Issue No. 03 - May-June (2012 vol. 38)
DOI Bookmark: http://doi.ieeecomputersociety.org/10.1109/TSE.2011.46
Jerod W. Wilkerson , Pennsylvania State University, Erie, Erie
Jay F. Nunamaker , University of Arizona, Tucson
Rick Mercer , University of Arizona, Tucson
This study is a quasi experiment comparing the software defect rates and implementation costs of two methods of software defect reduction: code inspection and test-driven development. We divided participants, consisting of junior and senior computer science students at a large Southwestern university, into four groups using a two-by-two, between-subjects, factorial design and asked them to complete the same programming assignment using either test-driven development, code inspection, both, or neither. We compared resulting defect counts and implementation costs across groups. We found that code inspection is more effective than test-driven development at reducing defects, but that code inspection is also more expensive. We also found that test-driven development was no more effective at reducing defects than traditional programming methods.
Agile programming, code inspections and walk throughs, reliability, test-driven development, testing strategies, empirical study.
R. Mercer, J. F. Nunamaker and J. W. Wilkerson, "Comparing the Defect Reduction Benefits of Code Inspection and Test-Driven Development," in IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, vol. 38, no. , pp. 547-560, 2011.