Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Identifying Factors Contributing to Bad Days for Software Developers: A Mixed Methods Study

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2410.18379 v1 pith:M6AU2UQW submitted 2024-10-24 cs.SE cs.CY

classification cs.SEcs.CY
keywords developersdaysfactorscauseimpactlevelsworkdata
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Software development is a dynamic activity that requires engineers to work effectively with tools, processes, and collaborative teams. As a result, the presence of friction can significantly hinder productivity, increase frustration, and contribute to low morale among developers. By contrast, higher satisfaction levels are positively correlated with higher levels of perceived productivity. Hence, understanding the factors that cause bad experiences for developers is critical for fostering a positive and productive engineering environment. In this research, we employed a mixed-method approach, including interviews, surveys, diary studies, and analysis of developer telemetry data to uncover and triangulate common factors that cause "bad days" for developers. The interviews involved 22 developers across different levels and roles. The survey captured the perception of 214 developers about factors that cause them to have "bad days," their frequency, and their impact on job satisfaction. The daily diary study engaged 79 developers for 30 days to document factors that caused "bad days" in the moment. We examined the telemetry signals of 131 consenting participants to validate the impact of bad developer experience using system data. Findings from our research revealed factors that cause "bad days" for developers and significantly impact their work and well-being. We discuss the implications of these findings and suggest future work.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. SetupBench: Assessing Software Engineering Agents' Ability to Bootstrap Development Environments

    cs.SE 2025-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    SetupBench, a 93-instance environment-bootstrap benchmark, finds coding agents succeed on only 34.4-62.4% of setup tasks, with database configuration and repo setup being the hardest.

Pith tools