Skip to main content

An Exploration of Individual Personality Types in Software Development

  • Conference paper
Systems, Software and Services Process Improvement (EuroSPI 2014)

Part of the book series: Communications in Computer and Information Science ((CCIS,volume 425))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

Previous research - using conventional psychometric questionnaires - has highlighted the importance of aligning compatible personality types in software development teams. However, there does not exist a dedicated, robust questionnaire instrument for revealing the pertinent personality types for software development practitioners. This study analyzes the validity and reliability of a 70-item (context dependent) personality-profiling questionnaire particularly developed to assess personality types of software practitioners. A systematic process of validation, using an iterative approach to questionnaire development, was employed. The questions were developed both with a qualitative analysis of interview data, and based on the opinions of expert reviewers who revised the items through a set of examination. To investigate how stable the questions and reproducible the results, we measured test-retest reliability of the instrument, yielding satisfactory results. The present study provided evidence for the construct validity of the instrument. Ultimately, an initial comparison of the results delivered by the instrument demonstrated positive correlations with the findings acquired with well-known personality assessment instrument, i.e. the big five personality questionnaire.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Stellman, A., Greene, J.: Applied software project management. O’Reilly Media (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Acuna, S.T., Juristo, N., Moreno, A.M., Mon, A.: A Software Process Model Handbook for Incorporating People’s Capabilities. Springer (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Schwalbe, K.: Information Technology: Project Management. Cengage Learning (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Lui, K.M., Chan, K.C.C.: Software Development Rhythms. John Wiley & Sons (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Mazni, O., Syed-Abdullah, S., Hussin, N.: Analyzing personality types to predict team performance. In: 2010 International Conference on Science and Social Research (CSSR), pp. 624–628. IEEE (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Lewis, T., Smith, W.: Building software engineering teams that work: The impact of dominance on group conflict and performance outcomes. In: 38th Annual Frontiers in Education Conference, FIE 2008, pp. S3H–1. IEEE (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Su-li, Z., Ke-fan, X.: Research on entrepreneurial team members’ personality traits influence on group risk decision-making. In: 2010 International Conference on Management Science and Engineering (ICMSE), pp. 937–942. IEEE (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Capretz, L., Ahmed, F.: Making sense of software development and personality types. IT Professional 12, 6–13 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Kerth, N., Coplien, J., Weinberg, J.: Call for the rational use of personality indicators. Computer 31, 146–147 (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Kline, P.: The handbook of psychological testing. Psychology Press (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Kaluzniacky, E.: Managing psychological factors in information systems work: An orientation to emotional intelligence. Information Science Publishing (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  12. John, O.P., Donahue, E.M., Kentle, R.L.: The big five inventory-versions 4a and 54. University of California, Institute of Personality and Social Research, Berkeley (1991)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Keirsey, D., Bates, M.: Please understand me: Character & temperament types. Prometheus Nemesis Michigan (1984)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Lenz, E.R.: Measurement in nursing and health research. Springer Publishing Company (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Joreskog, K., Sorbom, D.: LISREL 8: user’s reference guide. Scientific Software International Inc., Lincolnwood (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Biemer, P., Lyberg, L., Wiley, J.: Introduction to survey quality. Wiley Series in Survey Methodology. Wiley (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Presser, S.: Methods for Testing and Evaluating Survey Questionnaires. Wiley Series in Survey Methodology. Wiley-Interscience (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Hansen, M., Hurwitz, W., Pritzker, L.: Uinted State Bureau of the Census: The estimation and interpretation of gross differences and the simple response variance. Bureau of the Census (1963)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Cohen, J.: A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement 20, 37–46 (1960)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Varona, D., Capretz, L., Piñero, Y.: Personality types of cuban software developers. Global Journal of Engineering Education 13 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  21. McCrae, R.R., Costa, P.T.: Reinterpreting the myers-briggs type indicator from the perspective of the five-factor model of personality. Journal of Personality 57, 17–40 (1989)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. McDonald, S., Edwards, H.: Who should test whom? Communications of the ACM 50, 66–71 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Jackson, S.: Research methods and statistics: A critical thinking approach. Wadsworth Publishing Company (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Yilmaz, M., O’Connor, R.V.: A software process engineering approach to improving software team productivity using socioeconomic mechanism design. ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes 36, 1–5 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Yilmaz, M., O’Connor, R.V: Towards the understanding and classification of the personality traits of software development practitioners: Situational context cards approach. In: 2012 38th EUROMICRO Conference on Software Engineering and Advanced Applications (SEAA), pp. 400–405. IEEE (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Yilmaz, M., O’Connor, R.V., Collins, J.: Improving software development process through economic mechanism design. In: Riel, A., O’Connor, R., Tichkiewitch, S., Messnarz, R. (eds.) EuroSPI 2010. CCIS, vol. 99, pp. 177–188. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  27. Yilmaz, M., O’Connor, R.V., Clarke, P.: A systematic approach to the comparison of roles in the software development processes. In: Mas, A., Mesquida, A., Rout, T., O’Connor, R.V., Dorling, A. (eds.) SPICE 2012. CCIS, vol. 290, pp. 198–209. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Yilmaz, M., O’Connor, R.V., Clarke, P. (2014). An Exploration of Individual Personality Types in Software Development. In: Barafort, B., O’Connor, R.V., Poth, A., Messnarz, R. (eds) Systems, Software and Services Process Improvement. EuroSPI 2014. Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol 425. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-43896-1_10

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-43896-1_10

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-662-43895-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-662-43896-1

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics