gender and self-efficacy in Excel, In Proc. IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing, IEEE (2007), 119--126.
[7]
Berenson, S., Slaten, K., Williams, L., and Ho, C.-W. Voices of women in a software engineering course: Reflections on collaboration. J. Educ. Resour. Comput. 4, 1 (2004).
[8]
Busch, T. Gender differences in self-efficacy and attitudes toward computers. J. Educ. Comput. Research 12, (1995).
[9]
Compeau, D., Higgins, C. Computer self-efficacy: Development of a measure and initial test. MIS Quarterly 19, 2 (1995).
[10]
Conover, W. J. and Iman, R. L. Rank transformations as a bridge between parametric and nonparametric statistics. The American Statistician 35, 3 (1981), 124--129.
[11]
Fennema, E., Carpenter, T., Jacobs, V., Franke, L., Levi. L. A longitudinal study of gender differences in young children's mathematical thinking. Educational Researcher 27, 5 (1998).
[12]
Gallagher, A. M., De Lisi, R. Gender differences in scholastic aptitude-test mathematics problem-solving among high-ability students. J. Educational Psychology 8, 2 (1994), 204--211.
[13]
Grigoreanu, V., Cao, J., Kulesza, T., Bogart, C., Rector, K., Burnett, M., and Wiedenbeck, S. Can feature design reduce the gender gap in end-user software development environments? In Proc. IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing, IEEE (2008), 149--156.
[14]
Hartzel, K. How self-efficacy and gender issues affect software adoption and use. Comm. ACM 46, 9 (2003), 167--171.
[15]
Kaye, J. Some statistical analyses of CHI. In Proc. ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Extended Abstracts, ACM (2009), 2585--2594.
[16]
Kelleher, C., Pausch. R., and Kiesler, S. Storytelling Alice motivates middle school girls to learn computer programming, In Proc. ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, ACM (2007), 1455--1464.
[17]
Lawton, C. Gender differences in way-finding strategies: Relationship to spatial ability and spatial anxiety. Sex Roles Journal 30, 11--12 (1994), 765--779.
[18]
Ljungblad, S. and Holmquist, L. Transfer scenarios: Grounding innovation with marginal practices, In Proc. ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, ACM (2007), 737--746.
[19]
Margolis, J. and Fisher, A. Unlocking the Clubhouse, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, USA, 2003.
[20]
McDowell, C., Werner, L., Bullock, H. E., Fernald, J. The impact of pair programming on student performance, perception and persistence, In Proc. International Conference on Software Engineering, ACM (2003), 602--607.
[21]
Meyers-Levy, J. Gender differences in information processing: A selectivity interpretation. In P. Cafferata & A. Tybout (Eds) Cognitive and Affective Responses to Advertising. Lexington Books, Lexington, MA, USA, 1989.
[22]
O'Donnell, E., Johnson, E. Gender effects on processing effort during analytical procedures. Int. J. Auditing 5, 2001, 91--105.
[23]
Powell M. and Ansic D. Gender differences in risk behavior in financial decision-making: An experimental analysis, J. Economic Psychology 18, 6 (1997), 605--628.
[24]
Rode, J. An ethnographic examination of the relationship of gender & end-user programming, Ph.D. Thesis, Univ. Calif., 2008.
[25]
Rosson, M. B., Sinha, H., Bhattacharya, M., and Zhao, D. Design planning in end-user web development, In Proc. IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing, IEEE (2007), 189--196.
[26]
Sheskin, D. J. Handbook of Parametric and Nonparametric Statistical Procedures. Chapman & Hall/CRC, 2007.
[27]
Simon, S. The impact of culture and gender on web sites: An empirical study. The Data Base for Advances in Information Systems 32, 1 (2001), 18--37.
[28]
Subrahmaniyan, N., Beckwith, L., Grigoreanu, V., Burnett, M., Wiedenbeck, S., Narayanan, V., Bucht, K., Drummond, R., and Fern, X. Testing vs. code inspection vs. what else? Male and female end users' debugging strategies. In Proc. ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, ACM (2008), 617--626.
[29]
Tan, D., Czerwinski, M. and Robertson, G. Women go with the (optical) flow, In Proc. ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, ACM (2003), 209--215.
[30]
Torkzadeh, G. and X. Koufteros. Factorial validity of a computer self-efficacy scale and the impact of computer training. Educational and Psychological Measurement 54, 3 (1994).
[31]
Wohlin, C., Runeson, P., Höst, M., Ohlsson, M. C., Regnell, B., and Wesslén, A. Experimentation in Software Engineering: An Introduction. Kluwer, 2000.
[32]
Yin, R. Case Study Methodology (3rd edition), Sage, 2003.

