A Systematic Literature Review and Taxonomy of Modern Code Review
Nicole Davila, Ingrid Nunes

TL;DR
This paper systematically reviews modern code review (MCR), categorizing existing research into foundational studies, proposals, and evaluations, highlighting current knowledge, gaps, and future research directions in software quality assurance.
Contribution
It provides a comprehensive taxonomy and structured overview of MCR research, identifying key categories, common approaches, and research gaps for future exploration.
Findings
Foundational studies dominate MCR research, focusing on motivations, challenges, and benefits.
Most proposals involve code reviewer recommendation and support tools.
Evaluations are mostly offline, lacking human subject involvement.
Abstract
Modern Code Review (MCR) is a widely known practice of software quality assurance. However, the existing body of knowledge of MCR is currently not understood as a whole. Objective: Our goal is to identify the state of the art on MCR, providing a structured overview and an in-depth analysis of the research done in this field. Method: We performed a systematic literature review, selecting publications from four digital libraries. Results: A total of 139 papers were selected and analyzed in three main categories. Foundational studies are those that analyze existing or collected data from the adoption of MCR. Proposals consist of techniques and tools to support MCR, while evaluations are studies to assess an approach or compare a set of them. Conclusion: The most represented category is foundational studies, mainly aiming to understand the motivations for adopting MCR, its challenges and…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
