arXiv subjects
Publications and source records attributed to Rashina Hoda.
AI policies introduced by software organisations to mitigate LLM-related risks such as sensitive information leaks and unauthorised usage are not useful if software developers do not engage with them. We draw on 19 software developer interviews to show how AI policies help and hinder developers. We suggest approaches to support managers and decision makers with a developer-centric approach to introducing AI policies.
AI-assisted qualitative data analysis (QDA) offers unprecedented opportunities to streamline software engineering (SE) research, yet uncritical use risks compromising analytical rigor and flooding the field with accelerated production of low-quality research. While tactical best practices will naturally evolve over time, SE researchers currently lack strategic guidance to identify and mitigate methodological risks when attempting AI-assisted QDA. Based on our decades of qualitative SE research expertise and experience combined with an understanding of the emerging landscape of AI-assisted QDA, this paper presents a catalog of antipatterns in AI-assisted QDA - a set of assumptions and practices that initially appear advantageous but ultimately undermine analytical rigor and validity. The antipatterns are grouped into three categories reflecting escalating impact: Dangerous Drivers, Operational Missteps, and Analytical Failures. As more SE researchers attempt AI-assisted QDA, these antipatterns will help them identify and avoid common temptations and pitfalls, while reviewers can be equipped with the vocabulary and criteria to call out problematic and failed practice. Ultimately, this catalog of antipatterns can serve as a stepping stone in our responsible methodological evolution toward principled and meaningful human-AI collaboration in qualitative research.
With the rapid rise of AI coding agents, the fundamental premise of what it means to be a software engineer is in question. In this vision paper, we examine what it means for an AI agent to be considered a software engineer and then critically think about what makes such an agent trustworthy. Grounded in established definitions of SE (SE) and informed by recent research on agentic AI systems, we conceptualise AI software engineers as participants in human-AI SE teams composed of human software engineers and AI agents, and we distinguish trustworthiness as a key property of these systems and actors rather than a subjective human attitude. Extending on historical perspectives and emerging visions, we identify key dimensions that contribute to the trustworthiness of AI software engineers, spanning technical quality, transparency and accountability, epistemic humility, and societal and ethical alignment. Beyond defining these dimensions, we address a critical but underexplored challenge: how trustworthiness can be operationalised in practice. We therefore introduce the notion of evidence-centric inspection, arguing that developers should evaluate selective signals and justifications of trustworthiness rather than raw outputs, and we outline implications for rethinking verification, validation, and code review in human-AI SE teams.
Background: Large Language Models emerged with the potential of provoking a revolution in software development (e.g., automating processes, workforce transformation). Although studies have started to investigate the perceived impact of LLMs for software development, there is a need for empirical studies to comprehend how to balance forward and backward effects of using LLMs. Objective: We investigated how LLMs impact software development and how to manage the impact from a software developer's perspective. Method: We conducted 22 interviews with software practitioners across 3 rounds of data collection and analysis, between October (2024) and September (2025). We employed Socio-Technical Grounded Theory for Data Analysis (STGT4DA) to rigorously analyse interview participants' responses. Results: We identified the benefits (e.g., maintain developer flow, improve developer mental models, and foster entrepreneurship) and challenges (e.g., damage to developers' reputation) of using LLMs at individual, team, organisation, and society levels; as well as actionable guidances into how mitigate these challenges. Conclusion: Critically, we present the trade-offs that software practitioners, teams, and organisations face in working with LLMs. Our findings are particularly useful for software team leaders and IT managers to assess the viability of LLMs within their specific context.
AI applications are increasingly being introduced into digital health. While technical performance has advanced rapidly, successful deployment mainly depends on consumer attitudes, especially to patient-facing applications. However, most existing research examines consumer attitudes towards healthcare AI at an abstract level rather than in response to concrete artefacts. We report a mixed-methods survey study in Australia (N=275) examining consumer readiness, acceptance, trust, and risk perceptions of healthcare AI, combined with a scenario-based evaluation of an AI-generated versus clinician-written consultation summary. Participants expressed moderate optimism and strong perceived usefulness and ease of use, but also substantial concerns about accuracy, safety, and data use. In the scenario task, the AI-generated summary was strongly preferred for quality, empathy, and overall usefulness, yet identification of the AI summary was near chance. Findings show that consumers judge AI through concrete communication quality and visible human governance, underscoring the need for clinically supervised deployment frameworks beyond technical performance alone.
How software developers interact with Artificial Intelligence (AI)-powered tools, including Large Language Models (LLMs), plays a vital role in how these AI-powered tools impact them. While overreliance on AI may lead to long-term negative consequences (e.g., atrophy of critical thinking skills); underreliance might deprive software developers of potential gains in productivity and quality. Based on twenty-two interviews with software developers on using LLMs for software development, we propose a preliminary reliance-control framework where the level of control can be used as a way to identify AI overreliance and underreliance. We also use it to recommend future research to further explore the different control levels supported by the current and emergent LLM-driven tools. Our paper contributes to the emerging discourse on AI overreliance and provides an understanding of the appropriate degree of reliance as essential to developers making the most of these powerful technologies. Our findings can help practitioners, educators, and policymakers promote responsible and effective use of AI tools.
Software testing is crucial for ensuring software quality, yet developers' engagement with it varies widely. Identifying the technical, organizational and social factors that lead to differences in engagement is required to remove barriers and utilize enablers for testing. While much research emphasizes the usefulness of software testing approaches and technical solutions, less is known about why developers do (not) test. This study investigates the first-hand experience of developers with software testing. The study illuminates how developers' opinions about testing and their testing behavior changes. Through analysis of personal evolutions of practice, we explore when and why testing is used. Employing socio-technical grounded theory (STGT), we construct a theory by systematically analyzing data from 19 in-depth, semi-structured interviews with software developers. Allowing interviewees to reflect on how and why they approach software testing, we explore perspectives that are rooted in their contextual experiences. We develop eleven categories of circumstances that act as conditions for the application and adaptation of testing practices and introduce three concepts that we then use to present a theory of emerging testing strategies (ETS) that explains why developers do (not) use testing practices. This study reveals a new perspective on the connection between testing artifacts and collective reflection of practitioners, and it embraces. It has direct implications for practice %and contributes to the groundwork of socio-technical research which embraces testing as an experience in which human- and social aspects are entangled with organizational and technical circumstances.
Understanding motivations of contributors for participating in community question and answer platforms is crucial for sustaining knowledge-sharing ecosystem, which is necessary to advance the discipline while also ensuring its longevity. This is particularly necessary in the age of LLMs, where data from such portals are used to train these models. Limited insights exist regarding how motivations of contributors vary across different national cultures. This research investigates Stack Overflow contributor motivations, analysing regional differences and relations to platform activity. We combined qualitative content analysis of Stack Overflow profiles with quantitative linguistic analysis of data from the United States, China, and Russia. Using deductive content analysis, we identified 17 motivational categories. We applied correlation analysis to identify associations between stated motivations and platform activities. Contributors are primarily motivated by advertising opportunities and altruistic problem solving desires. American contributors demonstrated stronger self promotional behaviours while Chinese contributors exhibited greater learning oriented engagement. Our correlation analysis showed that those with more detailed profiles tend to engage in advertising and social activities, while learning oriented users maintain minimal self presentation. Understanding these variations can inform strategies for enhancing cross cultural participation in software engineering.
Agentic AI is poised to usher in a seismic paradigm shift in Software Engineering (SE). As technologists rush head-along to make agentic AI a reality, SE researchers are driven to establish agentic SE as a research area. While early visions of agentic SE are primarily focused on code-related activities, early empirical evidence calls for a consideration of a wider range of socio-technical activities and concerns to make it work in practice. This paper contributes to the emerging visions by: (a) recommending an expansion of its scope beyond code, toward a 'whole of process' vision, grounding it in SE foundations and evolution and emerging agentic SE frameworks, (b) proposing a preliminary set of values and principles to guide community efforts, and (c) sharing guidance on designing and using well-defined vocabulary for agentic SE. It is hoped that these ideas will encourage collaborations and steer the SE community toward laying strong foundations of agentic SE so it is not limited to enabling coding acceleration but becomes the next process-level paradigm shift.
