Skip to main content

An Empirical Investigation on the Impact of Training-by-Examples on Inspection Performance

  • Conference paper

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 3009))

Abstract

Software inspection is often seen as a technique to produce quality software. It has been claimed that expertise is a key determinant in inspection performance particularly in individual detection and group meetings [33]. Uncertainty, among reviewers during the group meetings due to lack of expertise is seen as a weakness in inspection performance. One aspect of achieving expertise is through education or formal training. Recent theoretical frameworks in software inspection also support the idea of possible effects of training on inspection performance [33]. A laboratory experiment was conducted to test the effects of training by examples on requirements inspection. Our findings show that the trained group performs significantly better than the group which received no training. However, the ‘experienced’ reviewers did not outperform those with no experience. The results have implications the use of a repository of defect examples for training reviewers.

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

Buying options

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

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Basili, V.R., Green, S., Laitenburger, O., Lanubile, F., Shull, F., Sorumgard, S., Zelkowitz, M.: The Empirical Investigation of Perspective-Based Reading. Empirical Software Engineering: An International Journal 2(1), 133–164 (1996)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Biffl, S., Halling, M.: Investigating the Influence of Inspectors capability factors with Four Inspection Techniques on Inspection Performance. In: Proc. IEEE Int’l Software Metrics Symp. (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Biffl, S., Halling, M.: Investigating the Defect Detection Effectiveness and Cost Benefit of Nominal Inspection Teams. IEEE Transaction on Software Engineering 29(5), 385–387 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Boehm, B.W.: Software Engineering Economics. In: Advances in Computing Science and Technology, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1981)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Carver, J., Shull, F., Basili, V.: Investigating the Effects of Process Experience on Inspection Effectiveness, University of Maryland Technical Report CSTR- 4442 (March 2003)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Carver, J.: The Impact of Background and Experience on Software Inspections. PhD Thesis, University of Maryland (April 2003)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Carver, J., Basili, V.: Identifying Implicit Process Variables To Support Future Empirical Work. In: Proceedings of the 17th Brazilian Symposium on Software Engineering (SBES 2003), October 2003, pp. 5–18 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Charney, D.H., Reder, L.M.: Designing interactive tutorials for computer users: Effects of the form and spacing of practice on skill learning. Human-Computer Interaction 2, 297–317 (1986)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Chase, W.G., Simon, H.A.: The mind’s Eye in Chess. In: Chase, W.G. (ed.) Visual Information Processing, pp. 215–281. Academic, New York (1973)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Cheng, B., Jeffery, R.: Comparing Inspection Strategies for Software Requirements Specifications. In: Proceeding of the 1996 Australian Software Engineering Conference, pp. 203–211 (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Cooper, G., Sweller, J.: The effects of schema acquisition and rule automation on mathematical problem-solving transfer. Journal of Educational Psychology 79, 347–362 (1987)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Dansereau, D.F.: The development of a learning strategies curriculum. In: O’Neil Jr., H.F. (ed.) Learning Strategies, Academic Press, New York (1978)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Fagan, M.E.: Design and code inspections to reduce errors in program development. IBM Systems Journal 15(3), 182–211 (1976)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Fowler, P.J.: In-process inspections of work-products at AT&T. At&T Journal, 102–112 (March/April 1986)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Freedman, D.P., Weinberg, G.M.: Handbook of Walkthroughs, Inspections and Technical Reviews: Evaluating Programs, Projects, and Products, 3rd edn. Dorest House Publishing, New York (1990)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Gilb, T., Graham, D.: Software Inspection. Addison Wesley, Reading (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Goska, R., Ackerman, P.: An Aptitude-Treatment Interaction Approach to Transfer With-in Training. Journal of Educational Psychology 88(2), 249–259 (1996)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 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, 201–214 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Humphrey, W.S.: A Discipline for Software Engineering. Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Reading (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Kim, L.P.W., Sauer, C., Jeffery, R.: A Framework for software development technical reviews. In: Lee, M., Barta, B.-Z., Juliff, P. (eds.) Software Quality and Productivity: Training, Practice, Education and training, pp. 294–299. IFIP/Chapman and Hall (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Laitenburg, O., DeBraud, J.: An Encompassing Life Cycle Centric Survey of Software Inspection. Journal of Systems and Software 50(1), 5–31 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Land, L.: Software Group Reviews and the Impact of Procedural Roles on Defect Detection Performance, Thesis, University of New South Wales (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Land, L., Wong, B., Jeffery, R.: An Extension Behavioural Theory of Group Performance in Software Development Technical Reviews. APSEC (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Lieberman, H.: An Example Based Environment for beginning Programmers. Instructional Science 14(3), 277–292 (1986)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Melo, W., Shull, F., Travassos, G.H.: Software Review Guidelines Technical Report ES-556/01 Systems Engineering and Computer Science Program. COPPE. Federal University of Rio de Janeiro (September 2001)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Miller, J., Daly, J., Wood, M., Roper, M., Brooks, A.: Statistical power and its subcomponents – missing and misunderstood concepts in empirical software engineering research. Information and Software Technology 39, 285–295 (1997)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. O’Neil, H.F., Spielberger, C.: Cognitive and Affective Learning Strategies. Academic Press, London (1979)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Parnas, D.L., Weiss, D.M.: Active Design Reviews: Principles and Practices. In: Proc of the 8th International Conferences on Software Engineering, pp. 418–426 (1985)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Porter, A.A., Votta, L.G., Basili, V.R.: Comparing detection methods for software requirements inspections: A replicated experiment. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 21(6), 563–575 (1995)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Porter, A.A., Johnson, P.M.: Assessing Software Review Meetings: Results of a Comparative Analysis of Two Experimental Studies. IEEE Transaction on Software Engineering 23(3), 129–145 (1997)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Porter, A.A., Votta, L.G.: What makes Inspection Work?, IEEE Software, 99–102 (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  32. Proctor, R.W., Dutta, A.: Skill Acquisition and Human Performance. Sage, Thousand Oaks (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  33. Sauer, C., Jeffery, R., Land, L., Yetton, P.: The Effectiveness of Software Development Technical Reviews: A Behaviourally Motivated Program of Research. IEEE Transaction on Software Engineering 26(1) (January 2000)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Schneider, G.M., Martin, J., Tsai, W.T.: An experiment study of fault detection in user requirements document. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology 1(2), 188–204 (1992)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Shull, F., Carver, J., Travassos, G.: An Empirical Methodology for Introducing Software Processes. In: Proceedings of the Joint 8th European Software Engineering Conference (ESEC) and 9th ACM SIGSOFT Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering (FSE-9), Vienna, Austria, September 10-14, pp. 288–296 (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  36. Sweller, J., Cooper, G.A.: The use of worked examples as a substitute for problem solving in learning algebra. Cognition and Instruction 2, 59–89 (1985)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Sweller, J.: Instructional Design in Technical Areas. ACER Press (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  38. Wangari, M., Sweller, J.: Learning to Solve Compare Word Problems: The Effect of Example Format and Generating Self Explanation. Cognition and Instruction 16(2), 173–199 (1998)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2004 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Chowdhury, A., Land, L.P.W. (2004). An Empirical Investigation on the Impact of Training-by-Examples on Inspection Performance. In: Bomarius, F., Iida, H. (eds) Product Focused Software Process Improvement. PROFES 2004. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 3009. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-24659-6_15

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-24659-6_15

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-21421-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-24659-6

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics