By using this site, you agree to the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Accept
World of SoftwareWorld of SoftwareWorld of Software
  • News
  • Software
  • Mobile
  • Computing
  • Gaming
  • Videos
  • More
    • Gadget
    • Web Stories
    • Trending
    • Press Release
Search
  • Privacy
  • Terms
  • Advertise
  • Contact
Copyright © All Rights Reserved. World of Software.
Reading: Pair Programming’s Impact on Effort: A Comparative Discussion | HackerNoon
Share
Sign In
Notification Show More
Font ResizerAa
World of SoftwareWorld of Software
Font ResizerAa
  • Software
  • Mobile
  • Computing
  • Gadget
  • Gaming
  • Videos
Search
  • News
  • Software
  • Mobile
  • Computing
  • Gaming
  • Videos
  • More
    • Gadget
    • Web Stories
    • Trending
    • Press Release
Have an existing account? Sign In
Follow US
  • Privacy
  • Terms
  • Advertise
  • Contact
Copyright © All Rights Reserved. World of Software.
World of Software > Computing > Pair Programming’s Impact on Effort: A Comparative Discussion | HackerNoon
Computing

Pair Programming’s Impact on Effort: A Comparative Discussion | HackerNoon

News Room
Last updated: 2025/08/23 at 9:22 AM
News Room Published 23 August 2025
Share
SHARE

Table of Links

Abstract and 1. Introduction

2. Experiment Definition

3. Experiment Design and Conduct

3.1 Latin Square Designs

3.2 Subjects, Tasks and Objects

3.3 Conduct

3.4 Measures

4. Data Analysis

4.1 Model Assumptions

4.2 Analysis of Variance (ANOVA)

4.3 Treatment Comparisons

4.4 Effect Size and Power Analysis

5. Experiment Limitations and 5.1 Threats to the Conclusion Validity

5.2 Threats to Internal Validity

5.3 Threats to Construct Validity

5.4 Threats to External Validity

6. Discussion and 6.1 Duration

6.2 Effort

7. Conclusions and Further Work, and References

6. Discussion

In this section we discuss some results of other experiments, and we contrast them with our results regarding duration and effort.

6.1 Duration

The experiment run by Nosek [24] employed 15 practitioners grouped in 5 pairs and 5 solos. Subjects wrote a database script. Results show a decrease of 29% in time duration in favor of pair programming.

Williams et al. [28] used 41 students grouped in 14 pairs and 13 solos. During the experiment, subjects completed four assignments. Authors reported that pairs completed the assignments 40 to 50 percentage faster.

Nawrocki and Wojciechowski [23] employed 16 student subjects (5 pairs and 6 solos). Subjects wrote four programs. Authors did not find differences between pairs and solos.

Lui and Chan [19] used 15 practitioners grouped in 5 pairs and 5 solos. Authors reported 52% decrease in time in favor of pair programming.

Müller [22] used 38 students (14 pairs and 13 solos). Students worked on four programming assignments where tasks were decomposed into implementation, quality assurance and the whole task. Author reported that pairs spent 7% more time working on the whole task, however this difference is not significant.

Arisholm et al. [1] used 295 practitioners grouped in 98 pairs and 99 solos. Subjects performed several change tasks on two alternative systems with different degrees of complexity. Authors reported 8% decrease in favor of pairs.

In contrast, the results reported in this paper infer a significant (at a=0.1) 28% decrease in time (in favor of pairs) and an effect size d=0.65. With respect to duration, our results reinforce those reported in [24].

:::info
Authors:

(1) Omar S. Gómez, full time professor of Software Engineering at Mathematics Faculty of the Autonomous University of Yucatan (UADY);

(2) José L. Batún, full time professor of Statistics at Mathematics Faculty of the Autonomous University of Yucatan (UADY);

(3) Raúl A. Aguilar, Faculty of Mathematics, Autonomous University of Yucatan Merida, Yucatan 97119, Mexico.

:::


:::info
This paper is available on arxiv under CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 DEED license.

:::

Sign Up For Daily Newsletter

Be keep up! Get the latest breaking news delivered straight to your inbox.
By signing up, you agree to our Terms of Use and acknowledge the data practices in our Privacy Policy. You may unsubscribe at any time.
Share This Article
Facebook Twitter Email Print
Share
What do you think?
Love0
Sad0
Happy0
Sleepy0
Angry0
Dead0
Wink0
Previous Article My son died in horror crash – but I don’t deserve sympathy, says brave mum
Next Article Peacock Just Added One of My Favorite Movies from Last Year — and this Found-Family Drama is a Must-Watch
Leave a comment

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Stay Connected

248.1k Like
69.1k Follow
134k Pin
54.3k Follow

Latest News

Top Used Luxury Cars Worth Buying in 2025
News
The Pixel Tablet 2 would’ve been great with Android’s new PC-like keyboard and mouse controls
News
German city is offering FREE flats to newcomers… but competition is fierce
News
10 Best Project Cost Tracking Software Tools in 2025 |
Computing

You Might also Like

Computing

10 Best Project Cost Tracking Software Tools in 2025 |

34 Min Read
Computing

Booms, busts, and Seattle’s place in the AI era, with Jeff Shulman of the UW Foster School

3 Min Read
Computing

I Found the Perfect Reading Setup Without an E-Reader

7 Min Read
Computing

16 Failure Modes of RAG and LLM Agents and How to Fix Them With a Semantic Firewall | HackerNoon

11 Min Read
//

World of Software is your one-stop website for the latest tech news and updates, follow us now to get the news that matters to you.

Quick Link

  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of use
  • Advertise
  • Contact

Topics

  • Computing
  • Software
  • Press Release
  • Trending

Sign Up for Our Newsletter

Subscribe to our newsletter to get our newest articles instantly!

World of SoftwareWorld of Software
Follow US
Copyright © All Rights Reserved. World of Software.
Welcome Back!

Sign in to your account

Lost your password?