Abstract
It is widely accepted that software development technical reviews (SDTRs) are a useful technique for finding defects in software products. Recent debates centre around the need for review meetings (Porter and Votta 1994, Porter et al 1995, McCarthy et al 1996, Lanubile and Visaggio 1996). This paper presents the findings of an experiment that was conducted to investigate the performance advantage of interacting groups over average individuals and artificial (nominal) groups. We found that interacting groups outperform the average individuals and nominal groups. The source of performance advantage of interacting groups is not in finding defects, but rather in discriminating between true defects and false positives. The practical implication for this research is that nominal groups constitute an alternative review design in situations where individuals discover a low level of false positives.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Basili, V. R., Green, S., Laitenberger, O. U., Lanubile, F., Shull, F., Sorumgaard, S., Zelkowitz, M. V., The Empirical Investigation of Perspective-Based Reading, Journal of Empirical Software Engineering, 1(2), 1996.
Bottger, P. C., Yetton, P. W., Improving Group Performance by Training in Individual Problem Solving, Journal of Applied Psychology, 42, 234–249, 1988.
Eick, S. G., Loader, C. R., Long, M. D., Votta, L. G., Wiel, S. V., Estimating Software Fault Content Before Coding, 14th Proceedings International Conference on Software Engineering, 59–65, May 11–15, 1992.
Fagan, M. E., Design and Code Inspections to Reduce Errors in Program Development, IBM Systems Journal, 15(3), 1976.
Freedman, D. P., Weinberg, G. M., Handbook of Walkthroughs, Inspections, and Technical Reviews: Evaluating Programs, Projects, and Products, Third Edition, Dorset House Publishing, 353 West 12th St., New York, NY 10014, 1990.
Gilb, T., Graham, D., Software Inspection, Addison-Wesley, 1993.
Jelinski, Z., Moranda, P. B., Applications of a Probability-Based Model to a Code Reading Experiment, IEEE Symposium on Computer Software Reliability, New York City, 1973.
Johnson, P. M., Tjahjono, D., Assessing Software Review Meetings: A Controlled Experimental Study Using CSRS, Technical Report 96-06, Department of Information and Computer Sciences, University of Hawaii, Honolulu, HI, 96734, USA, 1996.
Judd, C. M., Smith, E. R., Kidder, L. H., Research Methods in Social Relations, Sixth Edition, Harcourt Bruce Jovanovich College Publishers, 1991.
Kamsties, E., Lott, C., An Empirical Evaluation of Three Defect Detection Techniques, Proceedings of 5th European Software Engineering Conference, September 1995.
Kim, L. P. W., Sauer, C., Jeffery, R., A Framework of Software Development Technical Reviews, Software Quality and Productivity: Theory, Practice, Education and Training, Edited by Matthew Lee, Ben-Zion Barta, Peter Juliff, Chapman and Hall, 294–299, IFIP 1995.
Knight, J. C., Myers, A. N., An Improved Inspection Technique, Communications of the ACM, 36(11), November 1993.
Lanubile, F., Visaggio, G., Assessing Defect Detection Methods for Software Requirements Inspections Through External Replication, International Software Engineering Research Network, Technical report ISERN-96-01, January 1996.
Lau, L. P. W., Sauer, C., Jeffery, R., Validating the Defect Detection Performance Advantage of Group Designs for Software Reviews: Report of a Replicated Experiment, Centre for Advanced Empirical Software Research Technical Report 9618, The University of New South Wales, 1997.
Lorge, I., Fox, D., Davitz, L, Brenner, M., A Survey of Studies Contrasting the Quality of Group Performance and Individual Performance, Psychological Bulletin, 55, 337–371, 1958.
McCarthy, P., Porter, A., Harvey, S., Votta, L., An Experiment to Assess Cost Benefits of Inspection Meetings and their Alternatives: A Pilot Study, Proceedings of the Third International Software Metrics Symposium, Berlin, Germany, March 25–26 1996.
Myers, G. J., A Controlled Experiment in Program Testing and Code Walkthroughs/Inspections, Communications ofACM, 21(9), September, 1978.
Noru⩛is, M. J., SPSS: SPSS 6.1 Guide to Data Analysis, Prentice Hall, Englewood, New Jersey 07632, 1995.
Parnas, D. L., Weiss, D. M., Active Design Reviews: Principles and Practices, The Journal of Systems and Software, 7, 259–265, 1987.
Porter, A. A., Votta, L. G., An Experiment to Assess Different Defect Detection Methods for Software Requirements Inspections, Proceedings of the Sixteenth International Conference on Software Engineering, Sorrento, Italy, May 1994.
Porter, A. A., Votta, L. G., Basili, V. R., Comparing Detection Methods for Software Requirements Inspections: AReplicated Experiment, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 21(6), 563–575, June 1995.
Sauer, C., Jeffery, R., Lau, L. P. W., Yetton, P., A Behaviourally Motivated Programme for Empirical Research into Software Development Technical Reviews, Technical Report 9615, Centre for Advanced Empirical Software Research, School of Information Systems, University of New South Wales, Sydney 2052, 1996.
Schneider G. M., Martin, J., Tsai, W. T., An Experimental Study of Fault Detection in User Requirements Documents, ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology, 1( 2), April 1992.
Shaw, M. E., Group Dynamics: The Psychology of Small Group Behaviour, Third Edition, McGraw-Hill Publishing Company, 1981.
Siy, H. P., Identifying the Mechanisms Driving Code Inspection Costs and Benefits, PhD Dissertation, 1996.
Steiner, I. D., Group Process and Productivity, Academic Press, New York, 1972.
Strauss, R. G., Ebenau, R. G., Software Inspection Process, McGraw-Hill, Inc., 1994.
Votta, L. G., Does Every Inspection Need a Meeting, Proceedings of the ACM SIGSOFT, Symposium on Foundations of Software Engineering, December, 1993. Welburn, T., Structured COBOL: Fundamentals and Style, Mayfield Publishing Company, Mitchell Publishing. INC., 1981.
Yetton, P. W., Bottger, P. C., Individual Versus Group Problem Solving: an Experimental Test of a Best-Member Strategy, Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 307–321, June 1982.
Yourdon, E., Structured Walkthrough, Fourth Edition, Prentice-Hall, 1989.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1997 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Wee Land, L.P., Sauer, C., Jeffery, R. (1997). Validating the defect detection performance advantage of group designs for software reviews: Report of a laboratory experiment using program code. In: Jazayeri, M., Schauer, H. (eds) Software Engineering — ESEC/FSE'97. ESEC SIGSOFT FSE 1997 1997. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 1301. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-63531-9_21
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-63531-9_21
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-63531-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-69592-9
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive