Cited by 79Software Engineering ResearchSoftware Engineering Techniques and PracticesUsability and User Interface Design

An Information Foraging Theory Perspective on Tools for Debugging, Refactoring, and Reuse Tasks

Fleming, Scott D., Scaffidi, Chris, Piorkowski, David, Burnett, Margaret, Bellamy, Rachel, Lawrance, Joseph, Kwan, Irwin·2013·ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology

Abstract

Theories of human behavior are an important but largely untapped resource for software engineering research. They facilitate understanding of human developers’ needs and activities, and thus can serve as a valuable resource to researchers designing software engineering tools. Furthermore, theories abstract beyond specific methods and tools to fundamental principles that can be applied to new situations. Toward filling this gap, we investigate the applicability and utility of Information Foraging Theory (IFT) for understanding information-intensive software engineering tasks, drawing upon literature in three areas: debugging, refactoring, and reuse. In particular, we focus on software engineering tools that aim to support information-intensive activities, that is, activities in which developers spend time seeking information. Regarding applicability, we consider whether and how the mathematical equations within IFT can be used to explain why certain existing tools have proven empirically successful at helping software engineers. Regarding utility, we applied an IFT perspective to identify recurring design patterns in these successful tools, and consider what opportunities for future research are revealed by our IFT perspective.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/2430545.2430551

Cites

104 of 104 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • IFT has proven useful for explaining and predicting developer behaviors during software maintenance, in ways beneficial to tool design.

    “IFT has already proven useful for explaining and predicting developer behaviors during software maintenance, in ways beneficial to tool design [12,16,17,25,26,27,33].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 106 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Fleming, S. D., Scaffidi, C., Piorkowski, D., Burnett, M., Bellamy, R., Lawrance, J., & Kwan, I.
Affiliations
  • Oregon State University (US)
  • IBM (United States) (US)
  • Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US)
Venue
ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology
Published
2013-03
Volume
22
Issue
2
Pages
1-41
ISSN
  • 1049-331X (ISSN-L)
  • 1557-7392
OpenAlex
W2044049174
Cited by
79
References
106
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 3
FWCI
23.32
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • International Business Machines Corporation
  • Air Force Office of Scientific Research (FA9550-09-l-0213)
  • National Science Foundation (ITR-0325273)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Software Engineering Research
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Software Engineering Techniques and Practices
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Usability and User Interface Design
Keywords
information foraging theory, software engineering tools, debugging, refactoring, software reuse, human behavior theory

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