The Use of Procedural Roles in Code Inspections: An ExperimentalStudy

  • Authors:

  • Lesley Pek Wee Land;Chris Sauer;Ross Jeffery

  • Affiliations:

  • Centre for Advanced Empirical Software Engineering Research, School of Information Systems, Technology, and Management;Department of Information Management, Templeton College, Oxford University;Centre for Advanced Empirical Software Engineering Research, School of Information Systems, Technology, and Management

  • Venue:
  • Empirical Software Engineering
  • Year:
  • 2000

Quantified Score

Hi-index 0.00

Visualization

Abstract

Softwareinspections are important for finding defects in software products(Fagan, 1976; Gilb, 1993; Humphrey, 1995; Strauss and Ebenau,1994). A typical inspection includes two stages: individual preparationfollowed by a group review with roles assigned to each reviewer.Research has shown that group tasks typically result in processloss (Lorge et al., 1958; Steiner, 1972). In software defectdetection also, considerable defects found during individualpreparation are subsequently not reported by the group (Porterand Votta, 1994; Porter et al., 1995, 1997; Land et al., 1997a,1997b; Siy, 1996; Votta, 1993). Our objective is to study whetherprocedural roles (moderator, reader, recorder) affect group performance,particularly in terms of process loss. At the same time, theuse of roles in software reviews has also not been empiricallyvalidated, although there are wide claims for their benefits.Procedural roles made a limited difference to group performance.Further analyses provide possible explanations for the resultsand a deeper understanding of how groups make their decisionsbased on individual reviewers‘ findings. Limitations of the researchare discussed. We also suggest how procedural roles may greaterimpact group performance.