It seems as though the programming field is in a bit of a bind because, odd though it might seem, it has been difficult to be empirical in our approach to our field. The programming domain is very complex, so there are considerable difficulties in implementing empirical approaches. Proprietary development often entails a degree of secrecy, so a lot of data is not available to be shared. There is even debate along the lines of what is valuable to measure, or what can even be measured. One is reminded of many social sciences and psychology, or even medicine prior to the scientific revolution.
What is holding programming back from the degree of empiricism found in a field like mechanical engineering? Is it that it's hard to fund or even structure meaningful experiments? Should someone be developing non-ferromagnetic monitor/keyboard sets so that we can study programmers of different levels of demonstrated ability with their heads stuck inside MRI machines? (Such research has been done with piano virtuosos playing on electronic keyboards and rappers.)
http://www.ted.com/talks/charles_limb_your_brain_on_improv.h...
Another thing I'd note, is that a lot of debate about programming is word salad full of reasons why you can't say X or Y. There seems to be a lot of the Epistemic Viciousness that exists in martial arts schools.