No half-measures

A study of manual and tool-assisted end-user programming tasks in Excel

Conference Paper (2018)
Author(s)

Rahul Pandita (North Carolina State University, Phase Change Software)

Chris Parnin (North Carolina State University)

Felienne Hermans (TU Delft - Electrical Engineering, Mathematics and Computer Science)

Emerson Murphy-Hill (North Carolina State University)

Research Group
Software Engineering
DOI related publication
https://doi.org/10.1109/VLHCC.2018.8506540 Final published version
More Info
expand_more
Publication Year
2018
Language
English
Research Group
Software Engineering
Article number
8506540
Pages (from-to)
95-103
ISBN (print)
978-1-5386-4236-8
ISBN (electronic)
978-1-5386-4235-1
Event
2018 IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing, VL/HCC 2018 (2018-10-01 - 2018-10-04), Lisbon, Portugal
Downloads counter
187

Abstract

The popularity of end-user programming has lead to diverse end-user development environments. Despite accurate and efficient tools available in such environments, end-user programmers often manually complete tasks. What are the consequences of rejecting these tools? In this paper, we answer this question by studying end-user programmers completing four tasks with and without tools. In analyzing 111 solutions to each of these tasks, we observe that neither tool use nor tool rejection was consistently more accurate or efficient. In some cases, tool users took nearly twice as long to solve problems and over-relied on tools, causing errors in 95% of solutions. Compared to manual task completion, the primary benefit of tool use was narrowing the kinds of errors that users made. We also observed that partial tool use can be worse than no tool use at all.