When GUI‐Based Testing of Web Applications Meets Code Review

ABSTRACT Code review is a well‐established practice to ensure code quality, identify potential bugs, promote knowledge sharing and maintain coding standards within a team or organization. This study aims to investigate the specific practices, challenges and information needs encountered when reviewing GUI‐based test artefacts for web applications, which remain poorly understood. We conducted a qualitative interview study with 14 software testing professionals from six different companies to explore the distinct aspects of reviewing GUI‐based test artefacts. We identified four practices, six challenges and four information needs related to reviewing GUI‐based test artefacts. The foremost challenge is the validation of GUI‐based tests under review. Furthermore, challenges concerning levels of abstraction and test robustness were not addressed in related studies. Additionally, participants proposed six potential improvements for tools and practices to better support the code review process. Notably, the absence of standardized practices and the need to run tests locally were common themes across participants. The code review process for GUI‐based test artefacts differs from that of production code, highlighting the need for practices and tools tailored specifically to the unique demands of GUI‐based testing.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Software Testing Verification and Reliability
Published
2026-06-29
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/stvr.70024
Primary Topic
Software Testing and Debugging Techniques
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

When GUI‐Based Testing of Web Applications Meets Code Review

Georg‐Daniel Schwarz, Tomas Helmfridsson, Andreas Bauer, Emil Alégroth
Software Testing Verification and Reliability
Software Testing and Debugging Techniques
article

When GUI‐Based Testing of Web Applications Meets Code Review

Georg‐Daniel Schwarz, Tomas Helmfridsson, Andreas Bauer, Emil Alégroth
article en

Abstract

ABSTRACT Code review is a well‐established practice to ensure code quality, identify potential bugs, promote knowledge sharing and maintain coding standards within a team or organization. This study aims to investigate the specific practices, challenges and information needs encountered when reviewing GUI‐based test artefacts for web applications, which remain poorly understood. We conducted a qualitative interview study with 14 software testing professionals from six different companies to explore the distinct aspects of reviewing GUI‐based test artefacts. We identified four practices, six challenges and four information needs related to reviewing GUI‐based test artefacts. The foremost challenge is the validation of GUI‐based tests under review. Furthermore, challenges concerning levels of abstraction and test robustness were not addressed in related studies. Additionally, participants proposed six potential improvements for tools and practices to better support the code review process. Notably, the absence of standardized practices and the need to run tests locally were common themes across participants. The code review process for GUI‐based test artefacts differs from that of production code, highlighting the need for practices and tools tailored specifically to the unique demands of GUI‐based testing.

Software Testing Verification and ReliabilityVol. 36(5)
Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (DE), Georg Simon Ohm University of Applied Sciences Nuremberg (DE), Blekinge Institute of Technology (SE)
Openalex Percentile: Top 7%
Software Testing and Debugging Techniques
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.