An Eye for Trust: An Exploration of Developers' Trust Perceptions Through Urgency and Reputation
2026-04-09 • Software Engineering
Software Engineering
AI summaryⓘ
The authors conducted an experiment using eye tracking to see how urgency (code priority) and the author's reputation (experience level) affect how developers trust code. They found that urgency changed how long developers spent reviewing code and how much mental effort they used, but it didn't change whether they decided to use the code. Developers looked differently at code said to be written by senior versus junior authors, but this did not affect their review quality. The authors also found that developers mainly focus on the code's function, quality, and clarity, and often don't realize how urgency and reputation influence their behavior. This work helps understand trust in software development better.
code reusecode reviewtrustworthinessurgencyreputationeye trackingcognitive loadsoftware engineeringcode evaluationdeveloper behavior
Authors
Sara Yabesi, Mahta Amini, Jelena Ristic, Zohreh Sharafi
Abstract
Code reuse is a widespread practice across software development projects, suggesting an inherent trust in the reused code. Yet, there is a lack of a fundamental understanding of developers' trust and how various factors mold their trust-based cognitive processes. Drawing from the psychology of compliance and trust, we present the results of the first controlled experiment (n=37) which uses eye tracking to explore how urgency (represented by code priority level) and reputation (represented by the experience level of the code's author) influence developers' perceptions of code trustworthiness. Our research revealed that the priority assigned to a code patch significantly influenced developers' code review behavior, impacting their evaluation time, cognitive load, and perceived quality. However, the decision to incorporate and implement the code was not affected . Eye tracking data revealed that there were variations in overall visual code scanning and the distribution of attention across identical code patches labeled as written by senior vs. junior developers. Yet, there were no significant performance differences. Moreover, our participants nominate code functionality, quality, and comprehensibility as primary factors in code evaluation. Despite noticeable changes in code review behavior, our participants surprisingly overlooked the substantial influence of urgency and reputation on their decisions to review and reuse code changes. This study takes the next step toward a better understanding of trust in software engineering and may inform future research about code review platforms and guidelines, code reuse, and automated code generation.