Co-ordination of multiple external representations during Java program debugging

Abstract

Java program debugging was investigated in computer science students who used a software debugging environment (SDE)

Increasing student success by modifying course delivery based on student submission data

“…Most analyses of programming behavior between the mid-1980s and early 2000s came from a cognitive perspective. Computer programming is cognitively taxing [32]. Some of the most interesting approaches to the study of programming during this time period have been based on seeing programming (a) as abstraction [4,20]; (b) as a linguistic process [9]; (c) as planning [17]; and (d) as attention investment [4].…”

An analysis of patterns of debugging among novice computer science students

“…Much research has been carried out comparing the differences between novices and experts in terms of debugging ability [6,7,8,9,25]. Examples include "the end-user or direct-manipulation programming system" [1,17], "the impact of the debugging environment features on program debugging" [18], "automated fault localization" [24] and "the program debugging tool" [12]. Little, if any, attention has been paid to discovering the pattern of debugging in novices or to draw conclusions, which might aid computer programming education.…”

An eye-tracking methodology for characterizing program comprehension processes

“…For example, the visualization of Jeliot 3 is based on representing a virtual machine on which a program is executed, while visualizations of PlanAni [Sajaniemi and Kuittinen 2003] are based on a cognitive concept. In addition, some of the previous experiments in program comprehension and debugging with multiple representations involved only precomputed static or semi-dynamic visualizations [Romero et al 2002]. Therefore, the eventual behavior recorded during comprehension with other tools might be different for any of the involved experience groups.…”

“…Understanding that opportunity, Romero et al [2002] conducted a series of experiments that involved the Restricted Focus Viewer (RFV) [Jansen et al 2003], a tool that links visual attention to a small fully-focused spot within an otherwise blurred stimulus. When an experimenter employs the RFV to track the visual attention, participants move the focused spot using a computer mouse to explore the visual representations in task.…”