The Impact of Human Factors on the Participation Decision of Reviewers in Modern Code Review
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Modern Code Review (MCR) plays a key role in software quality practices. In MCR process, a new patch (i.e., a set of code changes) is encouraged to be examined by reviewers in order to identify weaknesses in source code prior to an integration into main software repositories. To mitigate the risk of having future defects, prior work suggests that MCR should be performed with sufficient review participation. Indeed, recent work shows that a low number of participated reviewers is associated with poor software quality. However, there is a likely case that a new patch still suffers from poor review participation even though reviewers were invited. Hence, in this paper, we set out to investigate the factors that are associated with the participation decision of an invited reviewer. Through a case study of 230,090 patches spread across the Android, LibreOffice, OpenStack and Qt systems, we find that (1) 16%-66% of patches have at least one invited reviewer who did not respond to the review invitation; (2) human factors play an important role in predicting whether or not an invited reviewer will participate in a review; (3) a review participation rate of an invited reviewers and code authoring experience of an invited reviewer are highly associated with the participation decision of an invited reviewer. These results can help practitioners better understand about how human factors associate with the participation decision of reviewers and serve as guidelines for inviting reviewers, leading to a better inviting decision and a better reviewer participation.
Key facts. Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 27 Jun 2018.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2021: 3; 2022: 0; 2023: 0; 2024: 1; 2025: 0; 2026: 1.
5 papers.
- 2021Using Machine Intelligence to Prioritise Code Review Requestscited by 2
- 2026Rethinking Code Review in the Age of AI: A Vision for Agentic Code Reviewcited by 1
- 2021Predicting Code Review Completion Time in Modern Code Reviewcited by 0
- 2021Using Personality Detection Tools for Software Engineering Research: How Far Can We Go?cited by 0
- 2024Practitioners' Challenges and Perceptions of CI Build Failure Predictions at Atlassiancited by 0
- 2026Rethinking Code Review in the Age of AI: A Vision for Agentic Code Review17 May 2026
- 2024Practitioners' Challenges and Perceptions of CI Build Failure Predictions at Atlassian15 Feb 2024
- 2021Using Personality Detection Tools for Software Engineering Research: How Far Can We Go?11 Oct 2021
- 2021Predicting Code Review Completion Time in Modern Code Review30 Sep 2021
- 2021Using Machine Intelligence to Prioritise Code Review Requests11 Feb 2021