Building Software by Rolling the Dice: A Qualitative Study of Vibe Coding
Yi-Hung Chou, Boyuan Jiang, Yi Wen Chen, Mingyue Weng, Victoria Jackson, Thomas Zimmermann, James A. Jones
Abstract
Large language models (LLMs) are reshaping software engineering by enabling vibe coding—building software primarily through prompts rather than writing code. Although widely publicized as a productivity breakthrough, little is known about how practitioners actually define and engage in these practices. To shed some light on this emerging phenomenon, we conducted a grounded theory study of 20 vibe-coding videos, including 7 live-streamed coding sessions (approximately 16 hours, 254 prompts) and 13 opinion videos (approximately 5 hours), supported by additional analysis of activity durations and intents of prompts. Our findings reveal a spectrum of behaviors: some vibe coders rely almost entirely on AI without inspecting code, while others examine and adapt generated outputs. Across approaches, all must contend with the stochastic nature of generation, with debugging and refinement described as “rolling the dice.” Further, divergent mental models, shaped by vibe coders’ expertise and reliance on AI, influence prompting strategies, evaluation practices, and levels of trust. Through additional quantitative analysis, vibe coders spend over 20% of session time on average waiting for model responses, with some sessions exceeding 50%. We also observe prompt redundancy: for some participants, nearly 40% of prompts repeat prior intents. These findings open new directions for research on the future of software engineering and point to practical opportunities for tool design and education.
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.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext f485fba0-ea9c-460e-b6e2-3995378ee863Builds on14
- Why Johnny Can't Prompt: How Non-AI Experts Try (and Fail) to Design LLM PromptsJ. D. Zamfirescu-Pereira, Richmond Y. Wong, Bjoern Hartmann, Qian YangCHI 2023 · 892 citations
- Grounded Copilot: How Programmers Interact with Code-Generating ModelsShraddha Barke, Michael B. James, Nadia PolikarpovaOOPSLA 2023 · 408 citations
- The Metacognitive Demands and Opportunities of Generative AILev Tankelevitch, Viktor Kewenig, Auste Simkute, Ava Elizabeth Scott et al.CHI 2024 · 279 citations
- The Effects of Generative AI on Design Fixation and Divergent ThinkingSamangi Wadinambiarachchi, Ryan M. Kelly, Saumya Pareek, Qiushi Zhou et al.CHI 2024 · 186 citations
- Luminate: Structured Generation and Exploration of Design Space with Large Language Models for Human-AI Co-CreationSangho Suh, Meng Chen, Bryan Min, Toby Jia-Jun Li et al.CHI 2024 · 143 citations
Related papers
- Is Vibe Coding Safe? Benchmarking Vulnerability of Agent-Generated Code in Real-World TasksSongwen Zhao, Danqing Wang, Kexun Zhang, Jiaxuan Luo et al.ICML 2026 · 22 citations
- Computer Science Achievement and Writing Skills Predict Vibe Coding ProficiencySverrir Thorgeirsson, Theo B. Weidmann, Zhendong SuCHI 2026 · 4 citations
- From Specifications to Implementation in the Gen-AI Era: Lessons from a Project-Based Software Engineering CourseYingying Wang, Masih Beigi Rizi, Fatemeh Khashei, Julia RubinFSE 2026
- Vibe Coding Entanglements - Repositioning Boundaries of Intention, Authorship, and Responsibility in Programming with Generative AIJakob Tholander, Martin JonssonCHI 2026 · 3 citations
- The Matthew Effect of AI Programming Assistants: A Hidden Bias in Software EvolutionFei Gu, Zi Liang, Jiahao MA, Hongzong LIICLR 2026 · 5 citations
