Skip to content
Book Open access

Peer Code Review in Research Software: Practices, Improvements, and Implementation Challenges from Interviews of RSEs

Jul 2026 · Practice and Experience in Advanced Research Computing · pp. 1-8 · 0 citations · 20 references
Computer Science

TL;DR

The results show that RSEs most often improved code review by using pull requests, defining review expectations, adding lightweight process steps, and using tools and automation to reduce effort and increase consistency.

Abstract

The quality of research software directly impacts the quality of the research results. Peer code review can identify defects, improve design, and facilitate knowledge sharing. Previously, we conducted a survey to understand how Research Software Engineers (RSEs) view and use code review. Because the prior survey did not examine how RSEs implement code review or the challenges they face, we study here how RSEs implement code review improvement practices, the challenges that limit adoption, and the additional strategies they propose. To gather this insight, we conducted 20 semi-structured interviews of RSEs. The results show that RSEs most often improved code review by using pull requests, defining review expectations, adding lightweight process steps, and using tools and automation (e.g., CI checks) to reduce effort and increase consistency. Key challenges included limited reviewer capacity and time, gaps in Git and software engineering skills, social and authority barriers to setting norms, and weak documentation or enforcement of standards. They also proposed lightweight training, clearer reviewer guidance (e.g., checklists), and better recognition of review and mentoring work. To ease peer code review adoption in research software, teams should begin with lightweight pull-request workflows, document a few clear review rules, use CI to enforce basics, and support reviewers with simple guidance, training, and recognition.

Read PDF

Similar papers

Open access Aug 2026

How Technology Fails Developers: A Qualitative Investigation of Tool, Architecture, and Legacy System Deficiencies in Software Error Introduction

This study provides the first developer-experience-grounded, phenomenologically anchored account of software error origins within the Technology-Organization-Environment (TOE) framework, examining how inadequacies in development tools, developer expertise gaps, architectural failures, modern technology adoption challen...

Rahul Azmeera, James C. Hyatt · 0 citations
Review Aug 2026

Requirements Engineering Challenges and Solutions in Open‐Source Software Development

This research aims to identify and validate key challenges and their solutions within the RE process for open‐source software development (OSSD) and propose best practices to address these challenges.

Fazli Rabi, M. Ilyas, Nasir Rashid et al. · 0 citations
Open access Mar 2025

LLMs’ reshaping of people, processes, products, and society in software development: a qualitative exploration with early adopters

Interviews with sixteen early-adopter software professionals who integrated LLM-based tools into their day-to-day work in early to mid-2023 offer actionable implications for developers, organizations, educators, and tool designers seeking to integrate LLMs responsibly into professional software practice.

Benyamin T. Tabarsi, Heidi Reichert, Sam Gilson et al. · 22 citations · ⚡1
Review

Evaluating the Effects of Automated Test Results, Model Solutions, and Checklists on Peer Code Review: A Quantitative Study

Qu quantitative analysis of 622 peer reviews on review time, length, and correctness reveals that students are better at assessing actual correct submissions as correct than incorrect ones as incorrect, with test results and checklists slightly increasing their performance in identifying incorrect submissions.

Unknown authors · 0 citations
Review Open access Aug 2026

How developer coreness influences the patch-review process: A mixed-method study

Developer coreness, a continuous proxy measure of experience that measures how important and connected a developer is within a project, is used to measure the impact of developer coreness on code integration processes of popular OSS projects and shows that developers with higher coreness values have a higher probabilit...

Christian Hechtl, Thomas Bock, Ralf Ramsauer et al. · 0 citations

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.