arXiv subjects
Publications and source records attributed to Brittany Johnson.
We have been trying to get software engineering researchers and practitioners to talk to one another for over a decade. This paper describes what we have done, assesses our impact, and recommends an approach that we hope will have greater success.
Psychoactive substances, which influence the brain to alter perceptions and moods, have the potential to have positive and negative effects on critical software engineering tasks. They are widely used in software, but that use is not well understood. We present the results of the first qualitative investigation of the experiences of, and challenges faced by, psychoactive substance users in professional software communities. We conduct a thematic analysis of hour-long interviews with 26 professional programmers who use psychoactive substances at work. Our results provide insight into individual motivations and impacts, including mental health and the relationships between various substances and productivity. Our findings elaborate on socialization effects, including soft skills, stigma, and remote work. The analysis also highlights implications for organizational policy, including positive and negative impacts on recruitment and retention. By exploring individual usage motivations, social and cultural ramifications, and organizational policy, we demonstrate how substance use can permeate all levels of software development.
Modern software relies heavily on data and machine learning, and affects decisions that shape our world. Unfortunately, recent studies have shown that because of biases in data, software systems frequently inject bias into their decisions, from producing better closed caption transcriptions of men's voices than of women's voices to overcharging people of color for financial loans. To address bias in machine learning, data scientists need tools that help them understand the trade-offs between model quality and fairness in their specific data domains. Toward that end, we present fairkit-learn, a toolkit for helping data scientists reason about and understand fairness. Fairkit-learn works with state-of-the-art machine learning tools and uses the same interfaces to ease adoption. It can evaluate thousands of models produced by multiple machine learning algorithms, hyperparameters, and data permutations, and compute and visualize a small Pareto-optimal set of models that describe the optimal trade-offs between fairness and quality. We evaluate fairkit-learn via a user study with 54 students, showing that students using fairkit-learn produce models that provide a better balance between fairness and quality than students using scikit-learn and IBM AI Fairness 360 toolkits. With fairkit-learn, users can select models that are up to 67% more fair and 10% more accurate than the models they are likely to train with scikit-learn.
Understanding the root cause of a defect is critical to isolating and repairing buggy behavior. We present Causal Testing, a new method of root-cause analysis that relies on the theory of counterfactual causality to identify a set of executions that likely hold key causal information necessary to understand and repair buggy behavior. Using the Defects4J benchmark, we find that Causal Testing could be applied to 71% of real-world defects, and for 77% of those, it can help developers identify the root cause of the defect. A controlled experiment with 37 developers shows that Causal Testing improves participants' ability to identify the cause of the defect from 80% of the time with standard testing tools to 86% of the time with Causal Testing. The participants report that Causal Testing provides useful information they cannot get using tools such as JUnit. Holmes, our prototype, open-source Eclipse plugin implementation of Causal Testing, is available at http://holmes.cs.umass.edu/.