The Mind Is a Powerful Place: How Showing Code Comprehensibility Metrics Influences Code Understanding
Marvin Wyrich, Andreas Preikschat, Daniel Graziotin, Stefan Wagner
Abstract
Static code analysis tools and integrated development environments present developers with quality-related software metrics, some of which describe the understandability of source code. Software metrics influence overarching strategic decisions that impact the future of companies and the prioritization of everyday software development tasks. Several software metrics, however, lack in validation: we just choose to trust that they reflect what they are supposed to measure. Some of them were even shown to not measure the quality aspects they intend to measure. Yet, they influence us through biases in our cognitive-driven actions. In particular, they might anchor us in our decisions. Whether the anchoring effect exists with software metrics has not been studied yet. We conducted a randomized and double-blind experiment to investigate the extent to which a displayed metric value for source code comprehensibility anchors developers in their subjective rating of source code comprehensibility, whether performance is affected by the anchoring effect when working on comprehension tasks, and which individual characteristics might play a role in the anchoring effect. We found that the displayed value of a comprehensibility metric has a significant and large anchoring effect on a developer's code comprehensibility rating. The effect does not seem to affect the time or correctness when working on comprehension questions related to the code snippets under study. Since the anchoring effect is one of the most robust cognitive biases, and we have limited understanding of the consequences of the demonstrated manipulation of developers by non-validated metrics, we call for an increased awareness of the responsibility in code quality reporting and for corresponding tools to be based on scientific evidence. 1
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Cited by top-tier papers3
- Trust Dynamics in AI-Assisted Development: Definitions, Factors, and ImplicationsSadra Sabouri, Philipp Eibl, Xinyi Zhou, Morteza Ziyadi et al.ICSE 2025 · 2 citations
- On the Relationship between Code Verifiability and UnderstandabilityKobi Feldman, Martin Kellogg, Oscar ChaparroFSE 2023 · 2 citations
- Example Quality Matters: Multi-Aspects Example Augmentation for Private Library ProgrammingYuhao Li, Haifeng Sun, Xuesong Zhang, Shu Yao et al.ACL 2026
Related papers
- Program Comprehension and Code Complexity Metrics: An fMRI StudyNorman Peitek, Sven Apel, Chris Parnin, André Brechmann et al.ICSE 2021 · 59 citations
- Studying the Effects of Cognitive Biases in Evaluation of Conversational AgentsSashank Santhanam, Alireza Karduni, Samira ShaikhCHI 2020 · 18 citations
- Programmers' Visual Attention on Function Call Graphs During Code SummarizationSamantha McLoughlin, Zachary Karas, Robert Wallace, Aakash Bansal et al.ASE 2025 · 1 citation
- Deciding Fast and Slow: The Role of Cognitive Biases in AI-assisted Decision-makingCharvi Rastogi, Yunfeng Zhang, Dennis Wei, Kush R. Varshney et al.CSCW 2022 · 184 citations
- Evidence Profiles for Validity Threats in Program Comprehension ExperimentsMarvin Muñoz Barón, Marvin Wyrich, Daniel Graziotin, Stefan WagnerICSE 2023 · 3 citations
