Context: Using student subjects in empirical studies has been discussed extensively from a methodological perspective in Software Engineering (SE), but there is a lack of similar discussion surrounding ethical aspects of doing so. As students are in a subordinate relationship to their instructors, such a discussion is needed. Objective: We aim to increase the understanding of practices and perceptions SE researchers have of ethical issues with student participation in empirical studies. Method: We conducted a systematic mapping study of 372 empirical SE studies involving students, following up with a survey answered by 100 SE researchers regarding their current practices and opinions regarding student participation. Results: The mapping study shows that the majority of studies does not report conditions regarding recruitment, voluntariness, compensation, and ethics approval. In contrast, the majority of survey participants supports reporting these conditions. The survey further reveals that less than half of the participants require ethics approval. Additionally, the majority of participants recruit their own students on a voluntary basis, and use informed consent with withdrawal options. There is disagreement among the participants whether course instructors should be involved in research studies and if should know who participates in a study. Conclusions: It is a positive sign that mandatory participation is rare, and that informed consent and withdrawal options are standard. However, we see immediate need for action, as study conditions are under-reported, and as opinions on ethical practices differ widely. In particular, there is little regard in SE on the power relationship between instructors and students.

中文翻译：

---

使用学生科目进行的实证研究中的伦理学问题：重访实践和看法

背景：在软件工程（SE）中，已经从方法论的角度对在实验研究中使用学生科目进行了广泛的讨论，但是围绕这样做的道德方面缺乏类似的讨论。当学生与他们的老师处于从属关系时，就需要进行这样的讨论。目标：我们的目的是通过学生参与经验研究来增强对SE研究人员对道德问题的实践和观念的理解。方法：我们对涉及学生的372项经验性SE研究进行了系统的制图研究，随后进行了一项由100名SE研究者回答的关于他们当前实践和对学生参与的看法的调查。结果：制图研究表明，大多数研究没有报告有关招募，自愿，赔偿和道德批准。相反，大多数调查参与者都支持报告这些情况。调查还显示，不到一半的参与者需要道德规范的批准。此外，大多数参与者都是自愿招募自己的学生，并使用知情同意书和退出选项。参与者之间是否存在意见分歧，即课程讲师是否应参与研究研究，以及是否应该知道谁参与了研究。结论：这是一个积极的信号，表明很少有强制性参与，并且标准的知情同意和退出选择。但是，我们认为迫切需要采取行动，因为对研究条件的报告不足，并且对道德规范的看法也大相径庭。特别是，