Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Improving the Quality of Architecture Design Through Peer-Reviews and Recombination

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Software Architecture (ECSA 2015)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNPSE,volume 9278))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

Software architecture reviews help improve the quality of architecture design decisions. Traditional reviews are considered expensive and time-consuming. We assert that organizations can consider leveraging peer-reviews and recombination (i.e., promoting design improvement through sharing design ideas) activities to improve the quality of architectures and getting staff trained. This paper reports a case study aimed at exploring the potential impact of combining peer-review and recombination on the quality of architecture design and design decisions made by novice architects, who usually have limited practical experience of architecture design. The findings show that the use of peer-review and recombination can improve both the quality of architecture design and documented decisions. From the decision-making perspective, this study also identifies the main types of challenges that the participants faced during architectural decision making and reasoning. These findings can be leveraged to focus on the types of training novice architects may need to effectively and efficiently address the types of challenges identified in this study.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Dow, P.S., Glassco, A., Kass, J., Schwarz, M., Schwartz, D.L., Klemmer, S.R.: Parallel Prototyping Leads to Better Design Results, More Divergence, and Increased Self-efficacy. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction 17(4) (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Dow, P.S., Fortuna, J., Schwartz, D., Altringer, B., Schwartz, D.L., Klemmer, S.R.: Prototyping dynamics: sharing multiple designs improves exploration, group rapport, and results. In: The SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 2807–2816 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  3. LaToza, T.D., Chen, M., Jiang, L., Zhao, M., van der Hoek, A.: Borrowing from the crowd: a study of recombination in software design competitions. In: 37th International Conference on Software Engineering (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Xu, A., Bailey, B.P.: A crowdsourcing model for receiving design critique. In: CHI 2011 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 1183–1188 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Armitage, P., Berry, G.: Statistical Methods in Medical Research, 3rd edn. Blackwell (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Braun, V., Clarke, V.: Using Thematic Analysis in Psychology. Qual. Res. Psychol. 3(2), 77–101 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Kruchten, P.: An ontology of architectural design decisions in software intensive systems. In: 2nd Groningen Workshop on Software Variability, pp. 54–61 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Yin, R.: Case Study research: Design and methods, Sage Publications, Inc. (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Nicol, D., Thomson, A., Breslin, C.: Rethinking Feedback Practices in Higher Education: a Peer Review Perspective. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 39(1), 102–122k (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. McCrum-Gardner, E.: Which is the Correct Statistical Test to Use? British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery 46(1), 38–41 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Lytra, I., Gaubatz, P., Zdun, U.: Two Controlled Experiments on Model-based Architectural Decision Making. Information and Software Technology 63, 58–75 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Ali Babar, M., Gorton, I.: Software Architecture Review: The State of. Practice 42(7), 26–32 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Tang, A., Lau, M.F.: Software Architecture Review by Association. Journal of Systems and Software 88, 87–101 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Tang, A., Kuo, F.-C., Lau, M.F.: Towards independent software architecture review. In: Morrison, R., Balasubramaniam, D., Falkner, K. (eds.) ECSA 2008. LNCS, vol. 5292, pp. 306–313. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  15. Maranzano, J.F., Rozsypal, S.A., Zimmerman, G.H., Warnken, G.W., Wirth, P.E., Weiss, D.M.: Architecture Reviews: Practice and Experience. IEEE Software 22(2), 34–43 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Klaas-Jan Stol, K., Fitzgerald, B.: Two’s company, three’s a crowd: a case study of crowdsourcing software development. In: 36th International Conference on Software Engineering, pp. 187–198 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Service Oriented Architecture Modeling Language (SoaML) Specification, OMG. http://www.omg.org/spec/SoaML/1.0.1/PDF

  18. Raymond, E.S.: The Cathedral and the Bazaar: Musings on Linux and Open Source by an Accidental Revolutionary. O’Reilly (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Wang, J., Shih, P.C., Carroll, J.M.: Revisiting Linus’s Law: Benefits and Challenges of Open Source Software Peer Review. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 77, 52–65 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Weinreich, R., Groher, I., Miesbauer, C.: An Expert Survey on Kinds, Influence Factors and Documentation of Design Decisions in Practice. Future Generation Computer Systems 47, 145–160 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Kitchenham, B., Pfleeger, S., Pickard, L., Jones, P., Hoaglin, D., El Emam, K., Rosenberg, J.: Preliminary Guidelines for Empirical Research in Software Engineering. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 28(8), 721–734 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Host, M., Regnell, B., Wohlin, C.: Using Students as Subjects - A Comparative Study of Students and Professionals in Lead-time Impact Assessment. Empirical Software Engineering 5(3), 201–214 (2000)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  23. Bass, L., Clements, P., Kazman, R.: Software Architecture in Practice, 3rd edn. Addison Wesley, Boston (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Mao, K., Capra, L., Harman, M., Jia, Y.: A Survey of the Use of Crowdsourcing in Software Engineering. Technical Report RN/15/01, Department of Computer Science, University College London (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Jiang, L.: Recombination Contest: Crowdsourcing Software Architecture and Design. Master Thesis, University of Amsterdam (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Kahneman, D.: Thinking, Fast and Slow. Penguin (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Kitchenham, B., Pickard, L., Pfleeger, S.L.: Case Studies for Method and Tool Evaluation. IEEE Software 12(4), 53–62 (1995)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. CREST – The Centre for Research on Engineering Software Technologies, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia

    Mojtaba Shahin & Muhammad Ali Babar

Authors
  1. Mojtaba Shahin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Muhammad Ali Babar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mojtaba Shahin .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Science, Linnaeus University, Växjö, Sweden

    Danny Weyns

  2. Dipartimento di Elettronica, Informazione e Biongegneria, Politecnico di Milano, Milano, Italy

    Raffaela Mirandola

  3. Computer Science and Engineering Department, Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg, Sweden

    Ivica Crnkovic

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this paper

Cite this paper

Shahin, M., Babar, M.A. (2015). Improving the Quality of Architecture Design Through Peer-Reviews and Recombination. In: Weyns, D., Mirandola, R., Crnkovic, I. (eds) Software Architecture. ECSA 2015. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 9278. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-23727-5_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-23727-5_6

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-23726-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-23727-5

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation