By Topic

Assessing software review meetings: results of a comparative analysis of two experimental studies

Sign In

Cookies must be enabled to login.After enabling cookies , please use refresh or reload or ctrl+f5 on the browser for the login options.

Formats Non-Member Member
$31 $13
Learn how you can qualify for the best price for this item!
Become an IEEE Member or Subscribe to
IEEE Xplore for exclusive pricing!
close button

puzzle piece

IEEE membership options for an individual and IEEE Xplore subscriptions for an organization offer the most affordable access to essential journal articles, conference papers, standards, eBooks, and eLearning courses.

Learn more about:

IEEE membership

IEEE Xplore subscriptions

2 Author(s)
Porter, A.A. ; Dept. of Comput. Sci., Maryland Univ., College Park, MD, USA ; Johnson, P.M.

Software review is a fundamental tool for software quality assurance. Nevertheless, there are significant controversies as to the most efficient and effective review method. One of the most important questions currently being debated is the utility of meetings. Although almost all industrial review methods are centered around the inspection meeting, recent findings call their value into question. In prior research the authors separately and independently conducted controlled experimental studies to explore this issue. The paper presents new research to understand the broader implications of these two studies. To do this, they designed and carried out a process of “reconciliation” in which they established a common framework for the comparison of the two experimental studies, reanalyzed the experimental data with respect to this common framework, and compared the results. Through this process they found many striking similarities between the results of the two studies, strengthening their individual conclusions. It also revealed interesting differences between the two experiments, suggesting important avenues for future research

Published in:

Software Engineering, IEEE Transactions on  (Volume:23 ,  Issue: 3 )