|
DRUM >
College of Computer, Mathematical & Natural Sciences >
Computer Science >
Technical Reports from UMIACS >
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
http://hdl.handle.net/1903/880
|
| Title: | Assessing Software Review Meetings: Results of a Comparative Analysis
of Two Experimental Studies, |
| Authors: | Porter, Adam A. Johnson, Philip M. |
| Type: | Technical Report |
| Issue Date: | 15-Oct-1998 |
| Series/Report no.: | UM Computer Science Department; CS-TR-3755 UMIACS; UMIACS-TR-97-15 |
| Abstract: | 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. To gain insight into these
issues, the two authors of this paper separately and independently
conducted controlled experimental studies.
This paper discusses a joint effort to understand the broader implications
of these tow studies. To do this, we designed and carried out a process
of "reconciliation" in which we established a common framework for the
comparison of the two experimental studies, re-analyzed to experimental
data with respect to this common framework, and compared the results.
Through this process we found many striking similarities between the 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.
(Also cross-referenced as UMIACS-TR-97-15) |
| URI: | http://hdl.handle.net/1903/880 |
| Appears in Collections: | Technical Reports of the Computer Science Department Technical Reports from UMIACS
|
All items in DRUM are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.
|