Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Let's Talk With Developers, Not About Developers

Links

Text available via DOI:

View graph of relations

Let's Talk With Developers, Not About Developers: A Review of Automatic Program Repair Research

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Published

Standard

Let's Talk With Developers, Not About Developers: A Review of Automatic Program Repair Research. / Winter, Emily; Nowack, Vesna; Bowes, David et al.
In: IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, Vol. 49, No. 1, 31.01.2023, p. 419-436.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Winter E, Nowack V, Bowes D, Counsell S, Hall T, Haraldsson S et al. Let's Talk With Developers, Not About Developers: A Review of Automatic Program Repair Research. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering. 2023 Jan 31;49(1):419-436. Epub 2022 Feb 16. doi: 10.1109/TSE.2022.3152089

Author

Winter, Emily ; Nowack, Vesna ; Bowes, David et al. / Let's Talk With Developers, Not About Developers : A Review of Automatic Program Repair Research. In: IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering. 2023 ; Vol. 49, No. 1. pp. 419-436.

Bibtex

@article{00152abe459f4864813380198ea69fba,
title = "Let's Talk With Developers, Not About Developers: A Review of Automatic Program Repair Research",
abstract = "Automatic program repair (APR) offers significant potential for automating some coding tasks. Using APR could reduce the high costs historically associated with fixing code faults and deliver significant benefits to software engineering. Adopting APR could also have profound implications for software developers daily activities, transforming their work practices. To realise the benefits of APR it is vital that we consider how developers feel about APR and the impact APR may have on developers' work. Developing APR tools without consideration of the developer is likely to undermine the success of APR deployment. In this paper, we critically review how developers are considered in APR research by analysing how human factors are treated in 260 studies from Monperrus's Living Review of APR. Over half of the 260 studies in our review were motivated by a problem faced by developers (e.g., the difficulty associated with fixing faults). Despite these human-oriented motivations, fewer than 7% of the 260 studies included a human study. We looked in detail at these human studies and found their quality mixed (for example, one human study was based on input from only one developer). Our results suggest that software developers are often talked about in APR studies, but are rarely talked with. A more comprehensive and reliable understanding of developer human factors in relation to APR is needed. Without this understanding, it will be difficult to develop APR tools and techniques which integrate effectively into developers' workflows. We recommend a future research agenda to advance the study of human factors in APR.",
keywords = "Human factors, software development, Automatic Program Repair",
author = "Emily Winter and Vesna Nowack and David Bowes and Steve Counsell and Tracy Hall and Saemundur Haraldsson and John Woodward",
year = "2023",
month = jan,
day = "31",
doi = "10.1109/TSE.2022.3152089",
language = "English",
volume = "49",
pages = "419--436",
journal = "IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering",
issn = "0098-5589",
publisher = "Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc.",
number = "1",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Let's Talk With Developers, Not About Developers

T2 - A Review of Automatic Program Repair Research

AU - Winter, Emily

AU - Nowack, Vesna

AU - Bowes, David

AU - Counsell, Steve

AU - Hall, Tracy

AU - Haraldsson, Saemundur

AU - Woodward, John

PY - 2023/1/31

Y1 - 2023/1/31

N2 - Automatic program repair (APR) offers significant potential for automating some coding tasks. Using APR could reduce the high costs historically associated with fixing code faults and deliver significant benefits to software engineering. Adopting APR could also have profound implications for software developers daily activities, transforming their work practices. To realise the benefits of APR it is vital that we consider how developers feel about APR and the impact APR may have on developers' work. Developing APR tools without consideration of the developer is likely to undermine the success of APR deployment. In this paper, we critically review how developers are considered in APR research by analysing how human factors are treated in 260 studies from Monperrus's Living Review of APR. Over half of the 260 studies in our review were motivated by a problem faced by developers (e.g., the difficulty associated with fixing faults). Despite these human-oriented motivations, fewer than 7% of the 260 studies included a human study. We looked in detail at these human studies and found their quality mixed (for example, one human study was based on input from only one developer). Our results suggest that software developers are often talked about in APR studies, but are rarely talked with. A more comprehensive and reliable understanding of developer human factors in relation to APR is needed. Without this understanding, it will be difficult to develop APR tools and techniques which integrate effectively into developers' workflows. We recommend a future research agenda to advance the study of human factors in APR.

AB - Automatic program repair (APR) offers significant potential for automating some coding tasks. Using APR could reduce the high costs historically associated with fixing code faults and deliver significant benefits to software engineering. Adopting APR could also have profound implications for software developers daily activities, transforming their work practices. To realise the benefits of APR it is vital that we consider how developers feel about APR and the impact APR may have on developers' work. Developing APR tools without consideration of the developer is likely to undermine the success of APR deployment. In this paper, we critically review how developers are considered in APR research by analysing how human factors are treated in 260 studies from Monperrus's Living Review of APR. Over half of the 260 studies in our review were motivated by a problem faced by developers (e.g., the difficulty associated with fixing faults). Despite these human-oriented motivations, fewer than 7% of the 260 studies included a human study. We looked in detail at these human studies and found their quality mixed (for example, one human study was based on input from only one developer). Our results suggest that software developers are often talked about in APR studies, but are rarely talked with. A more comprehensive and reliable understanding of developer human factors in relation to APR is needed. Without this understanding, it will be difficult to develop APR tools and techniques which integrate effectively into developers' workflows. We recommend a future research agenda to advance the study of human factors in APR.

KW - Human factors

KW - software development

KW - Automatic Program Repair

U2 - 10.1109/TSE.2022.3152089

DO - 10.1109/TSE.2022.3152089

M3 - Journal article

VL - 49

SP - 419

EP - 436

JO - IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering

JF - IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering

SN - 0098-5589

IS - 1

ER -