1,720,980 research outputs found
Team-Enacted Use versus Developer-Needed Use of Agile Practices: How Perceptual (In-)Congruence and Team Feedback-Seeking Shape Developer Well-Being
No full textAre agile practices always beneficial for developers? Although agile methods, such as daily stand-ups or pair programming, are designed to enhance flexibility and productivity, developers often experience a mismatch between the team-enacted use of these practices and their own individual needs. Using daily survey responses from 149 agile developers (1,510 observations), our study uncovers a crucial yet overlooked factor; perceived (in-)congruence between team-enacted and developer-needed agile practices significantly impacts developer well-being. We show that alignment between the use and need of agile practices is associated with higher well-being, whereas mismatches—both excessive and insufficient agile practices—can be detrimental. Interestingly, we find that frequent team feedback seeking amplifies the negative effects of misalignment but does not enhance well-being when alignment is achieved. These findings challenge the assumption that the use of agile practices is inherently beneficial and highlight the need for a tailored, developer-centric approach. For organizations, the key takeaway is clear. A “one-size-fits-all” approach to agile practices can backfire. Instead, fostering alignment through adaptive work environments, flexible agile practice use, and targeted interventions can promote sustainable developer well-being and long-term agile team effectiveness.Despite significant progress in understanding how the use of agile practices in teams affects crucial developer outcomes, we still know little about whether the team-enacted use of agile practices (e.g., daily stand-up meetings or pair programming) always aligns with the developer-needed use of such practices. In other words, does incongruence between the team-enacted versus individually needed use of agile practices matter for developer well-being? Additionally, how does developers’ team feedback-seeking behavior shape how developers respond to congruence and incongruence? Drawing on person-environment fit theory, we shed light on developers’ perceived (in-)congruence between the team-enacted versus individually needed use of agile practices and the resulting consequences for their well-being. In an experience-sampling study with 149 developers and 1,510 daily-level responses and by using multilevel polynomial regression and response surface methods, we show that perceived congruence (versus incongruence) consistently leads to higher levels of developer well-being. We also find that not all instances in which developers perceive high levels of team-enacted use of agile practices are equivalent. In fact, depending on the developer-needed use of agile practices in their daily work, enacting a high level of agile practices in teams can be just as detrimental as enacting a low level, revealing that the experience of agile practices use is more nuanced than previously recognized. Our findings also reveal an asymmetry; frequent (versus infrequent) team feedback-seeking developers experience amplified well-being losses from incongruence but not amplified well-being gains from congruence. In follow-up interviews with 32 developers from the experience-sampling study, we corroborate the main findings of our quantitative study and provide complementary insights into important boundary conditions of incongruence effects. Overall, these insights offer important implications for research on agile information systems development and for organizations seeking to align team-enacted agile practices with developers’ individual needs and feedback-seeking behavior in a human-centered and sustainable way. History: Rajiv Kohli, Senior Editor; Christy Cheung, Associate Editor. Funding: The authors’ work is funded by the German Research Foundation. Supplemental Material: The online appendix is available at https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.2023.0402 .Are agile practices always beneficial for developers? Although agile methods, such as daily stand-ups or pair programming, are designed to enhance flexibility and productivity, developers often experience a mismatch between the team-enacted use of these practices and their own individual needs. Using daily survey responses from 149 agile developers (1,510 observations), our study uncovers a crucial yet overlooked factor; perceived (in-)congruence between team-enacted and developer-needed agile practices significantly impacts developer well-being. We show that alignment between the use and need of agile practices is associated with higher well-being, whereas mismatches—both excessive and insufficient agile practices—can be detrimental. Interestingly, we find that frequent team feedback seeking amplifies the negative effects of misalignment but does not enhance well-being when alignment is achieved. These findings challenge the assumption that the use of agile practices is inherently beneficial and highlight the need for a tailored, developer-centric approach. For organizations, the key takeaway is clear. A “one-size-fits-all” approach to agile practices can backfire. Instead, fostering alignment through adaptive work environments, flexible agile practice use, and targeted interventions can promote sustainable developer well-being and long-term agile team effectiveness.Despite significant progress in understanding how the use of agile practices in teams affects crucial developer outcomes, we still know little about whether the team-enacted use of agile practices (e.g., daily stand-up meetings or pair programming) always aligns with the developer-needed use of such practices. In other words, does incongruence between the team-enacted versus individually needed use of agile practices