Research Report—The Relevance of Application Domain Knowledge: The Case of Computer Program Comprehension

Abstract

The field of software, has, to date, focused almost exclusively on application-independent approaches. In this research, we demonstrate the role of application domain knowledge in the processes used to comprehend computer programs. Our research sought to reconcile two apparently conflicting theories of computer program comprehension by proposing a key role for knowledge of the application domain under examination. We argue that programmers use more top-down comprehension processes when they are familiar with the application domain. When the application domain is unfamiliar, programmers use processes that are more bottom-up in nature. We conducted a protocol analysis study of 24 professional programmers comprehending programs in familiar and unfamiliar application domains. Our findings confirm our thesis.

The Role of Cognitive Fit in the Relationship between Software Comprehension and Modification

“…Software comprehension involves understanding existing software that frequently is written by another developer (Lientz et al 1978), while modification involves changing, deleting from, or adding to the software. Comprehension studies have sought to understand software developers' mental representations (Corritore and Weidenbeck 1999;Pennington 1987b), the cognitive processes they use during comprehension (Koenemann and Robertson 1991;Shaft and Vessey 1995;Vans et al 1999;von Mayrhauser and Vans 1995;von Mayrhauser et al 1997), and how characteristics of the software influence comprehension (Shaft and Vessey 1998).…”

Complacency and Intentionality in IT Use and Continuance

“…Such training is particularly important for studies in which participants repeat a task (e.g., McNab et al, 2011;Shaft & Vessey, 1995) to prevent potential confounds with the learning effects associated with repeated use. Therefore, we walked each participant through a practice stock purchase decision.…”

Comparing Three Notations for Defining Scenario-Based Model Tests: A Controlled Experiment

“…For further control, the questions per task were also randomly arranged for each participant individually. As domain knowledge has been shown beneficial for comprehension tasks (see, e.g., [32]), we factored out any domain bias by neutrally naming all model elements (e.g. ClassA, refB, attC).…”

“…Hence, all participants had to use the same bottom-up approach (increasing the internal validity of our experiment), which means that the participants had to analyze the scenario descriptions statement by statement. Thus, the participants first had to understand a scenario statement and then gradually build up to an understanding of groups of statements until the whole scenario was understood completely (see, e.g., [12], [32]). …”