Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A family of experiments to investigate the effects of groupware for software inspection

  • Published:
Automated Software Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

It is widely accepted that the inspection of software artifacts can find defects early in the development process and gather information on the quality of the evolving product. However, the inspection process is resource-intensive and involves tedious tasks, such as searching, sorting, and checking. Tool support for inspections can help accelerating these tasks and allows inspectors to concentrate on tasks particularly needing human attention. Only few tools are available for inspections. We have thus developed a set of groupware tools for both individual defect detection and inspection meetings to lower the effort of inspections and to increase their efficiency. This paper presents the Groupware-supported Inspection Process (GrIP) and describes tools for inspecting software requirements. As only little empirical work exists that directly compares paper-based and tool-based software inspection, we conducted a family of experiments in an academic environment to empirically investigate the effect of tool support regarding defect detection and inspection meetings. The main results of our family of experiments regarding individual defect detection are promising: The effectiveness of inspectors and teams is comparable to paper-based inspection without tool support; the inspection effort and defect overlap decreases significantly with tool support, while the efficiency of inspection teams increases considerably. Regarding tool support for inspection meetings the main findings of the experiments are that tool support considerably lowers the meeting effort, supports inspectors in identifying false positives, and reduces the number of true defects lost during a meeting. The number of unidentified false positives is still quite high.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anderson, P., Reps, T., et al.: Design and Implementation of a Fine-Grained Software Inspection Tool. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 29(8), 721–733 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aurum, A., Petersson, H., et al.: State-of-the-Art: Software Inspections after 25 Years. Softw. Test. Verif. Rel. 12(3), 134–154 (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  • Basili, V., Green, S., et al.: The Empirical Investigation of Perspective-Based Reading. Empirical Softw. Eng.: Int. J. 1(2), 133–164 (1996)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bianchi, A., Lanubile, F., et al.: A Controlled Experiment to Assess the Effectiveness of Inspection Meetings. Metrics 01, London. pp. 42–50 (2001)

  • Biffl, S.: Software Inspection Techniques to support Project and Quality Management. Shaker Publishing, Aachen (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  • Biffl, S., & Halling, M.: Investigating the influence of inspector capability factors with four inspection techniques on inspection performance. 8th IEEE Int. Software Metrics Symposium, IEEE Comp. Soc. Press, Ottawa, pp. 107–117 (2002)

  • Biffl, S., & Halling, M.: Investigating the Defect Detection Effectiveness and Cost-Benefit of Nominal Inspection Teams. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 29(5), 385–397 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boehm, B.W., Grünbacher, P., et al.: Developing Groupware for Requirements Negotiation: Lessons Learned. IEEE Softw. 18(3), 46–55 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ciolkowski M., Shull F., & Biffl St.: A Family of Inspection Experiments, Proc. Int. Conf. on Empirical Assessment of Software Engineering (EASE), Keele, April 2002 (2002)

  • Fagan, M.: Design and Code Inspections To Reduce Errors In Program Development. IBM Syst. J. 15(3), 182–211 (1976)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Genuchten, M., Cornelissen, W., et al.: Supporting Inspections With an Electronic Meeting System. JMIS 14(3), 165–178. (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  • Genuchten, M., Dijk, C., et al.: Industrial Experience in Using Group Support Systems for Software Inspections. IEEE Softw. 18(3), 60–65 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilb, T., & Graham, D.: Software Inspection. Boston, MA, USA, Addison Wesley Professional. (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  • Grünbacher, P., Halling, M., et al.: An Empirical Study on Groupware Support for Software Inspection Meetings. 18th IEEE International Conference on Automated Software Engineering, Montreal, IEEE Computer Society. pp. 4–11 (2003)

  • Halling, M.: Supporting Management Decisions in the Software Inspection Process, Vienna University of Technology. (2002)

  • Halling, M., & Biffl S.: Investigating the Influence of Software Inspection Process Parameters on Inspection Meeting Performance. IEE Proc.-Softw. 149(5), (2002)

  • Halling, M., Biffl, S., et al.: Using Reading Techniques to Focus Inspection Performance. 27th Euromicro Conference 2001: A Net Odyssey (Euromicro’01), IEEE Computer Society Press, Warsaw, pp. 248–257 (2001)

  • Halling, M., Biffl, S., et al.: A Groupware-Supported Inspection Process for Active Inspection Management. Proceedings of the 28th Euromicro Conference (EUROMICRO’02), Dortmund Germany, IEEE CS, pp. 251–258 (2002)

  • Halling, M., Biffl, S., et al.: An Economic Approach for Improving Requirements Negotiation Models with Inspection. Requirements Eng. J., Springer (8), 236–247 (2003a)

  • Halling, M., Biffl, S., et al.: An Experiment Family to Investigate the Defect Detection Effect of Tool-Support for Requirements Inspection. Proceedings of the Ninth International Software Metrics Symposium (METRICS’03), IEEE Comp. Soc. Press, Sydney, pp. 278–285 (2003b)

  • Halling, M., Grünbacher, P., et al.: Groupware Support for Software Requirements Inspection. WISE’01: Proceedings of the 1st Workshop on Inspection in Software Engineering, Paris, France, Software Quality Research Lab, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada, pp. 20–29 (2001a)

  • Halling, M., Grünbacher, P., et al.: Tailoring a COTS Group Support System for Software Requirements Inspection. 16th IEEE International Conference on Automated Software Engineering, IEEE Computer Society, San Diego, pp. 201–210 (2001b)

  • Höst, M., Regnell, B., et al.: Using Students as Subjects—A Comparative Study of Students and Professionals in Lead-Time Impact Assessment. Empirical Softw. Eng. 5, 201–214 (2000)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, P.M., & Tjahjono, D.: Assessing software review meetings: A controlled experimental study using CSRS. International Conference on Software Engineering, Boston, pp. 118-127 (1997)

  • Johnson, P.M., & Tjahjono, D.: Does Every Inspection Really Need a Meeting? Empirical Softw. Eng. (1998)

  • Knight, J.C., & Myers, E.A.: An improved inspection technique. C. ACM 36(11), 51–61 (1993)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laitenberger, O., & DeBaud, J.-M.: An encompassing life cycle centric survey of software inspection. J. Sys. Softw. 50(1), 5–31 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laitenberger, O., & Dreyer, H.M.: Evaluating the usefulness and the ease of use of a Web-based inspection data collection tool. Proceedings Fifth Intl. Software Metrics Symposium, pp. 122–132 (1998)

  • Land, L.P.W., Jeffery, R., et al.: Validating the Defect Detection Performance Advantage of Group Designs for Software Reviews. ESEC/FSE, pp. 17–26 (1997)

  • Lanubile, F., & Mallardo T.: An Empirical Study of Web-Based Inspection Meetings. ACM/IEEE Int. Sym. on Empirical Software Engineering, Rome, pp. 244–251 (2003)

  • MacDonald, F., & Miller J.: A Comparison of Tool-Based and Paper-Based Software Inspection. Empirical Softw. Eng. 3, 233–253 (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  • MacDonald, F., & Miller, J.: A Comparison of Computer Support Systems for Software Inspection. Automated Softw. Eng. 6, 291–313 (1999)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacDonald, F., Miller, J., et al.: Automatic Collation of Software Inspection Defect Lists. Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Information Systems Development, Boise, Idaho, pp. 1–11 (1999)

  • MacDonald, F., Miller, J., et al.: ASSISTing Management Decisions in the Software Inspection Process. J. Inf. Technol. Manage. 3, 67–83 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nunamaker, J.F., Briggs, R.O., et al.: Lessons from a Dozen Years of Group Support Systems Research: A Discussion of Lab and Field Findings. J. Manage. Inf. Sys. 13(3), 163–207 (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  • Parnas, D.L., & Lawford M.: The Role of Inspection in Software Quality Assurance. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 29(8), 674–676 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parnas, D.L., & Weiss, D.M.: Active design review: principles and practices. 8th Int. Conf. on Software Engineering, pp. 259–265 (1985)

  • Parnas, D.L., & Weiss, D.M. Active Design Reviews: Principles and Practice. J. Sys. Softw. 7, 259–265 (1987)

    Google Scholar 

  • Perpich, J.M., Perry, D.E., et al.: Anywhere, anytime code inspections: using the Web to remove inspection bottlenecks in large-scale software development. Proc. of the 19th ICSE, Boston, USA, pp. 14–21 (1997)

  • Porter, A.A., & Johnson, P.M.: Assessing Software Review Meetings: Results of a Comparative Analysis of Two Experimental Studies. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 23(3), (1997)

  • Sauer, C., & Jeffery, D., et al.: The Effectiveness of Software Development Technical Reviews: A Behaviorally Motivated Program of Research. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 26(1), 11–14 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thelin, T., Andersson, P., et al.: Tool Support for Usage-based reading. Proceedings IASTED Software Engineering Conference, Innsbruck, Austria, pp. (2004)

  • Tichy, W.: Hints for Reviewing Empirical Work in Software Engineering. Empirical Softw. Eng.: An Int. J. 5, 309–312 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vitharana, P., & Ramarmurthy, K.: Computer-Mediated Group Support, Anonymity, and the Software Inspection Process: An Empirical Investigation. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 29(2), 167–180 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Votta, L.: Does every Inspection need a Meeting? ACM Softw. Eng. Notes 18(5), 107–114 (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  • Wohlin, C., Runeson, P., et al.: Experimentation in Software Engineering: An Introduction, The Kluwer International Series in Software Engineering. Kluwer Academic Publishers. (2000)

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Software Technology and Interactive Systems, Vienna University of Technology, 1040, Vienna, Austria

    Stefan Biffl

  2. Christian Doppler Laboratory for Automated Software Engineering, Johannes Kepler University Linz, 4040, Linz, Austria

    Paul Grünbacher

  3. Department of Finance, University of Vienna, 1210, Vienna, Austria

    Michael Halling

Authors
  1. Stefan Biffl
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Paul Grünbacher
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Michael Halling
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stefan Biffl.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Biffl, S., Grünbacher, P. & Halling, M. A family of experiments to investigate the effects of groupware for software inspection. Autom Software Eng 13, 373–394 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10851-006-8531-5

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10851-006-8531-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation