Do you think there is no gender inequality in Software Engineering? Perhaps you should reconsider your opinion

Context: While researching gender inequality in software development teams, men consistently outnumber women among practitioners. Various perspectives, including gender bias and strategies to enhance diversity within development teams, have been explored by researchers in recent years. However, there is a significant gap in the existing literature, as the majority of studies focus on the perception of women practitioners, leaving the experiences of the larger demographic—men in the software development workforce—underrepresented and less examined. Goal: This study explores the perspectives of men regarding gender inequality within software development teams and compares their experiences in software development to those of women. Method: The study comprised two phases: Investigation and Confirmation. In the Investigation Phase, we distributed a survey questionnaire to gather a substantial number of responses. The subsequent Confirmation Phase aimed to validate the collected data. The Investigation phase involved 217 participants responding to a questionnaire with 27 questions. Subsequently, in the Confirmation Phase, two focus group sessions were held: one with ten Brazilian male practitioners and another with eight male practitioners working in five different European countries. The collected data was analyzed using a mixture of quantitative and qualitative techniques, incorporating graphical representations, percentages, and the grounded theory methodology. Results: Our results indicate that the majority of men surveyed do not perceive any sexist behavior among their team members, and they express satisfaction with their job performance. Furthermore, their primary recommendations to enhance their participation in software development projects include providing training courses and fostering improved interaction among team members. Furthermore, we did not find any substantial difference between the results we got during the Investigation and Confirmation phases. Conclusions: Men practitioners in software development teams encounter distinct barriers and challenges compared to their female counterparts. Moreover, they perceive that women’s limited presence in software development is attributed to a perceived lack of affinity and knowledge in coding.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Software Engineering Research and Development
Published
2024-08-19
DOI
https://doi.org/10.5753/jserd.2024.4031
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Open Source Software Innovations
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.41

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Do you think there is no gender inequality in Software Engineering? Perhaps you should reconsider your opinion

Edna Dias Canedo, Fabiana Freitas Mendes, Larissa Rocha Soares, Geovana Ramos Sousa Silva
1 citations
Journal of Software Engineering Research and Development
Open Source Software Innovations
0.41
article

Do you think there is no gender inequality in Software Engineering? Perhaps you should reconsider your opinion

Edna Dias Canedo, Fabiana Freitas Mendes, Larissa Rocha Soares, Geovana Ramos Sousa Silva
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Context: While researching gender inequality in software development teams, men consistently outnumber women among practitioners. Various perspectives, including gender bias and strategies to enhance diversity within development teams, have been explored by researchers in recent years. However, there is a significant gap in the existing literature, as the majority of studies focus on the perception of women practitioners, leaving the experiences of the larger demographic—men in the software development workforce—underrepresented and less examined. Goal: This study explores the perspectives of men regarding gender inequality within software development teams and compares their experiences in software development to those of women. Method: The study comprised two phases: Investigation and Confirmation. In the Investigation Phase, we distributed a survey questionnaire to gather a substantial number of responses. The subsequent Confirmation Phase aimed to validate the collected data. The Investigation phase involved 217 participants responding to a questionnaire with 27 questions. Subsequently, in the Confirmation Phase, two focus group sessions were held: one with ten Brazilian male practitioners and another with eight male practitioners working in five different European countries. The collected data was analyzed using a mixture of quantitative and qualitative techniques, incorporating graphical representations, percentages, and the grounded theory methodology. Results: Our results indicate that the majority of men surveyed do not perceive any sexist behavior among their team members, and they express satisfaction with their job performance. Furthermore, their primary recommendations to enhance their participation in software development projects include providing training courses and fostering improved interaction among team members. Furthermore, we did not find any substantial difference between the results we got during the Investigation and Confirmation phases. Conclusions: Men practitioners in software development teams encounter distinct barriers and challenges compared to their female counterparts. Moreover, they perceive that women’s limited presence in software development is attributed to a perceived lack of affinity and knowledge in coding.

Journal of Software Engineering Research and DevelopmentVol. 12(1)
Universidade do Estado da Bahia (BR), Universidade de Brasília (BR), Aalto University (FI)
Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
Openalex Percentile: Top 23%
Open Source Software Innovations
0.41
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.