Reporting Action Research Studies

  • Miroslaw Staron


Conducting an action research study improves practices at our industrial partners. The improvement can range from elevating the competence of the action team to changing the way in which the partner company or organization develops software. The ideal outcome, however, is the change in the way of working or in the product. While improving the industrial practice, action research also contributes to developing and evaluating theories in software engineering. Therefore, it is important that we report our action research studies in a rigorous way, so that others can learn from our experiences. In this chapter, we describe how to report studies, both in the standard format of research papers to focus on the impact of the actions and as a storytelling to focus on the actions taken alongside of the impact.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [Ant99]
    Laurence Anthony. Writing research article introductions in software engineering: How accurate is a standard model? IEEE transactions on Professional Communication, 42(1):38–46, 1999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [Ber18]
    Jeremy Berg. Obfuscating with transparency. Science, page 133, 2018.Google Scholar
  3. [BRB+04]
    David E Bakken, R Rarameswaran, Douglas M Blough, Andy A Franz, and Ty J Palmer. Data obfuscation: Anonymity and desensitization of usable data sets. IEEE Security & Privacy, 2(6):34–41, 2004.Google Scholar
  4. [CHGL18]
    Zhipeng Cai, Zaobo He, Xin Guan, and Yingshu Li. Collective data-sanitization for preventing sensitive information inference attacks in social networks. IEEE Transactions on Dependable and Secure Computing, 15(4):577–590, 2018.Google Scholar
  5. [FW05]
    A Feldman and T Weiss. Suggestions for writing the action research report. In University of Massachusetts Amherst Conference Paper, 2005.Google Scholar
  6. [Ip17]
    Tiffany Ip. Linking research to action: A simple guide to writing an action research report. The Language Teacher, 41(1):37–39, 2017.Google Scholar
  7. [NKo10]
    Jernej Novak, Andrej Krajnc, and RokŽontar. Taxonomy of static code analysis tools. In MIPRO, 2010 Proceedings of the 33rd International Convention, pages 418–422. IEEE, 2010.Google Scholar
  8. [Pin15]
    Steven Pinker. The sense of style: The thinking person’s guide to writing in the 21st century. Penguin Books, 2015.Google Scholar
  9. [RH09]
    Per Runeson and Martin Höst. Guidelines for conducting and reporting case study research in software engineering. Empirical software engineering, 14(2):131, 2009.Google Scholar
  10. [RHRR12]
    Per Runeson, Martin Höst, Austen Rainer, and Björn Regnell. Case study research in software engineering. In Guidelines and examples. Wiley Online Library, 2012.Google Scholar
  11. [SM16]
    Miroslaw Staron and Wilhelm Meding. Mesram–a method for assessing robustness of measurement programs in large software development organizations and its industrial evaluation. Journal of Systems and Software, 113:76–100, 2016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. [SMSB18]
    Miroslaw Staron, Wilhelm Meding, Ola Söder, and Magnus Bäck. Measurement and impact factors of speed of reviews and integration in continuous software engineering. Foundations of Computing and Decision Sciences, 43(4):281–303, 2018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. [SMT+18]
    Miroslaw Staron, Wilhelm Meding, Matthias Tichy, Jonas Bjurhede, Holger Giese, and Ola Söder. Industrial experiences from evolving measurement systems into self-healing systems for improved availability. Software: Practice and Experience, 48(3):719–739, 2018.Google Scholar
  14. [SRS10]
    Laura Smith, Lisa Rosenzweig, and Marjorie Schmidt. Best practices in the reporting of participatory action research: embracing both the forest and the trees 1ψ7. The Counseling Psychologist, 38(8):1115–1138, 2010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. [Swa90]
    John Swales. Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge University Press, 1990.Google Scholar
  16. [Swa11]
    John M Swales. Aspects of article introductions. Number 1. University of Michigan Press, 2011.Google Scholar
  17. [Swo12]
    Helen Sword. Stylish academic writing. Harvard University Press, 2012.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Miroslaw Staron
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer Science and EngineeringUniversity of GothenburgGothenburgSweden

Personalised recommendations