Investigating the Effectiveness of Peer Code Review in Distributed Software Development

Santos, Eduardo Witter dos; Nunes, Ingrid

doi:10.1145/3131151.3131161

Cited by 18 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This category involves factors i.e. team organization, team strategies, team culture, team, and team drive [8], [9], [11], [16], [32], [52], [48], [40], [53].…”

Section: B Knowledge Sharing Factors In Mcrmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although MCR has addressed many shortcomings of Fagan's code inspections and is developed to improve software and code quality through extensive knowledge sharing among MCR team members [6], [8], [9], [11], [12], however, the MCR generates waiting waste due to poor knowledge sharing [5], [8], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, in MCR delay between submitting source code review request by the author to the reviewer and getting feedback from the reviewer [8], [9], [17]. It is argued that one of the reasons for waiting waste in MCR is a poor knowledge sharing [5], [8], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18]. The waiting waste decreases the productivity and efficiency of the developers [2], [4], [8], [12], [16], [17], [21], [26], [32].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is argued that one of the reasons for waiting waste in MCR is a poor knowledge sharing [5], [8], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18]. The waiting waste decreases the productivity and efficiency of the developers [2], [4], [8], [12], [16], [17], [21], [26], [32]. It also causes project delays due to the blocking of tasks [4], [33].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Knowledge Sharing Factors for Modern Code Review to Minimize Software Engineering Waste

Fatima¹,

Nazir²,

Chuprat³

2020

IJACSA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Software engineering activities, for instance, Modern Code Review (MCR) produce quality software by identifying the defects from the code. It involves social coding and provides ample opportunities to share knowledge among MCR team members. However, the MCR team is confronted with the issue of waiting waste due to poor knowledge sharing among MCR team members. As a result, it delays the project delays and increases mental distress. To minimize the waiting waste, this study aims to identify knowledge sharing factors that impact knowledge sharing in MCR. The methodology employed for this study is a systematic literature review to identify knowledge sharing factors, data coding with continual comparison and memoing techniques of grounded theory to produce a unique and categorized list of factors influencing knowledge sharing. The identified factors were then assessed through expert panel for its naming, expressions, and categorization. The study finding reported 22 factors grouped into 5 broad categories i.e. Individual, Team, Social, Facility conditions, and Artifact. The study is useful for researchers to extend the research and for the MCR team to consider these factors to enhance knowledge sharing and to minimize waiting waste.

show abstract

“…This category involves factors i.e. team organization, team strategies, team culture, team, and team drive [8], [9], [11], [16], [32], [52], [48], [40], [53].…”

Section: B Knowledge Sharing Factors In Mcrmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Knowledge Sharing Factors for Modern Code Review to Minimize Software Engineering Waste

Fatima¹,

Nazir²,

Chuprat³

2020

IJACSA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Situational software engineering ensures the software engineers' sustainability [9], [11], [15]. The previous work established that researchers have highlighted the significance of situational factors identification and attention has been given on the identification of situational factors in software requirement and for software development [3], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], however, little indication is available concerning to Modern Code Review (MCR) [30], [31], [32], [33], [34]. It results in the unavailability of situational guidelines that can help software engineers to increase their competency for the identification of situational factors.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Situational Factors for Modern Code Review to Support Software Engineers’ Sustainability

Nazir¹,

Fatima²,

Chuprat³

2020

IJACSA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Software engineers working in Modern Code Review (MCR) are confronted with the issue of lack of competency in the identification of situational factors. MCR is a software engineering activity for the identification and fixation of defects before the delivery of the software product. This issue can be a threat to the individual sustainability of software engineers and it can be addressed by situational awareness. Therefore, the objective of the study is to identify situational factors concerning the MCR process. Systematic Literature Review (SLR) has been used to identify situational factors. Data coding along with continuous comparison and memoing procedures of grounded theory and expert review has been used to produce an exclusive and validated list of situational factors grouped under categories. The study results conveyed 23 situational factors that are grouped into 5 broad categories i.e. People, Organization, Technology, Source Code and Project. The study is valuable for researchers to extend the research and for software engineers to identify situations and sustain for longer.

show abstract

Code Reviews, Software Inspections, and Code Walkthroughs: Systematic Mapping Study of Research Topics

Fronza

Hellas

Ihantola

et al. 2019

Software Quality: Quality Intelligence in Software and Systems Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Investigating the Effectiveness of Peer Code Review in Distributed Software Development

Cited by 18 publications

References 31 publications

Knowledge Sharing Factors for Modern Code Review to Minimize Software Engineering Waste

Knowledge Sharing Factors for Modern Code Review to Minimize Software Engineering Waste

Situational Factors for Modern Code Review to Support Software Engineers’ Sustainability

Code Reviews, Software Inspections, and Code Walkthroughs: Systematic Mapping Study of Research Topics

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About