Abstract
Software architecture reviews help improve the quality of architecture design decisions. Traditional reviews are considered expensive and time-consuming. We assert that organizations can consider leveraging peer-reviews and recombination (i.e., promoting design improvement through sharing design ideas) activities to improve the quality of architectures and getting staff trained. This paper reports a case study aimed at exploring the potential impact of combining peer-review and recombination on the quality of architecture design and design decisions made by novice architects, who usually have limited practical experience of architecture design. The findings show that the use of peer-review and recombination can improve both the quality of architecture design and documented decisions. From the decision-making perspective, this study also identifies the main types of challenges that the participants faced during architectural decision making and reasoning. These findings can be leveraged to focus on the types of training novice architects may need to effectively and efficiently address the types of challenges identified in this study.
Access provided by Autonomous University of Puebla. Download to read the full chapter text
Chapter PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Keywords
References
Dow, P.S., Glassco, A., Kass, J., Schwarz, M., Schwartz, D.L., Klemmer, S.R.: Parallel Prototyping Leads to Better Design Results, More Divergence, and Increased Self-efficacy. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction 17(4) (2010)
Dow, P.S., Fortuna, J., Schwartz, D., Altringer, B., Schwartz, D.L., Klemmer, S.R.: Prototyping dynamics: sharing multiple designs improves exploration, group rapport, and results. In: The SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 2807–2816 (2011)
LaToza, T.D., Chen, M., Jiang, L., Zhao, M., van der Hoek, A.: Borrowing from the crowd: a study of recombination in software design competitions. In: 37th International Conference on Software Engineering (2015)
Xu, A., Bailey, B.P.: A crowdsourcing model for receiving design critique. In: CHI 2011 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 1183–1188 (2011)
Armitage, P., Berry, G.: Statistical Methods in Medical Research, 3rd edn. Blackwell (1994)
Braun, V., Clarke, V.: Using Thematic Analysis in Psychology. Qual. Res. Psychol. 3(2), 77–101 (2006)
Kruchten, P.: An ontology of architectural design decisions in software intensive systems. In: 2nd Groningen Workshop on Software Variability, pp. 54–61 (2004)
Yin, R.: Case Study research: Design and methods, Sage Publications, Inc. (2003)
Nicol, D., Thomson, A., Breslin, C.: Rethinking Feedback Practices in Higher Education: a Peer Review Perspective. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 39(1), 102–122k (2014)
McCrum-Gardner, E.: Which is the Correct Statistical Test to Use? British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery 46(1), 38–41 (2008)
Lytra, I., Gaubatz, P., Zdun, U.: Two Controlled Experiments on Model-based Architectural Decision Making. Information and Software Technology 63, 58–75 (2015)
Ali Babar, M., Gorton, I.: Software Architecture Review: The State of. Practice 42(7), 26–32 (2009)
Tang, A., Lau, M.F.: Software Architecture Review by Association. Journal of Systems and Software 88, 87–101 (2014)
Tang, A., Kuo, F.-C., Lau, M.F.: Towards independent software architecture review. In: Morrison, R., Balasubramaniam, D., Falkner, K. (eds.) ECSA 2008. LNCS, vol. 5292, pp. 306–313. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)
Maranzano, J.F., Rozsypal, S.A., Zimmerman, G.H., Warnken, G.W., Wirth, P.E., Weiss, D.M.: Architecture Reviews: Practice and Experience. IEEE Software 22(2), 34–43 (2005)
Klaas-Jan Stol, K., Fitzgerald, B.: Two’s company, three’s a crowd: a case study of crowdsourcing software development. In: 36th International Conference on Software Engineering, pp. 187–198 (2014)
Service Oriented Architecture Modeling Language (SoaML) Specification, OMG. http://www.omg.org/spec/SoaML/1.0.1/PDF
Raymond, E.S.: The Cathedral and the Bazaar: Musings on Linux and Open Source by an Accidental Revolutionary. O’Reilly (2001)
Wang, J., Shih, P.C., Carroll, J.M.: Revisiting Linus’s Law: Benefits and Challenges of Open Source Software Peer Review. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 77, 52–65 (2015)
Weinreich, R., Groher, I., Miesbauer, C.: An Expert Survey on Kinds, Influence Factors and Documentation of Design Decisions in Practice. Future Generation Computer Systems 47, 145–160 (2015)
Kitchenham, B., Pfleeger, S., Pickard, L., Jones, P., Hoaglin, D., El Emam, K., Rosenberg, J.: Preliminary Guidelines for Empirical Research in Software Engineering. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 28(8), 721–734 (2002)
Host, M., Regnell, B., Wohlin, C.: Using Students as Subjects - A Comparative Study of Students and Professionals in Lead-time Impact Assessment. Empirical Software Engineering 5(3), 201–214 (2000)
Bass, L., Clements, P., Kazman, R.: Software Architecture in Practice, 3rd edn. Addison Wesley, Boston (2012)
Mao, K., Capra, L., Harman, M., Jia, Y.: A Survey of the Use of Crowdsourcing in Software Engineering. Technical Report RN/15/01, Department of Computer Science, University College London (2015)
Jiang, L.: Recombination Contest: Crowdsourcing Software Architecture and Design. Master Thesis, University of Amsterdam (2014)
Kahneman, D.: Thinking, Fast and Slow. Penguin (2011)
Kitchenham, B., Pickard, L., Pfleeger, S.L.: Case Studies for Method and Tool Evaluation. IEEE Software 12(4), 53–62 (1995)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this paper
Cite this paper
Shahin, M., Babar, M.A. (2015). Improving the Quality of Architecture Design Through Peer-Reviews and Recombination. In: Weyns, D., Mirandola, R., Crnkovic, I. (eds) Software Architecture. ECSA 2015. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 9278. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-23727-5_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-23727-5_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-23726-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-23727-5
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)