The DOI matches its Crossref record; 14 of the 14 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Designing the whyline: a debugging interface for asking questions about program behavior
Abstract
Debugging is still among the most common and costly of programming activities. One reason is that current debugging tools do not directly support the inquisitive nature of the activity. Interrogative Debugging is a new debugging paradigm in which programmers can ask why did and even why didn't questions directly about their program's runtime failures. The Whyline is a prototype Interrogative Debugging interface for the Alice programming environment that visualizes answers in terms of runtime events directly relevant to a programmer's question. Comparisons of identical debugging scenarios from user tests with and without the Whyline showed that the Whyline reduced debugging time by nearly a factor of 8, and helped programmers complete 40% more tasks.
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
Contextual Design: Defining Customer-Centered Systems
Beyer, H. R., & Holtzblatt, K. (1997) · Cited by 2,748
Usability Analysis of Visual Programming Environments: A ‘Cognitive Dimensions’ Framework
Green, T. R. G., & Petre, M. (1996) · Journal of Visual Languages & Computing · doi:10.1006/jvlc.1996.0009 · Cited by 1,251
International Conference on Software Engineering
(2017) · IEEE Software · doi:10.1109/ms.2017.3571566 · Cited by 622
Isolating cause-effect chains from computer programs
Zeller, A. (2002) · Proceedings of the 10th ACM SIGSOFT symposium on Foundations of software engineering · doi:10.1145/587051.587053 · Cited by 530
Cognitive dimensions of notations
Green, T. R. G. (1990) · Cited by 487
Rethinking the evaluation of algorithm animations as learning aids: an observational study
KEHOE, C., STASKO, J., & TAYLOR, A. (2001) · International Journal of Human-Computer Studies · doi:10.1006/ijhc.2000.0409 · Cited by 200
Precise dynamic slicing algorithms
Zhang, X., Gupta, R., & Zhang, Y. (2003) · doi:10.5555/776816.776855 · Cited by 198
Models and theories of programming strategy
Davies, S. P. (1993) · International Journal of Man-Machine Studies · doi:10.1006/imms.1993.1061 · Cited by 173
Program understanding behavior during debugging of large scale software
von Mayrhauser, A., & Vans, A. M. (1997) · doi:10.1145/266399.266414 · Cited by 86
Development and evaluation of a model of programming errors
Ko, A. J., & Myers, B. A. (2003) · IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing (VL/HCC) · doi:10.1109/hcc.2003.1260196 · Cited by 78
Self-citation
Research works printed but not linked: 11
- 10.5555/786769.787013 · doi:10.5555/786769.787013
- 10.5555/795687.797807 · doi:10.5555/795687.797807
- 10.1145/230509.230513 · doi:10.1145/230509.230513
- Davies , S.P. Display-based problem solving strategies in computer programming, Empirical Studies of Programmers , 6th Workshop , 1996 , Washington, D.C., 59--76. Davies, S.P. Display-based problem solving strategies in computer programming, Empirical Studies of Programmers, 6th Workshop, 1996, Washington, D.C., 59--76.
- 10.5555/795687.797806 · doi:10.5555/795687.797806
- 10.5555/1153917.1153960 · doi:10.5555/1153917.1153960
- 10.1145/248448.248455 · doi:10.1145/248448.248455
- 10.1145/331960.331968 · doi:10.1145/331960.331968
- 10.1002/1099-1689(200006)10:2<77::AID-STVR197>3.0.CO;2-E · doi:10.1002/1099-1689(200006)10:2<77::aid-stvr197>3.0.co;2-e
- Tassey , G. , The economic impacts of inadequate infrastructure for software testing . National Institute of Standards and Technology , RTI Project Number 7007.011, 2002 . Tassey, G., The economic impacts of inadequate infrastructure for software testing. National Institute of Standards and Technology, RTI Project Number 7007.011, 2002.
- Tip , F. , A survey of programming slicing techniques . Journal of Programming Languages , 3 , 1995 , 121 -- 189 . Tip, F., A survey of programming slicing techniques. Journal of Programming Languages, 3, 1995, 121--189.
Cited by
Abdul, A., Vermeulen, J., Wang, D., Lim, B. Y., & Kankanhalli, M. (2018) · Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3173574.3174156 · Cited by 743
Ko, A. J., Myers, B. A., Coblenz, M. J., & Aung, H. H. (2006) · IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering · doi:10.1109/tse.2006.116 · Cited by 685
Self-citationThe state of the art in end-user software engineering
Ko, A. J., Abraham, R., Beckwith, L., Blackwell, A., Burnett, M., Erwig, M., Scaffidi, C., Lawrance, J., Lieberman, H., Myers, B., et al. (2011) · ACM Computing Surveys · doi:10.1145/1922649.1922658 · Cited by 633
Self-citationWhy and why not explanations improve the intelligibility of context-aware intelligent systems
Lim, B. Y., Dey, A. K., & Avrahami, D. (2009) · Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/1518701.1519023 · Cited by 552
Measuring Program Comprehension: A Large-Scale Field Study with Professionals
Xia, X., Bao, L., Lo, D., Xing, Z., Hassan, A. E., & Li, S. (2018) · IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering · doi:10.1109/tse.2017.2734091 · Cited by 326
Metadata
- Authors
- Ko, A. J., & Myers, B. A.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
- Publisher
- ACM
- Published
- 2004-04-25
- Pages
- 151-158
- OpenAlex
- W2157922094
- Cited by
- 361
- References
- 14
- FWCI
- 13.33
- Type
- conference paper
- 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: Designing the whyline: a debugging interface for asking questions about program behavior. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1145/985692.985712
- The paper
- Ko, A. J., & Myers, B. A. (2004). Designing the whyline: a debugging interface for asking questions about program behavior. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. https://doi.org/10.1145/985692.985712
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.
