The DOI matches its DataCite record.
Sampling in Software Engineering Research: A Critical Review and Guidelines
Abstract
Representative sampling appears rare in empirical software engineering research. Not all studies need representative samples, but a general lack of representative sampling undermines a scientific field. This article therefore reports a critical review of the state of sampling in recent, high-quality software engineering research. The key findings are: (1) random sampling is rare; (2) sophisticated sampling strategies are very rare; (3) sampling, representativeness and randomness often appear misunderstood. These findings suggest that software engineering research has a generalizability crisis. To address these problems, this paper synthesizes existing knowledge of sampling into a succinct primer and proposes extensive guidelines for improving the conduct, presentation and evaluation of sampling in software engineering research. It is further recommended that while researchers should strive for more representative samples, disparaging non-probability sampling is generally capricious and particularly misguided for predominately qualitative research.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Wyrich, M., Preikschat, A., Graziotin, D., & Wagner, S. (2021) · 2021 IEEE/ACM 43rd International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE) · doi:10.1109/icse43902.2021.00055 · Cited by 24
Metadata
- Authors
- Baltes, S., & Ralph, P.
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2020
- arXiv
- 2002.07764
- References
- 0
- Type
- Preprint
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Sampling in Software Engineering Research: A Critical Review and Guidelines. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.48550/arxiv.2002.07764
- The paper
- Baltes, S., & Ralph, P. (2020). Sampling in Software Engineering Research: A Critical Review and Guidelines. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.2002.07764