*our journal article, of course

Moreover, differing opinions exist within the two conceptual lines regarding the importance of each component, we have formulated a few recommendations for researchers, educators, and practitioners to move from object disorientation to object orientation.

Definitions of OOP can generally be divided into two conceptual lines (how and why OOP is applied) and both together define object-oriented programming. However, hardly anyone demonstrates this holistic view when talking about OOP.

In our recently accepted IEEE Software article, we took a deep dive into the essence of object-oriented programming through a scoping review of prominent views in both, academic publications and nonacademic sources, such as industry reports and practitioner blogs.

Taking a closer look at prominent definitions of OOP, different people do not necessarily mean the same thing when they talk about it. The example with Laika, the dog, represents only one side of the coin: how OOP is applied.

There are classes and objects. Dog, for example, could be a class. Laika, the first dog in space, is an object of the Dog class. Laika has a state and can respond to messages. That’s one perspective to think of object-oriented programmig (OOP).

➡️ Our insights:

💡Humans’ perceptions differ widely, thus aggregating human annotations is not reliable.
(2/4)