Details
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Title of host publication | Proceedings - 2020 IEEE/ACM 17th International Conference on Mining Software Repositories, MSR 2020 |
| Pages | 606-610 |
| Number of pages | 5 |
| ISBN (electronic) | 9781450379571 |
| Publication status | Published - 29 Jun 2020 |
| Event | 17th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Mining Software Repositories, MSR 2020, co-located with the 42nd International Conference on Software Engineering. ICSE 2020 - Virtual, Online, Korea, Republic of Duration: 29 Jun 2020 → 30 Jun 2020 |
Abstract
Context: Code review is a fundamental, yet expensive part of software engineering. Therefore, research on understanding code review and its efficiency and performance is paramount. Objective: We aim to test the effect of a guidance approach on review effectiveness and efficiency. This effect is expected to work by lowering the cognitive load of the task; thus, we analyze the mediation relationship as well. Method: To investigate this effect, we employ an experimental design where professional developers have to perform three code reviews. We use three conditions: no guidance, a checklist, and a checklist-based review strategy. Furthermore, we measure the reviewers' cognitive load. Limitations: The main limitations of this study concern the specific cohort of participants, the mono-operation bias for the guidance conditions, and the generalizability to other changes and defects. Full registered report: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/5FPTJ; Materials: https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.11806656
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Computer Science(all)
- Computer Science Applications
- Computer Science(all)
- Software
Cite this
- Standard
- Harvard
- Apa
- Vancouver
- BibTeX
- RIS
Proceedings - 2020 IEEE/ACM 17th International Conference on Mining Software Repositories, MSR 2020. 2020. p. 606-610.
Research output: Chapter in book/report/conference proceeding › Conference contribution › Research › peer review
}
TY - GEN
T1 - Do Explicit Review Strategies Improve Code Review Performance?
AU - Gonçalves, Pavlína Wurzel
AU - Fregnan, Enrico
AU - Baum, Tobias
AU - Schneider, Kurt
AU - Bacchelli, Alberto
N1 - Funding Information: A. Bacchelli, P. Wurzel Gonçalves, and E. Fregnan gratefully acknowledge the support of the Swiss National Science Foundation through the SNF Projects No. PP00P2_170529. P. Wurzel Gonçalves also acknowledges the student sponsoring support by CHOOSE, the Swiss Group for Software Engineering.
PY - 2020/6/29
Y1 - 2020/6/29
N2 - Context: Code review is a fundamental, yet expensive part of software engineering. Therefore, research on understanding code review and its efficiency and performance is paramount. Objective: We aim to test the effect of a guidance approach on review effectiveness and efficiency. This effect is expected to work by lowering the cognitive load of the task; thus, we analyze the mediation relationship as well. Method: To investigate this effect, we employ an experimental design where professional developers have to perform three code reviews. We use three conditions: no guidance, a checklist, and a checklist-based review strategy. Furthermore, we measure the reviewers' cognitive load. Limitations: The main limitations of this study concern the specific cohort of participants, the mono-operation bias for the guidance conditions, and the generalizability to other changes and defects. Full registered report: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/5FPTJ; Materials: https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.11806656
AB - Context: Code review is a fundamental, yet expensive part of software engineering. Therefore, research on understanding code review and its efficiency and performance is paramount. Objective: We aim to test the effect of a guidance approach on review effectiveness and efficiency. This effect is expected to work by lowering the cognitive load of the task; thus, we analyze the mediation relationship as well. Method: To investigate this effect, we employ an experimental design where professional developers have to perform three code reviews. We use three conditions: no guidance, a checklist, and a checklist-based review strategy. Furthermore, we measure the reviewers' cognitive load. Limitations: The main limitations of this study concern the specific cohort of participants, the mono-operation bias for the guidance conditions, and the generalizability to other changes and defects. Full registered report: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/5FPTJ; Materials: https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.11806656
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85093686106&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1145/3379597.3387509
DO - 10.1145/3379597.3387509
M3 - Conference contribution
AN - SCOPUS:85093686106
SP - 606
EP - 610
BT - Proceedings - 2020 IEEE/ACM 17th International Conference on Mining Software Repositories, MSR 2020
T2 - 17th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Mining Software Repositories, MSR 2020, co-located with the 42nd International Conference on Software Engineering. ICSE 2020
Y2 - 29 June 2020 through 30 June 2020
ER -