Abstract
In this paper we look at the results from three experiments.We discuss the results and combine them into advices for code inspection. The main observations are that 1) it is beneficial to use large inspection groups in order to have access to a large amount of diverse experience and knowledge, 2) hands-on experience is more important than general knowledge and experience and 3) if left on their own, large groups tend to use a voting-like mechanism when deciding which defects to report after the group meeting.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Stålhane, T., et al.: Teaching the Process of Code Review. In: ASWEC 2004, Melbourne, Australia, April 13 – 16 (2004)
Awan, T.H.: Sources of variation in software inspections; An empirical and explorative study. TDT 4735, Software Engineering, NTNU, Norway (2003)
Awan, T.H.: Sources of variation in software inspections: An empirical research project. Master thesis, NTNU, Norway (2004)
Meyers, G.J.: Experiment in Program Testing and Code Walkthrough/Inspection. IBM Systems Research Institute (1978)
Basili, V.R., Selby, R.W.: Comparing the Effectiveness of Software testing Strategies. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering SE-12 (7) (December 1987)
Porter, A.A., Votta, L.G.: An experiment to assess different defect detection methods for software requirements inspection. NASA research paper (1994)
Laitenberg, O., et al.: An Experimental Comparison of Reading Techniques for Defect detection in UML Design Documents. National research Council Canada (1999)
Basili, V.R., et al.: The Empirical Investigation of Perspective-Based Reading (1996)
Basili, V.R., et al.: Investigating the effect of Process Experience on Inspection Effectiveness. University of Maryland, Institute for Advanced Computer Studies (2001)
Votta, L.G., et al.: An Experiment to Assess the Cost – Benefits of Code Inspection in Large Scale Software Development. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering SE 23 (6) (1997)
Kelly, D., Shepard, T.: Task-Directed Software Inspection Technique: An Experiment and case Study, Royal Military College of Canada (1997)
Auråen, E.: Manufacturing World Commodities at the 1994 Internet Conference – Dynamic Leadership through project management. Oslo, Norway, June 9 – 11 (1994)
Box, G.E.P., et al.: Statistics for Experimenters. John Wiley and Sons, Inc, Chichester (1978)
Wohlin, C., et al.: Experimentation in Software Engineering. An Introduction. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (2000)
Sølvberg, A., et al.: Evaluating the quality of information models. Empirical testing of a conceptual model quality framework. In: Proceedings of ICS 2003, Portland, Oregon (2003)
Arisholm, E., Sjøberg, D.I.K.: Evaluating the Effect of a Delegated versus Centralized Control Style on the Maintainability of Object-oriented Software. IEEE Transaction on Software Engineering 30(8) (August 2004)
Fagan, M.E.: Design and code inspection to reduce errors in program development. IBM Systems Journal (15) (1976)
Rosenthal, R., Rosnow, R.L.: Essentials of behavioral research: Methods and data analysis, 2nd edn. McGraw Hill, New York (1991)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2005 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Stålhane, T., Awan, T.H. (2005). Improving the Software Inspection Process. In: Richardson, I., Abrahamsson, P., Messnarz, R. (eds) Software Process Improvement. EuroSPI 2005. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 3792. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/11586012_16
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/11586012_16
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-30286-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-32271-9
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)