Cited By

View all
  • (2025)Software solutions for newcomers’ onboarding in software projects: A systematic literature reviewInformation and Software Technology10.1016/j.infsof.2024.107568177(107568)Online publication date: Jan-2025
  • (2024)Gender-Related Preferences for Learning by Tinkering: Updated Research is NeededProceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting10.1177/10711813241272118Online publication date: 24-Oct-2024
  • (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
  • Show More Cited By

Index Terms

  1. Gender differences and programming environments: across programming populations

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

    Information & Contributors

    Information

    Published In

    cover image ACM Conferences
    ESEM '10: Proceedings of the 2010 ACM-IEEE International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement
    September 2010
    423 pages
    ISBN:9781450300391
    DOI:10.1145/1852786
    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: 16 September 2010

    Permissions

    Request permissions for this article.

    Check for updates

    Author Tags

    1. gender
    2. programming
    3. programming tools

    Qualifiers

    • Research-article

    Funding Sources

    Conference

    ESEM '10
    Sponsor:

    Acceptance Rates

    ESEM '10 Paper Acceptance Rate 30 of 102 submissions, 29%;
    Overall Acceptance Rate 130 of 594 submissions, 22%

    Contributors

    Other Metrics

    Bibliometrics & Citations

    Bibliometrics

    Article Metrics

    • Downloads (Last 12 months)80
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)15
    Reflects downloads up to 11 Dec 2024

    Other Metrics

    Citations

    Cited By

    View all
    • (2025)Software solutions for newcomers’ onboarding in software projects: A systematic literature reviewInformation and Software Technology10.1016/j.infsof.2024.107568177(107568)Online publication date: Jan-2025
    • (2024)Gender-Related Preferences for Learning by Tinkering: Updated Research is NeededProceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting10.1177/10711813241272118Online publication date: 24-Oct-2024
    • (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
    • (2024)"You're on a bicycle with a little motor": Benefits and Challenges of Using AI Code AssistantsProceedings of the 2024 IEEE/ACM 17th International Conference on Cooperative and Human Aspects of Software Engineering10.1145/3641822.3641882(144-152)Online publication date: 14-Apr-2024
    • (2024)Investigating and Designing for Trust in AI-powered Code Generation ToolsProceedings of the 2024 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency10.1145/3630106.3658984(1475-1493)Online publication date: 3-Jun-2024
    • (2024)How Far Are We? The Triumphs and Trials of Generative AI in Learning Software EngineeringProceedings of the IEEE/ACM 46th International Conference on Software Engineering10.1145/3597503.3639201(1-13)Online publication date: 20-May-2024
    • (2023)Designing for Cognitive Diversity: Improving the GitHub Experience for Newcomers2023 IEEE/ACM 45th International Conference on Software Engineering: Software Engineering in Society (ICSE-SEIS)10.1109/ICSE-SEIS58686.2023.00007(1-12)Online publication date: May-2023
    • (2023)Predicting Work Environment and Job Environment Among Employees using Transfer Learning Approach2023 2nd International Conference on Automation, Computing and Renewable Systems (ICACRS)10.1109/ICACRS58579.2023.10404165(771-776)Online publication date: 11-Dec-2023
    • (2023)Gender Differences in the Group Dynamics of Smaller CS1 Project Groups2023 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE)10.1109/FIE58773.2023.10343369(1-9)Online publication date: 18-Oct-2023
    • (2023)GIRE: Gender-Inclusive Requirements EngineeringData & Knowledge Engineering10.1016/j.datak.2022.102108143(102108)Online publication date: Jan-2023
    • Show More Cited By

    View Options

    Login options

    View options

    PDF

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    Media

    Figures

    Other

    Tables

    Share

    Share

    Share this Publication link

    Share on social media