Peer Reviews in Real Life - Motivators and Demotivators

Harjumaa, Lasse; Tervonen, Ilkka; Huttunen, Aira

doi:10.1109/qsic.2005.48

Cited by 11 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…knowledge transfer and identifying better solutions, may be more important than defect detection [2]. Prior research on software inspection also reported the following benefits provided by software inspections: defect identification [27], [50], knowledge sharing [15], [50], [57], increased project awareness [15], [50], and reduced development costs [26], [40]. Moreover, our prior work found that approximately half of code review comments relate to maintainability issues, with less than a quarter related to functional defects [14].…”

Section: Rq1: Why Are Code Reviews Important?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Process Aspects and Social Dynamics of Contemporary Code Review: Insights from Open Source Development and Industrial Practice at Microsoft

Bosu

Carver

Bird

et al. 2017

IIEEE Trans. Software Eng.

126

125

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many open source and commercial developers practice contemporary code review, a lightweight, informal, tool-based code review process. To better understand this process and its benefits, we gathered information about code review practices via surveys of open source software developers and developers from Microsoft. The results of our analysis suggest that developers spend approximately 10-15% of their time in code reviews, with the amount of effort increasing with experience. Developers consider code review important, stating that in addition to finding defects, code reviews offer other benefits, including knowledge sharing, community building, and maintaining code quality. The quality of the code submitted for review helps reviewers form impressions about their teammates, which can influence future collaborations. We found a large amount of similarity between the Microsoft and OSS respondents. One interesting difference is that while OSS respondents view code review as an important method of impression formation, Microsoft respondents found knowledge dissemination to be more important. Finally, we found little difference between distributed and co-located Microsoft teams. Our findings identify the following key areas that warrant focused research: 1) exploring the non-technical benefits of code reviews, 2) helping developers in articulating review comments, and 3) assisting reviewers' program comprehension during code reviews.

show abstract

Section: Rq1: Why Are Code Reviews Important?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Process Aspects and Social Dynamics of Contemporary Code Review: Insights from Open Source Development and Industrial Practice at Microsoft

Bosu

Carver

Bird

et al. 2017

IIEEE Trans. Software Eng.

126

125

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…At a process level, source code review processes in companies nowadays are similar to the processes adopted in open source projects [6], [9], [10], with a lot of variation in the process steps [6], [11]. Furthermore, source code reviews can be expensive: knowledgeable understanding of large code changes by reviewers is a time-consuming process, and finding the most knowledgeable code reviewers for the source code parts to be reviewed can also be very labor-intensive for developers.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Large-Scale Study on Source Code Reviewer Recommendation

Lipcak

Rossi

2018

2018 44th Euromicro Conference on Software Engineering and Advanced Applications (SEAA)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Context: Software code reviews are an important part of the development process, leading to better software quality and reduced overall costs. However, finding appropriate code reviewers is a complex and time-consuming task. Goals: In this paper, we propose a large-scale study to compare performance of two main source code reviewer recommendation algorithms (RevFinder and a Naïve Bayes-based approach) in identifying the best code reviewers for opened pull requests. Method: We mined data from Github and Gerrit repositories, building a large dataset of 51 projects, with more than 293K pull requests analyzed, 180K owners and 157K reviewers. Results: Based on the large analysis, we can state that i) no model can be generalized as best for all projects, ii) the usage of a different repository (Gerrit, GitHub) can have impact on the the recommendation results, iii) exploiting sub-projects information available in Gerrit can improve the recommendation results.• provision of a large dataset of 51 projects mined from Gerrit (14) and Github (37) with 293,337 total pull requests analyzed, considering 180,111 owners and 157,885 reviewers. The dataset is available on Figshare [24]. • comparison of the results in the two repositories (Gerrit, GitHub) using both RevFinder and Naïve Bayes-based approaches in the context of the 51-projects dataset.The article is structured as follows. In section II, we propose the background on several algorithms for code reviewer recommendation. In section III we have the experimental study design, with research questions, context, data analysis and replicability information. In section IV, we answer the research questions with discussions and threats to validity. Section V proposes the related works and section VI the conclusions.

show abstract

“…Nowadays, peer communication review [1] is commonly used in the review work, which means experts of the same field review the project back to back. Peer communication review can take full advantage of scientists who are in the scientific community to realize the reasonable allocation of scientific and technological resources.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Project Evaluation Method Based on Matter-Element and Hierarchy Model

2012

TELKOMNIKA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

AbstrakEvaluasi proyek selalu menjadi kunci dari manajemen proyek rekayasa. Evaluasi Kata kunci: model materi-unsur dan hirarki, metode evaluasi proyek, tinjauan komunikasi mitra, tinjauan proyek rekayasa Abstract Project evaluation is always the key link of the engineering project management. Project evaluation is a complex work which involves many factors. The final evaluation result is always influenced directly by the definition of various evaluation indexes and the corresponding weight. Mainly study the judgment of the experts' ability and the establishment of the project evaluation index system in the peer communication review, analyze deeply the engineering project review work, build a evaluation index system for the engineering project, and put forward a comprehensive evaluation method based on the matter-element and hierarchy model in the engineering project, at last, apply it in the actual project which proves the practicability of the paper's theory. Keywords: engineering project review, matter-element and hierarchy model, peer communication review, project evaluation method IntroductionThe impartiality of the engineering project review is very important, which most applicants pay close attention to. Nowadays, peer communication review [1] is commonly used in the review work, which means experts of the same field review the project back to back. Peer communication review can take full advantage of scientists who are in the scientific community to realize the reasonable allocation of scientific and technological resources. It also contributes to the democratization of the scientific decision-making, and puts an end to the purely administrative decision-making [2].This article attempts to establish the evaluation index system of the engineering project, give the knowledge set representation of engineering project knowledge, put forward engineering project evaluation method based on the matter-element and hierarchy model [3], and at last validates it through an actual project.

show abstract

Peer Reviews in Real Life - Motivators and Demotivators

Cited by 11 publications

References 18 publications

Process Aspects and Social Dynamics of Contemporary Code Review: Insights from Open Source Development and Industrial Practice at Microsoft

Process Aspects and Social Dynamics of Contemporary Code Review: Insights from Open Source Development and Industrial Practice at Microsoft

A Large-Scale Study on Source Code Reviewer Recommendation

Project Evaluation Method Based on Matter-Element and Hierarchy Model

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About