Despite their critical role in shaping student learning in computing education, the contributions of women teaching-support staff (TSS) often go unrecognised and undervalued. In this experience report, we synthesise lived experiences of 15 women TSS in IT/SE higher education to illuminate how authority is earned, resisted, and maintained in everyday teaching. Participants shared both their positive and negative lived experiences associated with finding and losing voice with teaching team colleagues on the one hand, and rewarding connections and gendered friction with students on the other. We map these dynamics onto an intersectional "wheel of privilege and power" tailored to TSS roles. The farther a TSS profile sits from the wheel's center (e.g., non-native English, non-white, younger-seeming, non-permanent, early-career), the more relational, emotional, and disciplinary labour is needed to reach parity. We provide actionable insights and recommendations for creating more inclusive education environments in technology dominant fields that are particularly timely as universities worldwide grapple with post-pandemic teaching models and seek to build more inclusive and resilient academic communities.
Peer review in software engineering research operates under tight time constraints, while generative AI has substantially reduced the human effort required to produce polished research narratives. Reviewer attention is often spent on aspects of submissions such as writing quality or literature positioning that have become relatively less effort-intensive to address, rather than on evaluating the scientific substance of a paper. At the same time, assessing whether methods are implemented correctly, analyses are sound, and claims are supported by evidence remains effort-intensive and dependent on human expertise. In software engineering research, this substance is frequently embodied in artifacts, including code, data, evidence and analysis samples, and experimental infrastructure. In this position paper, we argue that artifact evaluation should be treated as a first-class component of peer review. We frame peer review as an attention allocation problem, examine how generative AI weakens narrative quality as a signal of rigor, and argue that artifact evaluation should play a more prominent role in peer review decisions.
With the advent of agentic AI, Software Engineering is transforming to a new era dubbed Software Engineering 3.0. Software project management (SPM) must also evolve with such transformations to boost successful project completion, while keeping humans at the heart of it. Building on our preliminary ideas of "agentic SPM", and supporting literature, we present our vision of an "Agentic Project Manager (PM)" as a multi-agent system for SPM 3.0. They will work like a "junior project manager", or an "intern project manager" collaboratively with software teams. We introduce four working modes, with varying autonomy levels to choose from, based on the SPM task. This addresses concerns with ethics, accountability, and trust related to agentic PMs. We also share insights on human PM role evolution and new skill requirements as a "strategic leader" and a "coach" for humans and agents. While creating the foundation for agentic SPM research, we present a research agenda for the wider research community.
Empathy is a powerful yet often overlooked element in software engineering (SE), supporting better teamwork, smoother communication, and effective decision-making.This paper introduces 17 actionable empathy guidelines designed to support practitioners, teams, and organisations. We also explore how these guidelines can be implemented in practice by examining real-world applications, challenges, and strategies to overcome them shared by software practitioners. To support adoption, we present a visual prioritisation framework that categorises the guidelines based on perceived importance, ease of implementation, and willingness to adopt. The findings offer practical and flexible suggestions for integrating empathy into everyday SE work, helping teams move from principles to sustainable action.
This paper envisions a transformative paradigm in software engineering, where Artificial Intelligence, embodied in fully autonomous agents, becomes the primary driver of the core software development activities. We introduce a new class of software engineering agents, empowered by Large Language Models and equipped with beliefs, desires, intentions, and memory to enable human-like reasoning. These agents collaborate with humans and other agents to design, implement, test, and deploy software systems with a level of speed, reliability, and adaptability far beyond the current software development processes. Their coordination and collaboration are governed by norms expressed as deontic modalities - commitments, obligations, prohibitions and permissions - that regulate interactions and ensure regulatory compliance. These innovations establish a scalable, transparent and trustworthy framework for future Human-AI software engineering teams.
