Investigating the Impact of Personality Types on Communication and Collaboration-Viability in Pair Programming – An Empirical Study

  • Panagiotis Sfetsos
  • Ioannis Stamelos
  • Lefteris Angelis
  • Ignatios Deligiannis
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4044)


This paper presents two controlled experiments (a pilot and the main one) investigating the impact of developer personalities and temperaments on communication, collaboration-pair viability and ultimately effectiveness in pair programming. The objective of the experiments was to compare pairs of mixed/ heterogeneous developer personalities and temperaments with pairs of the same personalities and temperaments, in terms of pair effectiveness. Pair effectiveness is expressed in terms of pair performance, measured by communication, velocity, productivity and customer satisfaction, and pair collaboration-viability measured by developers’ satisfaction, knowledge acquisition and participation (collaboration satisfaction ratio, nuisance ratio, voluntary or mandatory preference, and driver or navigator preference). The results have shown that there is significant difference between the two groups, indicating better communication and collaboration-viability for the pairs with mixed personalities/temperaments.


Communication Mode Personality Type Pair Effectiveness Communication Metrics Communication Transaction 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Basili, V., Weiss, D.: A Methodology for Collecting Valid Software Engineering Data. IEEE Transactions on software engineering SE-10, 728–738 (1984)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Basili, V., Rombach, H.: The TAME Project: Towards Improvement- Oriented Software Environments. IEEE Transactions on software engineering 14(6), 758–773 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Beck, K.: Extreme Programming Explained: Embrace Change. Addison-Wesley, Reading (2000)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Briand, L., Differding, C., Rombach, H.: Practical Guidelines For Measurement-Based Process Improvement. Software Process Improvement and Practice 2(4), 253–280 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Briand, L., Arisholm, S., Counsell, F., Houdek, F., Thevenod-Fosse, P.: Empirical Studies of Object-Oriented Artifacts, Methods, and Processes: State of the Ar and Future Directions. Empirical Software Engineering (2000)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cockburn, A.: The Coffee Machine Design Problem: Part 1 & 2. C/C++ User’s Journal (May/June 1998)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cockburn, A.: Agle Software Development. Addison-Wesley, Reading (2002)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dutoit, A., Bruegge, B.: Communication Metrics for Software Development. IEEE transactions on Software Engineering (1998)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fenton, N.: Software Metrics, A Rigorous Approach. Chapman & Hall, Boca Raton (1991)MATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Highsmith, J.: Agle Software Development Ecosystems. Addison Wesley, Reading (2002)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Katira, N., Williams, L., Wiebe, E., Miller, C., Balik, S., Gehringer, E.: On Under-standing Compatibility of Student Pair Programmers. In: SIGCSE 2004, pp. 3–7 (2004)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Keirsey, D., Bates, M.: Please Understand Me, Del Mar. Prometheus Book Company, California (1984)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Myers, Isabel: Manual: The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. Consulting Psychologists Press, Palo Alto (1975)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Saeki, M.: Communication, Collaboration, and Cooperation in Software Development — How Should We Support Group Work in Software Development? In: Proc. Asia-Pacific Software Eng. Conf., Brisbane, Australia (1995)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Seaman, C., Basili, V.: An Empirical Study of Communication in Code Inspections. In: Proc. 19th Int’l Conf. Software Eng., Boston (May 1997)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sfetsos, P., Angelis, L., Stamelos, I.: Investigating The Extreme Programming System - An Empirical Study. Empirical Software Engineering 11(2), 269–301 (to appear, 2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sundstrom, E., De Meuse, K., Futrell, D.: Work Teams. American Psychologist, 120–133 (February 1990)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wohlin, C., Runeson, P., Höst, M., Ohlson, M., Regnell, B., Wesslén, A.: Experimentation in Software Engineering: An Introduction. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (2000)MATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Panagiotis Sfetsos
    • 1
  • Ioannis Stamelos
    • 1
  • Lefteris Angelis
    • 1
  • Ignatios Deligiannis
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of InformaticsAristotle UniversityThessalonikiGreece
  2. 2.Department of Information TechnologyTechnological Education InstituteThessalonikiGreece

Personalised recommendations