psychological effect of software defects

[neil johnson]

this is a pretty specific topic, but I'm looking for material/research related to the psychological effects of software defects on developers. specifically, I'm wondering if there's any research that shows developers feel an emotional benefit from finding/fixing a software defect (and further that the emotional benefit is psychologically valuable to developers to the point it becomes a deterrent to adopting development practices that promote defect prevention).

or put another way... if software developers (problem solvers) actually enjoy finding/fixing defects (solving problems), is the personal joy they feel great enough that it becomes a barrier to defect prevention (preventing problems)?

anyone aware of work along these lines? or have an opinion?

thanks!

-neil

[Derek M Jones]

Neil,

> or put another way... if software developers (problem solvers) actually
> enjoy finding/fixing defects (solving problems), is the personal joy they
> feel great enough

You have obviously never worked in software development.

Developers hate fixing defects.

Developers enjoy writing new code, not fixing other people (or their
own mistakes).

Do you enjoy fixing other people's mistakes?

--
Derek M. Jones Software analysis
tel: +44 (0)1252 520667 blog:shape-of-code.coding-guidelines.com

[Paola Kathuria]

Derek writes:
> You have obviously never worked in software development.

One of the things I’ve learnt is that any statement starting with “you” is very likely to make people defensive and produce a negative outcome.

Derek, I’d appreciate it if you could express your opinions from your perspective (“I” statements) rather than make statements about other people.

> Do you enjoy fixing other people's mistakes?

I relish fixing mistakes. Fixing my own gives me a sense of relief and pride. Fixing other people’s mistakes can be annoying but, if the person is gone and other people are suffering as a result, it’s rewarding to make their life easier.

Also, there is a personalty type that loves getting their teeth into complex problems and reorganising them.

For example, on my last contract, I found out there the CSS file for a monolithic web site had 2,000 lines. The developers knew that 70% was redundant but they didn’t know which. Analysing and optimising that file would be a task some people would love to take on.

Similarly, when I know there are niggling but non-showstopper bugs in my code, I tolerate them but would rather I could solve the problem rather than it have a hold over my anxiety.

Neil asks:

> or put another way... if software developers (problem solvers) actually enjoy finding/fixing defects (solving problems), is the personal joy they feel great enough that it becomes a barrier to defect prevention (preventing problems)?

I think that’s unlikely. We write code for other people to use and maintain. If we write deliberately sloppy code so that we can fix it, other people are affected, including missing deadlines.

I also don’t think it’s possible to write code sloppily in the hope there are bugs to fix. It’d require complexity to the mental models one needs of the whole system.

I hope this helps.


Paola

[Gail Ollis]

It might be helpful if you clarify whether you mean ephemeral flaws (see work by Tamara Lopez) or reported bugs.

Personally I can confess to occasions as a developer when there has been a little hint of anti-climax when something i write works first time. I can't deny that tackling the puzzle of why it didn't work can be engaging.

Debugging reported bugs can also be a interesting puzzle, depending on context. It is stressful under severe time pressure or if it involves crawling over very poor code, but at its best it can be an intellectually demanding puzzle that piques curiosity and is deeply satisfying to solve.

I cannot speak for other developers... well, just one other: the part about debugging reported bugs represents the view of both developers currently in the room. Being slightly disappointed at the lack of ephemeral flaws, however, is perhaps my own idiosyncrasy!

________________________________________
From: ppig-d...@googlegroups.com [ppig-d...@googlegroups.com] on behalf of neil johnson [nosn...@gmail.com]
Sent: 16 December 2016 18:11
To: PPIG Discuss
Subject: [ppig-discuss] psychological effect of software defects

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PPIG Discuss" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ppig-discuss...@googlegroups.com<mailto:ppig-discuss...@googlegroups.com>.
To post to this group, send email to ppig-d...@googlegroups.com<mailto:ppig-d...@googlegroups.com>.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
BU is a Disability Two Ticks Employer and has signed up to the Mindful Employer charter. Information about the accessibility of University buildings can be found on the BU DisabledGo webpages This email is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed and may contain confidential information. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this email, which must not be copied, distributed or disclosed to any other person. Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Bournemouth University or its subsidiary companies. Nor can any contract be formed on behalf of the University or its subsidiary companies via email.

