Identification of factors that influence defect injection and detection in development of software intensive products

The objective of this study is the identification of factors that influence defect injection and defect detection. The study is part of a broader research project with the goal to lower the number of residual defects in software intensive products, by using the influencing factors to decrease injection of defects and to increase detection of defects. As a first step, we performed an extensive literature search to find influencing factors and processed the factors to achieve consistently formulated sets of factors without duplications. As a second step, we used a cluster analysis to reduce the number influencing factors to manageable-sized sets for practical application. As a last step, final groupings of factors were obtained by expert interpretation of the cluster analysis results. These steps were separately performed for defect injection and detection influencing factors, resulting in sets of, respectively, 16 and 17 factors. Finally, the resulting factor groupings were evaluated. The findings (1) are the basis for further research focusing on a framework for lowering residual defects, (2) already provide information to enable practitioners to devise strategies for lowering residual defects, and (3) may create awareness in organizations to reconsider policies regarding development and Verification & Validation.

[1]  Klaus Krippendorff,et al.  Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology , 1980 .

[2]  William M. K. Trochim,et al.  Conceptualization for Evaluation and Planning. , 1984 .

[3]  Barry W. Boehm,et al.  Software Engineering Economics , 1993, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering.

[4]  William M. K. Trochim,et al.  Conceptualization for Planning and Evaluation , 2022 .

[5]  Moonja P. Kim,et al.  The Method of Sorting as a Data-Gathering Procedure in Multivariate Research. , 1975, Multivariate behavioral research.

[6]  Tsuneo Furuyama,et al.  Analysis of fault generation caused by stress during software development , 1997, J. Syst. Softw..

[7]  W. Trochim Concept mapping: Soft science or hard art? , 1989 .

[8]  Victor R. Basili,et al.  Software Quality: An Overview from the Perspective of Total Quality Management , 1994, IBM Syst. J..

[9]  A. Kimball Romney,et al.  Systematic Data Collection , 1988 .

[10]  David G. Curry,et al.  Using Cluster Analysis for Deriving Menu Structures for Automotive Mobile Multimedia Applications , 2001 .

[11]  Barry W. Boehm,et al.  Cost models for future software life cycle processes: COCOMO 2.0 , 1995, Ann. Softw. Eng..

[12]  William M. K. Trochim,et al.  An introduction to concept mapping for planning and evaluation. , 1989 .

[13]  Philip B. Crosby,et al.  Quality Is Free: The Art of Making Quality Certain , 1979 .

[14]  Ming Li,et al.  A Ranking of Software Engineering Measures Based on Expert Opinion , 2003, IEEE Trans. Software Eng..

[15]  Tore Dybå,et al.  An Instrument for Measuring the Key Factors of Success in Software Process Improvement , 2000, Empirical Software Engineering.

[16]  Steve Sawyer,et al.  Software Development: Processes and Performance , 1998, IBM Syst. J..

[17]  Hoang Pham,et al.  An analysis of factors affecting software reliability , 2000, J. Syst. Softw..

[18]  J. Hartigan Statistical theory in clustering , 1985 .

[19]  Philipp Mayring Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse : Grundlagen und Techniken , 2003 .

[20]  B. Everitt Unresolved Problems in Cluster Analysis , 1979 .

[21]  H. Bock On some significance tests in cluster analysis , 1985 .