Content area

Abstract

Different types of programming tools are being developed and utilized by programmers at different levels, from traditional autocomplete to modern AI-based chatbots. All of them are designed to help people work more efficiently. However, the benefits of these tools, especially their learning effects, are not well understood.

This dissertation presents usability analyses of programming tools. First, we investigate IDE-based autocomplete features, conducting a between-subjects experiment (N=32) using an eye tracker to evaluate the costs and benefits for programmers learning an unfamiliar API. We conclude that autocomplete's primary benefit is in information access and learning promotion rather than typing reduction. Second, we examine the effectiveness of LLM-based chatbots versus human-written tutorials for learning unfamiliar codebases through a between-subjects experiment (N=15). We found that programmers using LLM chatbots exhibited greater confusion and less confidence, while those using tutorials developed better structural understanding but struggled with low-level implementation details. We found that when determining productivity, familiarity with the programming language is more important than other factors, such as familiarity with the framework or LLM chatbots.

Details

1010268
Title
Usability Analysis of Programming Assistants
Number of pages
76
Publication year
2025
Degree date
2025
School code
0033
Source
MAI 86/9(E), Masters Abstracts International
ISBN
9798310157200
Committee member
Griswold, William; Politz, Joe
University/institution
University of California, San Diego
Department
Computer Science and Engineering
University location
United States -- California
Degree
M.S.
Source type
Dissertation or Thesis
Language
English
Document type
Dissertation/Thesis
Dissertation/thesis number
31846294
ProQuest document ID
3184235448
Document URL
https://www.proquest.com/dissertations-theses/usability-analysis-programming-assistants/docview/3184235448/se-2?accountid=208611
Copyright
Database copyright ProQuest LLC; ProQuest does not claim copyright in the individual underlying works.
Database
ProQuest One Academic