[Huw Lloyd]

Hi Neil,

On opinion, I see more value in discerning what (cultural, historical) affordances there are for doing good work (collaboration, craftsmanship, design, reflexive development of skills) and consider what avenues there are for satisfaction within those settings.

Best,

Huw

--

http://www.bootstrapsystems.co.uk

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PPIG Discuss" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ppig-discuss+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to ppig-d...@googlegroups.com.

[Thomas Green]

Long time since I’ve done this and I was never professional, but I remember thinking that a good intriguing bug was like a good whodunnit - looking for shreds of evidence, and getting a nice surprise when I found the answer - and a bit of an ego-boost, quite often (“oooh, aren’t I clever, to have found that bug?”). OTOH some bugs were just too hard and all the fun went; and sometimes the bug was something like a comma in the wrong place, which was just banal and irritating (“what? I’ve spent all this time just to find a simple typo? Grrr!”)

So I think there’s something in the OP’s conjecture of "an emotional benefit ", but probably only for for some people and some bugs and in some contexts (not in the context of time stress, as has already been said). 

But the second part of the conjecture I’m more dubious about: "the emotional benefit is psychologically valuable to developers to the point it becomes a deterrent to adopting development practices that promote defect prevention”. I read that as  meaning developers don’t adopt stringent practices such as unit testing. While the conjecture could be true, surely there are other factors, such as disinclination to make the added effort of ‘doing it properly’. Or is that the very point that you’re making, Neil?

I don’t recall anyone else raising this point and i look forward to hearing more.

Thomas Green

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ppig-discuss...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to ppig-d...@googlegroups.com.

[Derek M Jones]

Paola,

>> You have obviously never worked in software development.
>
> One of the things I’ve learnt is that any statement starting with “you” is very likely to make people defensive and produce a negative outcome.

I'm sure Neil can stand up for himself.

> Derek, I’d appreciate it if you could express your opinions from your perspective (“I” statements) rather than make statements about other people.

I would appreciate it if you would not use this list as a forum
for your views on how people interact.

[Derek M Jones]

Neil,

> ha. I guess there's more than 1 perspective here. I'm a test engineer. I
> think it's common for testers to feel that finding a defect validates their
> existence (makes them happy).

Yes, I have seen this.

It is a shame, because tests that don't fail can be just as useful.
I have read a surprising number of papers that treat the finding
of faults as the purpose of testing. A case of the drunk looking under
the lamppost for car keys.

> and at a minimum, I think developers are
> relieved by defects being fixed (even if we assume they hate doing it).

Yes, the feeling is one of relief not joy.

[Huw Lloyd]

Un-substantiated generalisations combined with accusations are rude in a number of ways, Derek.  If you write to a group, you are writing to a group.  Writing to a group is supposed to help you with your manners!

I would not have an issues if Paola exercised moderation duties beyond polite emails.  I think it would serve you to make a simple apology.

Best,

Huw

--

http://www.bootstrapsystems.co.uk

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PPIG Discuss" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ppig-discuss+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

[neil johnson]

ha. I guess there's more than 1 perspective here. I'm a test engineer. I think it's common for testers to feel that finding a defect validates their existence (makes them happy). and at a minimum, I think developers are relieved by defects being fixed (even if we assume they hate doing it).

On Friday, December 16, 2016 at 2:05:33 PM UTC-7, Derek M Jones wrote:

[neil johnson]

thomas, that's pretty much it (right down to the mention of unit testing... though technique probably isn't important for the discussion). wrt taking on new techniques that promote defect reduction, I've heard extra effort mentioned as a deterrent (I don't have time for this). I know learning new techniques can seen as a deterrent (I don't have time to learn this). I'm sure there are other factors as well, but the one I've never thought of until recently is the idea that we might possibly feel less fulfilled without those "aren't I clever" moments. I wouldn't claim it's the deciding factor, but a possible factor nonetheless.

-neil

On Friday, December 16, 2016 at 3:14:49 PM UTC-7, thosgreen wrote:

Long time since I’ve done this and I was never professional, but I remember thinking that a good intriguing bug was like a good whodunnit - looking for shreds of evidence, and getting a nice surprise when I found the answer - and a bit of an ego-boost, quite often (“oooh, aren’t I clever, to have found that bug?”). OTOH some bugs were just too hard and all the fun went; and sometimes the bug was something like a comma in the wrong place, which was just banal and irritating (“what? I’ve spent all this time just to find a simple typo? Grrr!”)

So I think there’s something in the OP’s conjecture of "an emotional benefit ", but probably only for for some people and some bugs and in some contexts (not in the context of time stress, as has already been said). 

But the second part of the conjecture I’m more dubious about: "the emotional benefit is psychologically valuable to developers to the point it becomes a deterrent to adopting development practices that promote defect prevention”. I read that as  meaning developers don’t adopt stringent practices such as unit testing. While the conjecture could be true, surely there are other factors, such as disinclination to make the added effort of ‘doing it properly’. Or is that the very point that you’re making, Neil?

I don’t recall anyone else raising this point and i look forward to hearing more.

Thomas Green

On 16 Dec 2016, at 21:54, Gail Ollis <gol...@bournemouth.ac.uk> wrote:

It might be helpful if you clarify whether you mean ephemeral flaws (see work by Tamara Lopez) or reported bugs.

Personally I can confess to occasions as a developer when there has been a little hint of anti-climax when something i write works first time. I can't deny that tackling the puzzle of why it didn't work can be engaging.

Debugging reported bugs can also be a interesting puzzle, depending on context. It is stressful under severe time pressure or if it involves crawling over very poor code, but at its best it can be an intellectually demanding puzzle that piques curiosity and is deeply satisfying to solve.

I cannot speak for other developers... well,  just one other: the part about debugging reported bugs represents the view of both developers currently in the room. Being slightly disappointed at the lack of ephemeral flaws, however, is perhaps my own idiosyncrasy!

________________________________________
From: ppig-d...@googlegroups.com [ppig-d...@googlegroups.com] on behalf of neil johnson [nosn...@gmail.com]
Sent: 16 December 2016 18:11
To: PPIG Discuss
Subject: [ppig-discuss] psychological effect of software defects

this is a pretty specific topic, but I'm looking for material/research related to the psychological effects of software defects on developers. specifically, I'm wondering if there's any research that shows developers feel an emotional benefit from finding/fixing a software defect (and further that the emotional benefit is psychologically valuable to developers to the point it becomes a deterrent to adopting development practices that promote defect prevention).

or put another way... if software developers (problem solvers) actually enjoy finding/fixing defects (solving problems), is the personal joy they feel great enough that it becomes a barrier to defect prevention (preventing problems)?

anyone aware of work along these lines? or have an opinion?

thanks!

-neil

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PPIG Discuss" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ppig-discuss+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com<mailto:ppig-discuss+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com>.
To post to this group, send email to ppig-d...@googlegroups.com<mailto:ppig-discuss@googlegroups.com>.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
BU is a Disability Two Ticks Employer and has signed up to the Mindful Employer charter. Information about the accessibility of University buildings can be found on the BU DisabledGo webpages This email is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed and may contain confidential information. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this email, which must not be copied, distributed or disclosed to any other person. Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Bournemouth University or its subsidiary companies. Nor can any contract be formed on behalf of the University or its subsidiary companies via email.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PPIG Discuss" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ppig-discuss+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ppig-discuss+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com<mailto:ppig-discuss+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com>.
To post to this group, send email to ppig-d...@googlegroups.com<mailto:ppig-discuss@googlegroups.com>.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
BU is a Disability Two Ticks Employer and has signed up to the Mindful Employer charter. Information about the accessibility of University buildings can be found on the BU DisabledGo webpages This email is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed and may contain confidential information. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this email, which must not be copied, distributed or disclosed to any other person. Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Bournemouth University or its subsidiary companies. Nor can any contract be formed on behalf of the University or its subsidiary companies via email.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PPIG Discuss" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ppig-discuss+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ppig-discuss+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com<mailto:ppig-discuss+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com>.
To post to this group, send email to ppig-d...@googlegroups.com<mailto:ppig-discuss@googlegroups.com>.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
BU is a Disability Two Ticks Employer and has signed up to the Mindful Employer charter. Information about the accessibility of University buildings can be found on the BU DisabledGo webpages This email is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed and may contain confidential information. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this email, which must not be copied, distributed or disclosed to any other person. Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Bournemouth University or its subsidiary companies. Nor can any contract be formed on behalf of the University or its subsidiary companies via email.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PPIG Discuss" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ppig-discuss+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

[Thomas Green]

On 16 Dec 2016, at 22:40, neil johnson <nosn...@gmail.com> wrote:

 the one I've never thought of until recently is the idea that we might possibly feel less fulfilled without those "aren't I clever" moments. I wouldn't claim it's the deciding factor, but a possible factor nonetheless.

