A controlled eye-tracking study finds that code priority affects review time, cognitive load, and perceived quality but not reuse decisions, while author reputation changes visual attention patterns without altering performance or reuse choices.
InProceedings of the 14th ACM / IEEE International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement (ESEM)(Bari, Italy)(ESEM ’20)
3 Pith papers cite this work, alongside 11 external citations. Polarity classification is still indexing.
3
Pith papers citing it
11
external citations · external index
fields
cs.SE 3verdicts
UNVERDICTED 3representative citing papers
Eye-tracking experiment finds that labeling code as LLM-generated increases fixation time without changing review thoroughness, with reviewers adapting criteria or using the prompt.
The abstract and the full text are two different papers: EyeMulator (code LMs with eye-tracking) versus Walk-on-Interfaces (a PDE Monte Carlo method), so the submission is internally inconsistent.
citing papers explorer
-
An Eye for Trust: An Exploration of Developers' Trust Perceptions Through Urgency and Reputation
A controlled eye-tracking study finds that code priority affects review time, cognitive load, and perceived quality but not reuse decisions, while author reputation changes visual attention patterns without altering performance or reuse choices.
-
Same Scrutiny, More Time: Eye Tracking Insights into Reviewing LLM-Labelled Code
Eye-tracking experiment finds that labeling code as LLM-generated increases fixation time without changing review thoroughness, with reviewers adapting criteria or using the prompt.
-
EyeMulator: Improving Code Language Models by Mimicking Human Visual Attention
The abstract and the full text are two different papers: EyeMulator (code LMs with eye-tracking) versus Walk-on-Interfaces (a PDE Monte Carlo method), so the submission is internally inconsistent.