The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Do Crosscutting Concerns Cause Defects?
Abstract
There is a growing consensus that crosscutting concerns harm code quality. An example of a crosscutting concern is a functional requirement whose implementation is distributed across multiple software modules. We asked the question, "How much does the amount that a concern is crosscutting affect the number of defects in a program?" We conducted three extensive case studies to help answer this question. All three studies revealed a moderate to strong statistically significant correlation between the degree of scattering and the number of defects. This paper describes the experimental framework we developed to conduct the studies, the metrics we adopted and developed to measure the degree of scattering, the studies we performed, the efforts we undertook to remove experimental and other biases, and the results we obtained. In the process, we have formulated a theory that explains why increased scattering might lead to increased defects.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences
Cohen, J. (2013) · doi:10.4324/9780203771587 · Cited by 25,373
Use of relative code churn measures to predict system defect density
Nagappan, N., & Ball, T. (2005) · Proceedings of the 27th international conference on Software engineering - ICSE '05 · doi:10.1145/1062455.1062514 · Cited by 775
Self-citationInformation Needs in Collocated Software Development Teams
Ko, A. J., DeLine, R., & Venolia, G. (2007) · 29th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE'07) · doi:10.1109/icse.2007.45 · Cited by 499
Using task context to improve programmer productivity
Kersten, M., & Murphy, G. C. (2006) · Proceedings of the 14th ACM SIGSOFT international symposium on Foundations of software engineering · doi:10.1145/1181775.1181777 · Cited by 452
Self-citation
Cited by
Software fault prediction metrics: A systematic literature review
Radjenović, D., Heričko, M., Torkar, R., & Živkovič, A. (2013) · Information and Software Technology · doi:10.1016/j.infsof.2013.02.009 · Cited by 538
An Empirical Study of RefactoringChallenges and Benefits at Microsoft
Kim, M., Zimmermann, T., & Nagappan, N. (2014) · IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering · doi:10.1109/tse.2014.2318734 · Cited by 231
Self-citationUsing Data Fusion and Web Mining to Support Feature Location in Software
Revelle, M., Dit, B., & Poshyvanyk, D. (2010) · 2010 IEEE 18th International Conference on Program Comprehension · doi:10.1109/icpc.2010.10 · Cited by 105
Can Better Identifier Splitting Techniques Help Feature Location?
Dit, B., Guerrouj, L., Poshyvanyk, D., & Antoniol, G. (2011) · 2011 IEEE 19th International Conference on Program Comprehension · doi:10.1109/icpc.2011.47 · Cited by 89
Metadata
- Authors
- Eaddy, M., Zimmermann, T., Sherwood, K. D., Garg, V., Murphy, G. C., Nagappan, N., & Aho, A. V.
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering
- Published
- 2008-07
- Volume
- 34
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 497-515
- ISSN
- 0098-5589 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2122581326
- Cited by
- 242
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 93.25
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Do Crosscutting Concerns Cause Defects? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/tse.2008.36
- The paper
- Eaddy, M., Zimmermann, T., Sherwood, K. D., Garg, V., Murphy, G. C., Nagappan, N., & Aho, A. V. (2008). Do Crosscutting Concerns Cause Defects? IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering. https://doi.org/10.1109/tse.2008.36
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.