Institut für Bildung, Arbeit und Gesellschaft

Permanent URI for this collectionhttps://hohpublica.uni-hohenheim.de/handle/123456789/28

Browse

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3

Between trust and ambivalence: how does trainee teachers’ perception of the relationship with their mentors explain how trainee teachers experience their work?
(2024) Maué, Elisabeth; Goller, Michael; Bonnes, Caroline; Kärner, Tobias
The study aims to identify profiles of trainee teachers in terms of their stress and work experiences and to uncover profile differences in regard to dropout intentions and perceived relationships between trainee teachers and their mentors. Based on data from 1,756 German trainee teachers, three distinct stress and work experience profiles could be identified. Trainee teachers with high levels of stress and negative work experiences exhibit higher dropout intentions and experience their relationship with their mentors as less transparent, fair and trusting, and more ambivalent compared to trainee teachers with low levels of stress and positive work experiences. The results underline the importance of the relationship between mentors and trainee teachers for the professional development of future teachers.
Guidelines for using financial incentives in software-engineering experimentation
(2024) Krüger, Jacob; Çalıklı, Gül; Bershadskyy, Dmitri; Otto, Siegmar; Zabel, Sarah; Heyer, Robert; Krüger, Jacob; Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, The Netherlands; Çalıklı, Gül; University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom; Bershadskyy, Dmitri; Otto-von-Guericke University Magdeburg, Magdeburg, Germany; Otto, Siegmar; University of Hohenheim, Stuttgart, Germany; Zabel, Sarah; University of Hohenheim, Stuttgart, Germany; Heyer, Robert; Leibniz-Institut für Analytische Wissenschaften, Dortmund, Germany
Context: Empirical studies with human participants (e.g., controlled experiments) are established methods in Software Engineering (SE) research to understand developers’ activities or the pros and cons of a technique, tool, or practice. Various guidelines and recommendations on designing and conducting different types of empirical studies in SE exist. However, the use of financial incentives (i.e., paying participants to compensate for their effort and improve the validity of a study) is rarely mentioned Objective: In this article, we analyze and discuss the use of financial incentives for human-oriented SE experimentation to derive corresponding guidelines and recommendations for researchers. Specifically, we propose how to extend the current state-of-the-art and provide a better understanding of when and how to incentivize. Method: We captured the state-of-the-art in SE by performing a Systematic Literature Review (SLR) involving 105 publications from six conferences and five journals published in 2020 and 2021. Then, we conducted an interdisciplinary analysis based on guidelines from experimental economics and behavioral psychology, two disciplines that research and use financial incentives. Results: Our results show that financial incentives are sparsely used in SE experimentation, mostly as completion fees. Especially performance-based and task-related financial incentives (i.e., payoff functions) are not used, even though we identified studies for which the validity may benefit from tailored payoff functions. To tackle this issue, we contribute an overview of how experiments in SE may benefit from financial incentivisation, a guideline for deciding on their use, and 11 recommendations on how to design them. Conclusions: We hope that our contributions get incorporated into standards (e.g., the ACM SIGSOFT Empirical Standards), helping researchers understand whether the use of financial incentives is useful for their experiments and how to define a suitable incentivisation strategy.
Need strength, perceived need support, stress symptomatology, and performance in the context of oral exams: A typological approach
(2022) Schürmann, Linda; Kärner, Tobias; Ringeisen, Tobias
Introduction: Based on self-determination theory, we investigated whether examinees are classifiable into profiles based on basic need strength and perceived need support that differ in stress parameters and achievement in the context of a standardized oral exam. Methods: 92 students reported their basic need strength before and perceived need support provided by the examiner once after the exam. Students indicated their emotions and stress perception at four measurement points and we measured their saliva cortisol concurrently, analyzing stress-related changes over time. Results: Latent class analyses revealed two higher-quality (low/high, high/high) and two lower-quality (low/low, high/low) need strength/need support classes. Physio-affective stress development was typical of exam situations. Higher-quality classes that met or exceeded the needs displayed more beneficial stress and emotion response patterns than lower-quality classes. Gain-related emotions mediated achievement in the higher-quality classes. Discussion: Need-supportive examiners can promote student well-being and achievement when they succeed in providing high need satisfaction.

Browse

Browsing Institut für Bildung, Arbeit und Gesellschaft by Sustainable Development Goals "4"