The DOI matches its Crossref record; 14 of the 14 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Evaluation of Software Quality in Test-driven Development: A Perspective of Measurement and Metrics
Open accessAbstract
A software product is expected to be subjected to critical evaluation on its quality attributes in order to ascertain that target quality requirements are met, and that those quality attributes responsible for revealing software quality are not omitted in the software development process. Software metrics are essential to accomplish the task. This paper has carried out an exploratory study of software measurement and software metrics in tandem. The study took into cognizance the interwoven nature of the duo in measuring and revealing software quality. The study formulated a model that expressed the mutual bonding that propels both measurement and metrics to describing software quality in numeric quantities of software attributes. The study identified six software attributes whose values are considered enough quantities to reveal the quality of a software product. The identification enabled the study to create a model equation aimed at giving a numeric value for the complete evaluation of a software system. The result of the implementation of the six software attributes into the model equation showed that two software products employed in the study are of high-quality, having quality values of 0.93 and 0.86 respectively. The attributes produced values that confirmed the maintainability (25 seconds & 20 seconds respectively) and reliability (0.78 & 0.80 respectively) of both software products among other differing features that characterize them.
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.
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?
The check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“The studies' results suggest that TDD can improve code coverage, and code quality, reduce defects, increase productivity and developer satisfaction, improve internal and external software quality, and ultimately lead to higher customer satisfaction.”
From Test Driven Development and Its Impact on Program Design and Software Quality: A Systematic Literature Review (2023) · cites this paper as [12]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“Nwandu et al. suggest that TDD positively affects software developers by increasing confidence in code quality, satisfaction, and productivity, and reducing stress [12].”
From Test Driven Development and Its Impact on Program Design and Software Quality: A Systematic Literature Review (2023) · cites this paper as [12]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“Nwandu et al. suggest that TDD positively affects software developers by increasing confidence in code quality, satisfaction, and productivity, and reducing stress [12].”
From Test Driven Development and Its Impact on Program Design and Software Quality: A Systematic Literature Review (2023) · cites this paper as [12]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“Thus, TDD can improve communication between developers, facilitate knowledge sharing, reduce anxiety, and increase confidence in the code.”
From Test Driven Development and Its Impact on Program Design and Software Quality: A Systematic Literature Review (2023) · cites this paper as [12]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“Thus, TDD can improve communication between developers, facilitate knowledge sharing, reduce anxiety, and increase confidence in the code.”
From Test Driven Development and Its Impact on Program Design and Software Quality: A Systematic Literature Review (2023) · cites this paper as [12]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
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
Software Architecture in Practice
Bass, L., Clements, P., & Kazman, R. (1997) · Cited by 5,033
Software Metrics: A Rigorous and Practical Approach
Fenton, N., & Pfleeger, S. L. (2013) · Cited by 2,509
Jordan, P. W. (2020) · CRC Press eBooks · doi:10.1201/9781003062769 · Cited by 715
Framework for evaluation and validation of software complexity measures
Misra, S., Akman, İ., & Colomo‐Palacios, R. (2012) · IET Software · doi:10.1049/iet-sen.2011.0206 · Cited by 30
A SQuaRE-based software quality evaluation framework and its case study
Nakai, H., Tsuda, N., Honda, K., Washizaki, H., & Fukazawa, Y. (2016) · IEEE Region 10 Conference (TENCON) · doi:10.1109/tencon.2016.7848750 · Cited by 23
Evaluating Human-Assessed Software Maintainability Metrics
Chen, C., Alfayez, R., Srisopha, K., et al. (2016) · Communications in computer and information science · doi:10.1007/978-981-10-3482-4_9 · Cited by 17
Software Reliability Engineering
Kumar, D. (2011) · LAP LAMBERT Academic Publishing eBooks · Cited by 15
Reliability Evaluation Techniques
Wang, R. (2013) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-1-4614-4193-9_2 · Cited by 11
Concise Guide to Software Engineering
O’Regan, G. (2022) · Undergraduate topics in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-07816-3 · Cited by 7
Quantifying Software Quality in Agile Development Environment
Ikerionwu, C., & Caesar, N. I. (2021) · Software Engineering · doi:10.11648/j.se.20210902.11 · Cited by 4
Research works printed but not linked: 6
- A. Zai, R. Butt, and S. Nawaz, "A survey of software quality metrics for software measurement process", Journal of Software Engineering & Intelligent Systems, vol. 2, no. 1, April 2017, pp. 49-56.
- G. Gediga, K. Hamborg, and I. Düntsch, "Evaluation of software systems", Institut für Evaluation und Marktanalysen Brinkstr. vol. 19, Germany: 49143 Jeggen, 2015, pp. 1-5.
- I. Sommerville, Software Engineering, 10 th ed., Pearson Education Limited, ISBN 978-0-13-394303-0, 2016.
- K. Stoilova, and T. Stoilov, "Software evaluation approach", Institute of Computer and Communication Systems, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, pp. 1-6, 2005.
- R. Gunnalan, M. Shereshevsky, and A. Ammar, "Pseudo dynamic metrics [software metrics]", The 3rd ACS/IEEE International Conference on Computer Systems and Applications, Cairo, pp. 117-121, 2005.
- Dr. Okolie is a Fellow of the Nigeria Computer Society (FNCS), and also a National Executive Council Member of NCS, Zonal Coordinator of NCS (South-East), Council Member of Computer Professionals Registration Council of Nigeria. He is married with children. How to cite this paper: Ikenna Caesar Nwandu, Juliet N. Odii, Euphemia C. Nwokorie, Stanley A. Okolie, "Evaluation of Software Quality in Test-driven Development: A Perspective of Measurement and Metrics", International Journal of Information Technology and Computer Science(IJITCS), Vol.14, No.6, pp.13-22, 2022. DOI:10.5815/ijitcs.2022.06.02
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Agha, D., Sohail, R., Meghji, A. F., Qaboolio, R., & Bhatti, S. (2023) · VAWKUM Transactions on Computer Sciences · doi:10.21015/vtcs.v11i1.1494 · Cited by 3
Metadata
- Authors
- Department of Software Engineering, F. U. O. T., Nwandu, I. C., Odii, J. N., Nwokorie, E. C., & Okolie, S. A.
- Affiliations
- Federal University of Technology Owerri (NG)
- Venue
- International Journal of Information Technology and Computer Science
- Publisher
- MECS Publisher
- Published
- 2022-12-08
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 13-22
- ISSN
- 2074-9007 (ISSN-L)
- 2074-9015
- OpenAlex
- W4360910036
- Cited by
- 5
- References
- 14
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1
- FWCI
- 1.24
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
- doi.org
- Locations
- International Journal of Information Technology and Computer Science (publishedVersion)
- 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 › Software › Advanced Software Engineering Methodologies
- Keywords
- software quality, test-driven development, software metrics, software features, quality model, maintainability, reliability, software quality assessment
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
