Practical science in software engineering is generally disappointing, and this article fits that mold. In their own words, > The lack of specificity in our un

Practical science in software engineering is generally disappointing, and this article fits that mold. In their own words, > The lack of specificity in our understanding ... Our understanding also lacks breadth: ... We took a first step in addressing these gaps This doesn't represent established science, it represents a probative study. Moreover: > Of the 152 engineers we contacted, we interviewed 59 That's pretty bad from a perspective of statistical strength, they size of the response bias is larger than the resulting sample itself. The sample is also quite small. In these days where the replication is well known, one should take the concrete results with a grain of salt. It's a good study, but much more is necessary to be actionable advice.