Distributed Pair Programming: A Systematic Literature Review
Open accessIntegrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Students who applied distributed pair programming had to spend more time communicating and interacting with their partners to complete the task.
“First, students who applied distributed pair programming had to spend more time in communicating and interacting with their partners to complete the task (da Silva Est ´ acio & Prikladnicki, 2015).”
From The effects of online peer-facilitated learning and distributed pair programming on students’ learning (2023) · cites this paper as da Silva Estácio & Prikladnicki, 2015
Conflicts might occur during the coordination process of paired groups, such as task load, differing opinions, and divergent goals.
“Thirdly, conflicts might occur during the coordination process of the paired groups, such as task load, differing opinions, and divergent goals (da Silva Est ´ acio & Prikladnicki, 2015).”
From The effects of online peer-facilitated learning and distributed pair programming on students’ learning (2023) · cites this paper as da Silva Estácio & Prikladnicki, 2015
Cites
Empirical studies of agile software development: A systematic review
Dybå, T., & Dingsøyr, T. (2008) · Information and Software Technology · doi:10.1016/j.infsof.2008.01.006 · Cited by 2,668 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Tsai, C.-W., Lin, M. Y.-C., Cheng, Y.-P., Lee, L.-Y., Chyr, W.-L., Lin, C.-H., Lin, J.-W., & Tsai, M.-C. (2023) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2023.104849 · Cited by 25 · see citing works
- Authors
- da Silva Estácio, B. J., & Prikladnicki, R.
- Affiliations
- Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul (BR)
- ORCID
- Prikladnicki, Rafael
- Venue
- Information and Software Technology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2015-07
- Volume
- 63
- Pages
- 1-10
- ISSN
- 0950-5849 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1983422391
- Cited by
- 65
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 1
- FWCI
- 1.30
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- hdl.handle.net
- Licence
- Locations
- Information and Software Technology (publishedVersion)
- PUCRS Repository (Pontifical Catholic University of Rio Grande do Sul) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Funders
- ThoughtWorks
- PUCRS
- CNPq (309000/2012-2)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Software Engineering Techniques and Practices
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Teaching and Learning Programming
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Team Dynamics and Performance
- Keywords
- distributed pair programming, distributed software development, remote collaboration, agile software development, software engineering education, communication and coordination, industrial practice, teaching methods
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