So can anyone think of any empirical ways to look into this?

BTW doing hypothesis-testing experiments often brings elation - “Yay! It worked!!” - or dejection: “oh dear. no significant result.”  I’ve never done serious qualitative studies, so I don’t know whether they do or not.

Thomas

[Huw Lloyd]

On Sat, Dec 17, 2016 at 7:20 AM, Thomas Green <thos...@gmail.com> wrote:

On 16 Dec 2016, at 22:40, neil johnson <nosn...@gmail.com> wrote:

 the one I've never thought of until recently is the idea that we might possibly feel less fulfilled without those "aren't I clever" moments. I wouldn't claim it's the deciding factor, but a possible factor nonetheless.

So can anyone think of any empirical ways to look into this?

​I would look to the relation between the person and the task (including social contexts).  Specifically with respect to the construction of guiding (mediating) schemata in undertaking the task​.  The relation is between how the task is construed and how this construal shapes (structures) actions.  Hence it is about one's understanding of the process of learning and exercising skill.  In "beginner" stages we have responses indicating that "it was me" that constituted the fix, whereas in a more mature form we may have the recognition that the correct fix came about through the correct orientation -- i.e. it is more about learning how to read the task correctly. One could say the same for other activities, such as authors statements that the book wrote itself etc.

By imputing stages to orientation, I do not mean to suggest that one form is better than another, but rather that they have different qualities -- the "higher" having greater appreciation for systemic factors.

A problematic social factor that may confound these issues is when best practices are introduced/enforced that guide merely formal adherence (training) without giving scope for appreciation systemic qualities (craftsmanship, reflexivity, understanding), i.e. when the institutionalised practices inhibit exploration of systemic relations (formal education and its imitation in commerce).  If the institutionalised practices inhibit this then, yes, why not seek satisfaction in debugging skills.

Best,

Huw

--

http://www.bootstrapsystems.co.uk

 

BTW doing hypothesis-testing experiments often brings elation - “Yay! It worked!!” - or dejection: “oh dear. no significant result.”  I’ve never done serious qualitative studies, so I don’t know whether they do or not.

Thomas

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PPIG Discuss" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ppig-discuss+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to ppig-d...@googlegroups.com.

[Richard A. O'Keefe]

Write a piece of code that works, first time.
WOW GODLIKE POWER WOO WOO!

Write a piece of code that fails miserably.
why this is hell nor are we out of it

That's me, anyway.

[Richard A. O'Keefe]

On 17/12/16 10:54 AM, Gail Ollis wrote:
> It might be helpful if you clarify whether you mean ephemeral flaws (see work by Tamara Lopez) or reported bugs.
>
> Personally I can confess to occasions as a developer when there has been a little hint of anti-climax when something i write works first time. I can't deny that tackling the puzzle of why it didn't work can be engaging.

Ah, but when the code works perfectly, that's when you can start hacking
on its performance!

I was recently working on a data structure for a certain task.
It worked flawlessly, and was clearly superior to what I had been
using before.
Then it occurred to me that there were a couple of missing operations
that I should have been using all along.
Implemented on new and old data structures, worked flawlessly,
BUT the old data structure was better at these operations than the
new one.

So now I have a new data structure design to implement that should be
good at everything, but needs more space.

So an (apparent) absence of bugs just means you get to the really fun
part of hacking on your code quicker!

[Kutar Maria]

Dear All,

Please remember that this is a group list, for discussion of topics related to the Psychology of Programming. Anyone posting to the list should ensure that they are polite and courteous. We expect debate and some disagreement, but this should not extend to personal comments.

Paola is appointed moderator of the list and list members should abide by her advice on appropriate conduct.

Yours

Maria Kutar

Chair, PPIG

Dr Maria Kutar

Associate Dean (Academic - Student Experience) |  Salford Business School

Lady Hale Building, University of Salford, Salford  M5 4WT

t: +44 (0) 161 295 3056

m.k...@salford.ac.uk  | www.salford.ac.uk

http://www.salford.ac.uk/business-school/business-academics/maria-kutar 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PPIG Discuss" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ppig-discuss...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to ppig-d...@googlegroups.com.