matter for developer well-being? Additionally, how does developers’ team feedback-seeking behavior shape how developers respond to congruence and incongruence? Drawing on person-environment fit theory, we shed light on developers’ perceived (in-)congruence between the team-enacted versus individually needed use of agile practices and the resulting consequences for their well-being. In an experience-sampling study with 149 developers and 1,510 daily-level responses and by using multilevel polynomial regression and response surface methods, we show that perceived congruence (versus incongruence) consistently leads to higher levels of developer well-being. We also find that not all instances in which developers perceive high levels of team-enacted use of agile practices are equivalent. In fact, depending on the developer-needed use of agile practices in their daily work, enacting a high level of agile practices in teams can be just as detrimental as enacting a low level, revealing that the experience of agile practices use is more nuanced than previously recognized. Our findings also reveal an asymmetry; frequent (versus infrequent) team feedback-seeking developers experience amplified well-being losses from incongruence but not amplified well-being gains from congruence. In follow-up interviews with 32 developers from the experience-sampling study, we corroborate the main findings of our quantitative study and provide complementary insights into important boundary conditions of incongruence effects. Overall, these insights offer important implications for research on agile information systems development and for organizations seeking to align team-enacted agile practices with developers’ individual needs and feedback-seeking behavior in a human-centered and sustainable way. History: Rajiv Kohli, Senior Editor; Christy Cheung, Associate Editor. Funding: The authors’ work is funded by the German Research Foundation. Supplemental Material: The online appendix is available at https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.2023.0402
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Full text linkThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
Variations on the Author
Full text link“Variations on the Author” discusses two of Eduardo Coutinho’s recent films (Um Dia na Vida, from 2010, and Últimas Conversas, posthumously released in 2015) and their contribution to the general question of documentary authorship. The director’s filmography is characterized by a consistent yet self-effacing form of authorial self-inscription: Coutinho often features as an interviewer that rather than express opinions propels discourses; an interviewer that is good at listening. This mode of self-inscription characterizes him as an author who is not expressive but who is nonetheless markedly present on the screen. In Um Dia na Vida, however, Coutinho is completely absent form the image, while Últimas Conversas, on the contrary, includes a confessional prologue that moves the director from the margins to the center of his films. This article examines the ways in which these works stand out in the filmography of a director who offers new insights into the notion of cinematic authorship
Appropriate Similarity Measures for Author Cocitation Analysis
Full text linkWe provide a number of new insights into the methodological discussion about author cocitation analysis. We first argue that the use of the Pearson correlation for measuring the similarity between authors’ cocitation profiles is not very satisfactory. We then discuss what kind of similarity measures may be used as an alternative to the Pearson correlation. We consider three similarity measures in particular. One is the well-known cosine. The other two similarity measures have not been used before in the bibliometric literature. Finally, we show by means of an example that our findings have a high practical relevance.information science;Pearson correlation;cosine;similarity measure;author cocitation analysis
Dispelling the Myths Behind First-author Citation Counts
Full text linkWe conducted a full-scale evaluative citation analysis study of scholars in the XML research field to explore just how different from each other author rankings resulting from different citation counting methods actually are, and to demonstrate the capability of emerging data and tools on the Web in supporting more realistic citation counting methods. Our results contest some common arguments for the continued
use of first-author citation counts in the evaluation of scholars, such as high correlations between author rankings by first-author citation counts and other citation
counting methods, and high costs of using more realistic citation counting methods that are not well-supported by the ISI databases. It is argued that increasingly available digital full text research papers make it possible for citation analysis studies to go beyond what the ISI databases have directly supported and to employ more
sophisticated methods
koamabayili/VECTRON-author-checklist: VECTRON author checklist
No full textWe have done our best to complete the author checklist relating to the use of animals in the hut study. Note that the objective for the hut study was to evaluate the IRS treatment applications for residual efficacy against Anopheles mosquitoes, including the local An. coluzzii mosquito population. Cows were only used to attract mosquitoes into the huts and no tests were carried out directly on the cows. The author checklist is intended for use with studies where experiments are carried out on animals, which is why we have had such difficulty in completing this for the hut study, as many of the questions do not relate to how the cows were used
Author-wise bibliometric analysis based on entropy.
No full textAuthor-wise bibliometric analysis based on entropy.</p
- …
