Behavior Research Methods & Instrumentation

, Volume 11, Issue 2, pp 229–233 | Cite as

An introduction to structured programming

  • Karl P. Hunt
Session VII Data General Users’ Meeting Session VIII Programming Languages And Methodologies: A Tutorial Session


Structured programming (SP) is a technique devised to improve the reliability and clarity of programs. In SP, control of program flow is restricted to three structures, sequence, IF THEN ELSE, and DO WHILE, or to a structure derivable from a combination of the basic three. Thus, a structured program does not need to use GO TOs or branches (unless it is written in a language that does not have statement forms corresponding to the SP structures, in which case, GO TOs may be used to simulate the structures). The result is a program built of modules that are highly independent of each other. In turn, this allows a programmer to be more confident that the code contains fewer logic errors and will be easier to debug and change in the future. However, SP may be less efficient than an unstructured counterpart. Another disadvantage is the relative difficulty of using SP with a language that doesn’t support it, although this situation is changing as languages are updated (e.g., FORTRAN 77).


Control Structure Structure Programming Correctness Proof Recall Phase High Level Module 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Reference notes

  1. 1.
    Mills, H. D.How to write correct programs and know it (Report No. FSC 73-5008). Gaithersburg, Md: IBM Federal Systems Division, 1973.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Mills, H. D.Mathematical foundations for structured programming (Report No. FSC 72-6012). Gaithersburg, Md: IBM Federal Systems Division, 1972.Google Scholar


  1. Baker, F. T. Chief programmer team management of production programming.IBM Systems Journal, 1972,9, 366–371.Google Scholar
  2. Baker, F. T., &Mills, H. D. Chief programmer teams.Datamation, December 1973, pp. 55–57.Google Scholar
  3. Bohm, C., &Jacopini, G. Flow diagrams, Turning machines, and languages with only two formation rales.Communications of the ACM, 1966,9, 366–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Conway, R., &Gries, D.An introduction to programming: A structured approach. Cambridge, Mass: Winthrop, 1973.Google Scholar
  5. Dahl, O. J., Dijkstra, E. W., &Hoare, C. A. R.Structured programming. New York: Academic Press, 1972.Google Scholar
  6. Dijkstra, E. W. Programming considered as a human activity.Proceedings of IFIP Congress 65. Washington, D. C: Spartan Books, 1965.Google Scholar
  7. Dijkstra, E. W. GOTO statement considered harmful.Communications of the ACM, 1968,11, 147–148; 538; 541.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dijkstra, E. W. Structured programming. In P. Naur & B. Randell (Eds.),Software engineering techniques. Brussels: NATO Scientific Affairs Division, 1969.Google Scholar
  9. Hughes, J. K., &Michton, J. I.A structured approach to programming. Englewood Cliffs, N. J: Prentice-Hall, 1977.Google Scholar
  10. McCracken, D. D. Revolution in programming.Datamation, December, 1973. Pp. 50–52.Google Scholar
  11. McGowan, C. L., III, &Kelly, J. R.Top-down structured programming techniques. New York: Petrocelli-Charter, 1975.Google Scholar
  12. Miller, E. F., &Lindamood, G. E. Structured programming: Top-down approach.Datamation, December 1973, pp. 55–57.Google Scholar
  13. Yourdon, E.Techniques of program structure and design. Englewood Cliffs, N.J: Prentice-Hall, 1975.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Psychonomic Society, Inc. 1979

Authors and Affiliations

  • Karl P. Hunt
    • 1
  1. 1.American National BankChattanooga

Personalised recommendations