Investigating the Impact of Personality Types on Communication and Collaboration-Viability in Pair Programming – An Empirical Study
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.
KeywordsCommunication Mode Personality Type Pair Effectiveness Communication Metrics Communication Transaction
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 3.Beck, K.: Extreme Programming Explained: Embrace Change. Addison-Wesley, Reading (2000)Google Scholar
- 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.Cockburn, A.: The Coffee Machine Design Problem: Part 1 & 2. C/C++ User’s Journal (May/June 1998)Google Scholar
- 7.Cockburn, A.: Agle Software Development. Addison-Wesley, Reading (2002)Google Scholar
- 8.Dutoit, A., Bruegge, B.: Communication Metrics for Software Development. IEEE transactions on Software Engineering (1998)Google Scholar
- 10.Highsmith, J.: Agle Software Development Ecosystems. Addison Wesley, Reading (2002)Google Scholar
- 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.Keirsey, D., Bates, M.: Please Understand Me, Del Mar. Prometheus Book Company, California (1984)Google Scholar
- 13.Myers, Isabel: Manual: The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. Consulting Psychologists Press, Palo Alto (1975)Google Scholar
- 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.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
- 17.Sundstrom, E., De Meuse, K., Futrell, D.: Work Teams. American Psychologist, 120–133 (February 1990)Google Scholar