As digital health solutions continue to reshape healthcare delivery, telehealth software applications have become vital for improving accessibility, continuity of care, and patient outcomes. This paper presents an analysis of designing a software application focused on Enhanced Telehealth Capabilities (ETHC) for palliative care, integrating across three socio-technical dimensions: quality, human values, and real-world. Designing for quality attributes -- such as performance, maintainability, safety, and security -- ensured that the system is technically robust and compliant with clinical standards. Designing for human values -- empathy, inclusivity, accessibility, and transparency -- helped enhance patient experience, trust, and ethical alignment. Designing for real-world -- through a multidisciplinary, experience-based co-design approach involving clinicians, patients, and carers that guided iterative cycles of prototyping, usability testing, and real-world evaluation -- ensured continuous refinement of features and alignment with clinical practice. The resulting telehealth software solution demonstrated that our socio-technical design framework was successful in producing a secure, equitable, and resilient digital health application. Our design approach can assist others designing software in health and other domains.
Empathy plays a critical role in software engineering (SE), influencing collaboration, communication, and user-centred design. Although SE research has increasingly recognised empathy as a key human aspect, there remains no validated instrument specifically designed to measure it within the unique socio-technical contexts of SE. Existing generic empathy scales, while well-established in psychology and healthcare, often rely on language, scenarios, and assumptions that are not meaningful or interpretable for software practitioners. These scales fail to account for the diverse, role-specific, and domain-bound expressions of empathy in SE, such as understanding a non-technical user's frustrations or another practitioner's technical constraints, which differ substantially from empathy in clinical or everyday contexts. To address this gap, we developed and validated two domain-specific empathy scales: EmpathiSEr-P, assessing empathy among practitioners, and EmpathiSEr-U, capturing practitioner empathy towards users. Grounded in a practitioner-informed conceptual framework, the scales encompass three dimensions of empathy: cognitive empathy, affective empathy, and empathic responses. We followed a rigorous, multi-phase methodology, including expert evaluation, cognitive interviews, and two practitioner surveys. The resulting instruments represent the first psychometrically validated empathy scales tailored to SE, offering researchers and practitioners a tool for assessing empathy and designing empathy-enhancing interventions in software teams and user interactions.
Software practitioners are discussing GenAI transformations in software project management openly and widely. To understand the state of affairs, we performed a grey literature review using 47 publicly available practitioner sources including blogs, articles, and industry reports. We found that software project managers primarily perceive GenAI as an "assistant", "copilot", or "friend" rather than as a "PM replacement", with support of GenAI in automating routine tasks, predictive analytics, communication and collaboration, and in agile practices leading to project success. Practitioners emphasize responsible GenAI usage given concerns such as hallucinations, ethics and privacy, and lack of emotional intelligence and human judgment. We present upskilling requirements for software project managers in the GenAI era mapped to the Project Management Institute's talent triangle. We share key recommendations for both practitioners and researchers.
Empathy, defined as the ability to understand and share others' perspectives and emotions, is essential in software engineering (SE), where developers often collaborate with diverse stakeholders. It is also considered as a vital competency in many professional fields such as medicine, healthcare, nursing, animal science, education, marketing, and project management. Despite its importance, empathy remains under-researched in SE. To further explore this, we conducted a socio-technical grounded theory (STGT) study through in-depth semi-structured interviews with 22 software developers and stakeholders. Our study explored the role of empathy in SE and how SE activities and processes can be improved by considering empathy. Through applying the systematic steps of STGT data analysis and theory development, we developed a theory that explains the role of empathy in SE. Our theory details the contexts in which empathy arises, the conditions that shape it, the causes and consequences of its presence and absence. We also identified contingencies for enhancing empathy or overcoming barriers to its expression. Our findings provide practical implications for SE practitioners and researchers, offering a deeper understanding of how to effectively integrate empathy into SE processes.