Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Software Designers Satisfice

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Software Architecture (ECSA 2015)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNPSE,volume 9278))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

The software architecture community has advocated design rationale in the last decade. However, there is little knowledge of how much reasoning is performed when software design judgments are made. In this study, we investigated the amount of design reasoning performed before making a decision. We recruited 32 students and 40 professionals to participate in this software architecture design study. We found that most subjects needed only a few reasons before making their decisions. They considered that giving a few reasons were good enough to judge despite that more reasons could be found. This result shows a satisficing behavior in design decision making. We explore the implications of this common behavior on software architecture design.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Curtis, B., Krasner, H., Iscoe, N.: A field study of the software design process for large systems. Commun. ACM 31, 1268–1287 (1988)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Schön, D.A.: The reflective practitioner : how professionals think in action. Basic Books, Nueva York (1983)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Falessi, D., Briand, L.C., Cantone, G., Capilla, R., Kruchten, P.: The value of design rationale information. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology (TOSEM) 22, 21 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Jansen, A., Bosch, J.: Software architecture as a set of architectural design decisions. In: Proceedings 5th IEEE/IFIP Working Conference on Software Architecture, pp. 109−120 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Dutoit, A., McCall, R., Mistrik, I., Paech, B. (eds.): Rationale Management in Software Engineering. Springer (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Tang, A., Barbar, M.A., Gorton, I., Han, J.: A Survey of Architecture Design Rationale. Swinburne University of Technology (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Petre, M., Van Der Hoek, A. (eds.): Software Designers in Action: A Human-Centric Look at Design Work. CRC Press (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Simon, H.A.: The Sciences of the Artificial. The MIT Press (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Simon, H.A.: Satisficing. The New Palgrave: a Dictionary of Economics 4, 243–245 (1987)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Meyer, B.: On Formalism in Specifications. IEEE Software 2, 6–26 (1985)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Tang, A., Lau, M.F.: Software architecture review by association. Journal of Systems and Software 88, 87–101 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Perry, D.E., Wolf, A.L.: Foundation for the Study of Software Architecture. ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes 17, 40–52 (1992)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. ISO/IEC/IEEE: ISO/IEC/IEEE 42010:2010 Systems and software engineering - Architecture description, March 2010

    Google Scholar 

  14. Zannier, C., Chiasson, M., Maurer, F.: A model of design decision making based on empirical results of interviews with software designers. Information and Software Technology 49, 637–653 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Guindon, R.: Designing the design process: exploiting opportunistic thoughts. Hum.-Comput. Interact. 5, 305–344 (1990)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Kruchten, P.: What do software architects really do? Journal of Systems and Software 81, 2413–2416 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Tversky, A., Kahneman, D.: The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science 211, 453–458 (1981)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  18. Kahneman, D.: Thinking, fast and slow. Penguin (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Rittel, H.W.J., Webber, M.M.: Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences 4, 155–169 (1973)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Klein, G.: Streetlights and shadows: Searching for the keys to adaptive decision making. The MIT Press (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Hammond, K.R.: Human judgement and social policy: Irreducible uncertainty, inevitable error, unavoidable injustice. Oxford University Press (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Ward, D.: The role of satisficing in foraging theory. Oikos 63, 312–317 (1992)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Fasolo, B., Carmeci, F.A., Misuraca, R.: The effect of choice complexity on perception of time spent choosing: When choice takes longer but feels shorter. Psychology & Marketing 26, 213–228 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Tang, A., van Vliet, H.: Design Strategy and Software Design Effectiveness. IEEE Software 29, 51–55 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Gero, J.S., Kannengiesser, U.: The situated function–behaviour–structure framework. Design Studies 25, 373–391 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Clement, J.: Using bridging analogies and anchoring intuitions to deal with students’ preconceptions in physics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 30, 1241–1257 (1993)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Dörner, D.: The Logic Of Failure: Recognizing And Avoiding Error In Complex Situations. Basic Books (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Babb, J., Hoda, R., Norbjerg, J.: Embedding Reflection and Learning into Agile Software Development (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Tang, A., Lago, P.: Notes on Design Reasoning Techniques (V1.4). Swinburne University of Technology (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Kahneman, D., Lovallo, D., Sibony, O.: Before you make that big decision. Harvard Business Review 89, 50–60 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, Australia

    Antony Tang

  2. VU University, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Hans van Vliet

Authors
  1. Antony Tang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hans van Vliet
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Antony Tang .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Science, Linnaeus University, Växjö, Sweden

    Danny Weyns

  2. Dipartimento di Elettronica, Informazione e Biongegneria, Politecnico di Milano, Milano, Italy

    Raffaela Mirandola

  3. Computer Science and Engineering Department, Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg, Sweden

    Ivica Crnkovic

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this paper

Cite this paper

Tang, A., van Vliet, H. (2015). Software Designers Satisfice. In: Weyns, D., Mirandola, R., Crnkovic, I. (eds) Software Architecture. ECSA 2015. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 9278. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-23727-5_9

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-23727-5_9

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-23726-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-23727-5

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation