skip to main content
Skip header Section
Introduction to the personal software processJanuary 1997
Publisher:
  • Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc.
  • 75 Arlington Street, Suite 300 Boston, MA
  • United States
ISBN:978-0-201-54809-9
Published:01 January 1997
Pages:
278
Skip Bibliometrics Section
Bibliometrics
Abstract

No abstract available.

Cited By

  1. ACM
    Toledo J, Collazos C, Cantero M and Redondo M User Interface Sketch for the Development of Algorithmic Thinking with Augmented Reality Proceedings of the XIX International Conference on Human Computer Interaction, (1-8)
  2. ACM
    Houston D Using TRIZ to balance software process commonality and diversity Proceedings of the 2017 International Conference on Software and System Process, (114-123)
  3. Hentschel M, Hähnle R and Bubel R Can Formal Methods Improve the Efficiency of Code Reviews? Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Integrated Formal Methods - Volume 9681, (3-19)
  4. Pádua W (2019). Evolution of a Model-driven Process Framework, Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science (ENTCS), 321:C, (41-65), Online publication date: 14-Mar-2016.
  5. ACM
    Matsuzawa Y, Okada K and Sakai S Programming process visualizer Proceedings of the 18th ACM conference on Innovation and technology in computer science education, (46-51)
  6. ACM
    Kamma D, Geetha G and Neela J Countering Parkinson's law for improving productivity Proceedings of the 6th India Software Engineering Conference, (91-96)
  7. Aroonvatanaporn P, Koolmanojwong S and Boehm B COTIPMO Proceedings of the International Conference on Software and System Process, (28-37)
  8. Corral L, Sillitti A, Succi G, Strumpflohner J and Vlasenko J DroidSense Proceedings of the 50th international conference on Objects, Models, Components, Patterns, (17-33)
  9. ACM
    Leach R (2010). Using the vocabulary of software engineering to describe ABET accreditation, ACM Inroads, 1:2, (27-29), Online publication date: 1-Jun-2010.
  10. Traver V (2010). On compiler error messages, Advances in Human-Computer Interaction, 2010, (1-26), Online publication date: 1-Jan-2010.
  11. ACM
    Norris C, Barry F, Fenwick Jr. J, Reid K and Rountree J (2008). ClockIt, ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 40:3, (37-41), Online publication date: 25-Aug-2008.
  12. ACM
    Lincke R, Lundberg J and Löwe W Comparing software metrics tools Proceedings of the 2008 international symposium on Software testing and analysis, (131-142)
  13. ACM
    Norris C, Barry F, Fenwick Jr. J, Reid K and Rountree J ClockIt Proceedings of the 13th annual conference on Innovation and technology in computer science education, (37-41)
  14. ACM
    Nikolov R and Ilieva S A model for strengthening the software engineering research capacity Proceedings of the 2008 international workshop on Software Engineering in east and south europe, (107-110)
  15. Zhang S, Wang Y, Yang Y and Xiao J Capability assessment of individual software development processes using software repositories and DEA Proceedings of the Software process, 2008 international conference on Making globally distributed software development a success story, (147-159)
  16. Sherrell L and Mills D (2008). Introducing software engineering processes via games and simulations, Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges, 23:4, (133-139), Online publication date: 1-Apr-2008.
  17. ACM
    Bareiss R and Griss M A story-centered, learn-by-doing approach to software engineering education Proceedings of the 39th SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer science education, (221-225)
  18. ACM
    WANG Y, Yijun L, Collins M and LIU P Process improvement of peer code review and behavior analysis of its participants Proceedings of the 39th SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer science education, (107-111)
  19. ACM
    Bareiss R and Griss M (2008). A story-centered, learn-by-doing approach to software engineering education, ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 40:1, (221-225), Online publication date: 29-Feb-2008.
  20. ACM
    WANG Y, Yijun L, Collins M and LIU P (2008). Process improvement of peer code review and behavior analysis of its participants, ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 40:1, (107-111), Online publication date: 29-Feb-2008.
  21. Zeller A The Future of Programming Environments 2007 Future of Software Engineering, (316-325)
  22. Herbert N and Wang Z Student timesheets can aid in curriculum coordination Proceedings of the ninth Australasian conference on Computing education - Volume 66, (73-80)
  23. Herbert N Quantitative peer assessment Proceedings of the ninth Australasian conference on Computing education - Volume 66, (63-71)
  24. ACM
    Bergin J Patterns for agile development practice part 3 (version 4) Proceedings of the 2006 conference on Pattern languages of programs, (1-14)
  25. ACM
    Farmer R and Hughes B Towards a "personal cost" model for end-user development Proceedings of the 7th ACM SIGCHI New Zealand chapter's international conference on Computer-human interaction: design centered HCI, (75-82)
  26. ACM
    Paula Filho W A software process for time-constrained course projects Proceedings of the 28th international conference on Software engineering, (707-710)
  27. Li M Assessing 3-d integrated software development processes Proceedings of the 2006 international conference on Software Process Simulation and Modeling, (15-38)
  28. ACM
    Chamillard A (2006). Introductory game creation, ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 38:1, (515-519), Online publication date: 31-Mar-2006.
  29. ACM
    Chamillard A Introductory game creation Proceedings of the 37th SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer science education, (515-519)
  30. Thompson E Using a subject area model as a learning improvement model Proceedings of the 8th Australasian Conference on Computing Education - Volume 52, (197-203)
  31. D avila-Nicanor L and Mejia-Alvarez P Reliability Evaluation ofWeb-Based Software Applications Proceedings of the Sixth Mexican International Conference on Computer Science, (106-112)
  32. ACM
    Liew C (2019). Teaching software development skills early in the Curriculum through software engineering, ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 37:3, (133-137), Online publication date: 1-Sep-2005.
  33. ACM
    Liew C Teaching software development skills early in the Curriculum through software engineering Proceedings of the 10th annual SIGCSE conference on Innovation and technology in computer science education, (133-137)
  34. Inoue K, Garg P, Iida H, Matsumoto K and Torii K Mega software engineering Proceedings of the 6th international conference on Product Focused Software Process Improvement, (399-413)
  35. Ding L, Yang Q, Sun L, Tong J and Wang Y Evaluation of the capability of personal software process based on data envelopment analysis Proceedings of the 2005 international conference on Unifying the Software Process Spectrum, (235-248)
  36. Boehm B The future of software processes Proceedings of the 2005 international conference on Unifying the Software Process Spectrum, (10-24)
  37. Russo B, Sillitti A, Zuliani P, Succi G and Gasperi P A pilot project in PAs to transit to an open source solution Proceedings of the 2005 national conference on Digital government research, (303-304)
  38. ACM
    Sherrell L and Shiva S Will earlier projects plus a disciplined process enforce SE principles throughout the CS curriculum? Proceedings of the 27th international conference on Software engineering, (619-620)
  39. Rossi B, Russo B, Zuliani P and Succi G On the transition to an open source solution for desktop office automation Proceedings of the 2005 international conference on E-Government: towards Electronic Democracy, (277-285)
  40. von Konsky B, Ivins J and Robey M Using PSP to evaluate student effort in achieving learning outcomes in a software engineering assignment Proceedings of the 7th Australasian conference on Computing education - Volume 42, (193-201)
  41. Clark N, Davies P and Skeers R Self and peer assessment in software engineering projects Proceedings of the 7th Australasian conference on Computing education - Volume 42, (91-100)
  42. Davila-Nicanor L and Mejia-Alvarez P Reliability Improvement of Web-Based Software Applications Proceedings of the Quality Software, Fourth International Conference, (180-188)
  43. Wohlin C (2019). Are Individual Differences in Software Development Performance Possible to Capture Using a Quantitative Survey?, Empirical Software Engineering, 9:3, (211-228), Online publication date: 1-Sep-2004.
  44. Sherrell L and McCauley L A programming competition for high school students emphasizing process Proceedings of the 2nd annual conference on Mid-south college computing, (173-182)
  45. Tadayon N (2004). Software engineering based on the team software process with a real world project, Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges, 19:4, (133-142), Online publication date: 1-Apr-2004.
  46. ACM
    Chmiel R and Loui M Debugging Proceedings of the 35th SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer science education, (17-21)
  47. ACM
    Chmiel R and Loui M (2004). Debugging, ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 36:1, (17-21), Online publication date: 1-Mar-2004.
  48. Clark N Peer testing in Software Engineering Projects Proceedings of the Sixth Australasian Conference on Computing Education - Volume 30, (41-48)
  49. Reifer D (2003). Is the Software Engineering State of the Practice Getting Closer to the State of the Art?, IEEE Software, 20:6, (78-83), Online publication date: 1-Nov-2003.
  50. ACM
    Huang S and Tilley S Towards a documentation maturity model Proceedings of the 21st annual international conference on Documentation, (93-99)
  51. Scotto M Evaluation of new software engineering methodologies Proceedings of the 4th international conference on Extreme programming and agile processes in software engineering, (447-448)
  52. Sillitti A Collecting data in web service development Proceedings of the 4th international conference on Extreme programming and agile processes in software engineering, (443-444)
  53. Humphrey W (2019). Three Process Perspectives, Annals of Software Engineering, 14:1-4, (39-72), Online publication date: 10-Dec-2002.
  54. Lehman M and Ramil J (2019). Software Evolution and Software Evolution Processes, Annals of Software Engineering, 14:1-4, (275-309), Online publication date: 10-Dec-2002.
  55. Hilburn T and Humphrey W (2002). Teaching Teamwork, IEEE Software, 19:5, (72-77), Online publication date: 1-Sep-2002.
  56. Börstler J, Carrington D, Hislop G, Lisack S, Olson K and Williams L (2002). Teaching the PSP, IEEE Software, 19:5, (42-48), Online publication date: 1-Sep-2002.
  57. Díaz-Herrera J, Murphy M and Ramsey D (2002). A Collaborative Program to Retrain Lockheed Martin Aero Engineers, IEEE Software, 19:5, (30-34), Online publication date: 1-Sep-2002.
  58. ACM
    Cannon R, Hilburn T and Diaz-Herrera J (2002). Teaching a software project course using the team software process, ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 34:1, (369-370), Online publication date: 1-Mar-2002.
  59. ACM
    Cannon R, Hilburn T and Diaz-Herrera J Teaching a software project course using the team software process Proceedings of the 33rd SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer science education, (369-370)
  60. Prechelt L (2018). Accelerating Learning from Experience, IEEE Software, 18:6, (56-61), Online publication date: 1-Nov-2001.
  61. ACM
    Lehman M and Ramil J Evolution in software and related areas Proceedings of the 4th International Workshop on Principles of Software Evolution, (1-16)
  62. ACM
    Filho W (2001). Requirements for an educational software development process, ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 33:3, (65-68), Online publication date: 1-Sep-2001.
  63. Ebert C, Parro C, Suttels R and Kolarczyk H Improving validation activities in a global software development Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Software Engineering, (545-554)
  64. ACM
    Filho W Requirements for an educational software development process Proceedings of the 6th annual conference on Innovation and technology in computer science education, (65-68)
  65. ACM
    Williams L and Upchurch R (2001). In support of student pair-programming, ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 33:1, (327-331), Online publication date: 1-Mar-2001.
  66. ACM
    Williams L and Upchurch R In support of student pair-programming Proceedings of the thirty-second SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer Science Education, (327-331)
  67. ACM
    Sandström A and Daniels M Time studies as a tool for (computer science) education research Proceedings of the Australasian conference on Computing education, (208-214)
  68. ACM
    Yamamoto T, Matsushita M and Inoue K Accumulative versioning file system Moraine and its application to metrics environment MAME Proceedings of the 8th ACM SIGSOFT international symposium on Foundations of software engineering: twenty-first century applications, (80-87)
  69. ACM
    Yamamoto T, Matsushita M and Inoue K (2019). Accumulative versioning file system Moraine and its application to metrics environment MAME, ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes, 25:6, (80-87), Online publication date: 1-Nov-2000.
  70. Humphrey W (2018). Guest Editor's Introduction, IEEE Software, 17:6, (71-75), Online publication date: 1-Nov-2000.
  71. ACM
    Hilburn T (2000). Teams need a process!, ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 32:3, (53-56), Online publication date: 1-Sep-2000.
  72. ACM
    Hilburn T Teams need a process! Proceedings of the 5th annual SIGCSE/SIGCUE ITiCSEconference on Innovation and technology in computer science education, (53-56)
  73. Cockburn A (2000). Selecting a Project's Methodology, IEEE Software, 17:4, (64-71), Online publication date: 1-Jul-2000.
  74. ACM
    Tyrrell S (2000). The many dimensions of the software process, XRDS: Crossroads, The ACM Magazine for Students, 6:4, (22-26), Online publication date: 1-Jun-2000.
  75. ACM
    Wilkins D and Lawhead P Evaluating individuals in team projects Proceedings of the thirty-first SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer science education, (172-175)
  76. ACM
    Fekete A, Kay J, Kingston J and Wimalaratne K Supporting reflection in introductory computer science Proceedings of the thirty-first SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer science education, (144-148)
  77. Runeson P A New Software Engineering Program Structure and Initial Experiences Proceedings of the 13th Conference on Software Engineering Education & Training
  78. Abernethy K, Kelly J, Powell J, Kiper J and Sobel A Technology Transfer Issues for Formal Methods of Software Specification Proceedings of the 13th Conference on Software Engineering Education & Training
  79. Lisack S The Personal Software Process in the Classroom Proceedings of the 13th Conference on Software Engineering Education & Training
  80. Cannon B, Hilburn T and Diaz-Herrera J Tutorial Proceedings of the 13th Conference on Software Engineering Education & Training
  81. ACM
    Wilkins D and Lawhead P (2000). Evaluating individuals in team projects, ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 32:1, (172-175), Online publication date: 1-Mar-2000.
  82. Hong J, Lee K, Bang E, Cho T and Lim T ASP (A Software Process) for Improving Software Process Proceedings of the Sixth Asia Pacific Software Engineering Conference
  83. Johnson P and Disney A (1999). A Critical Analysis of PSP Data Quality, Empirical Software Engineering, 4:4, (317-349), Online publication date: 1-Dec-1999.
  84. ACM
    Wang M (1999). Integrating a software engineering approach into an Ada closed laboratory, ACM SIGAda Ada Letters, XIX:3, (163-168), Online publication date: 1-Sep-1999.
  85. ACM
    Wang M Integrating a software engineering approach into an Ada closed laboratory Proceedings of the 1999 annual ACM SIGAda international conference on Ada, (163-168)
  86. Humphrey W (2018). Why don’t they practice what we preach?, Annals of Software Engineering, 6:1-4, (201-222), Online publication date: 1-Apr-1999.
  87. ACM
    Bryant R Software engineering for seniors—overcoming the administrative fears The proceedings of the thirtieth SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer science education, (83-86)
  88. ACM
    Bryant R (1999). Software engineering for seniors—overcoming the administrative fears, ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 31:1, (83-86), Online publication date: 1-Mar-1999.
  89. ACM
    Brykczynski B (2019). A survey of software inspection checklists, ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes, 24:1, (82), Online publication date: 1-Jan-1999.
  90. ACM
    Disney A and Johnson P (2019). Investigating data quality problems in the PSP, ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes, 23:6, (143-152), Online publication date: 1-Nov-1998.
  91. ACM
    Disney A and Johnson P Investigating data quality problems in the PSP Proceedings of the 6th ACM SIGSOFT international symposium on Foundations of software engineering, (143-152)
  92. Aoyama M (2018). Web-Based Agile Software Development, IEEE Software, 15:6, (56-65), Online publication date: 1-Nov-1998.
  93. ACM
    Fagin B (1998). Liberty and community online, ACM SIGCAS Computers and Society, 28:2, (69-78), Online publication date: 1-Jun-1998.
  94. ACM
    Fagin B Liberty and community online Proceedings of the ethics and social impact component on Shaping policy in the information age, (69-78)
  95. ACM
    Hou L and Tomayko J (1998). Applying the personal software process in CS1, ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 30:1, (322-325), Online publication date: 1-Mar-1998.
  96. ACM
    Hou L and Tomayko J Applying the personal software process in CS1 Proceedings of the twenty-ninth SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer science education, (322-325)
  97. Garlan D, Gluch D and Tomayko J (2019). Agents of Change, Computer, 30:11, (59-65), Online publication date: 1-Nov-1997.
  98. Ferguson P, Humphrey W, Khajenoori S, Macke S and Matvya A (2019). Results of Applying the Personal Software Process, Computer, 30:5, (24-31), Online publication date: 1-May-1997.
  99. Coxon M, McCracken W, Over J, Towhidnejad M and Umphress D Panel Chair Proceedings of the 10th Conference on Software Engineering Education and Training
  100. Syu I, Salimi A, Towhidnejad M and Hilburn T A Web-Based System for Automating a Disciplined Personal Software Process (PSP) Proceedings of the 10th Conference on Software Engineering Education and Training
  101. ACM
    Hilburn T and Towhidnejad M (1997). Doing quality work, ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 29:1, (277-281), Online publication date: 1-Mar-1997.
  102. ACM
    Hilburn T and Towhidnejad M Doing quality work Proceedings of the twenty-eighth SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer science education, (277-281)
  103. Humphrey W (2018). Using A Defined and Measured Personal Software Process, IEEE Software, 13:3, (77-88), Online publication date: 1-May-1996.
Contributors
  • Carnegie Mellon University

Recommendations

Reviews

Hans J. Schneider

The Personal Software Process (PSP) is a framework for estimating and planning software development, tracking performance against these plans, and improving the quality of the resulting programs. This book introduces those parts of PSP that can be used by individual software engineers. It covers neither statistical methods nor the management of large projects. Chapters 1 through 10 present the time management techniques PSP is based on; the remaining ten chapters discuss the application of these principles to software projects. The first chapters describe a procedure for tracking and recording the way people spend their time and introduce some forms to support this, such as time logs and weekly activity summaries. In chapter 5, the author starts to focus on the product. In this book, the product is understood in a broad sense, as any activity that leads to a well-defined goal. (One of the author's examples is reading his book.) Chapters 6 and 7 consider project planning using time log data; estimating product size (that is, the time needed to reach a defined goal); and making a time budget. Chapter 8 introduces personal commitments software engineers should make to themselves and emphasizes their importance for meeting a time budget. Chapters 9 and 10 show how to use schedules to track the progress of one's work and include time estimation in project planning. This first part of the book, which is only concerned with time management, may intimidate computer science students and, even more so, practitioners. It is only at the end of the tenth chapter that the reader finds the first form related to software development, but these chapters are a prerequisite for what follows. Chapter 11 switches over to the application of time management techniques to software development. First, the author defines the well-known phases of software development and encourages the reader to estimate the time to be spent in each phase and to compare these estimates to the actual data afterward. These data can be used to improve software quality, since they show how much time is spent repairing defects. The next three chapters address the nature of software defects. (Humphrey prefers this term because he believes the term “bug” plays down the problem.) These chapters include a thorough discussion of defect types, a summary of principal ways to find defects, and examples of code review checklists. Chapters 15 and 16 discuss ways to analyze defect data and to project the number of defects that will be injected and removed in each phase. In chapter 17, the author considers the special importance of design defects. Chapter 18 focuses on how the software engineer's working discipline affects the qualify of products and illustrates the relationship between the number of defects found during compiling and testing and the number left in the product. The author then gives some measures that software engineers can use to evaluate the quality of their work. The conclusion emphasizes the importance of establishing quality as the highest priority. The author's message is that software engineers who spend most of their time finding and fixing defects are not performing professionally. This book should help software engineers identify weaknesses in the way they solve software problems. The book is meant to be used in conjunction with a two-semester introductory course and, as such, includes an instructor's guide. Each chapter covers a single topic and presents forms and checklists to support the disciplined use of that material. In the second part of the book, the main form under discussion is the Project Plan Summary form, part of which is to be completed in each chapter. Overall, I can recommend this textbook, although many students may find it difficult to fill in the forms in a disciplined way. A foreword by some students who have taken the course recommends doing so. Unfortunately, there are only a few references, and they are not collected in a bibliography.

Access critical reviews of Computing literature here

Become a reviewer for Computing Reviews.