The Detection of Human Spreadsheet Errors by Humans versus Inspection (Auditing) Software
arXiv:1009.2785
Abstract
Previous spreadsheet inspection experiments have had human subjects look for seeded errors in spreadsheets. In this study, subjects attempted to find errors in human-developed spreadsheets to avoid the potential artifacts created by error seeding. Human subject success rates were compared to the successful rates for error-flagging by spreadsheet static analysis tools (SSATs) applied to the same spreadsheets. The human error detection results were comparable to those of studies using error seeding. However, Excel Error Check and Spreadsheet Professional were almost useless for correctly flagging natural (human) errors in this study.
14 Pages, 4 Figures
References in corpus (6)
- Recommended Practices for Spreadsheet Testing
- An Exploratory Analysis of the Impact of Named Ranges on the Debugging Performance of Novice Users
- Spreadsheet Auditing Software
- A Typical Model Audit Approach: Spreadsheet Audit Methodologies in the City of London
- Spreadsheet End-User Behaviour Analysis
- Spreadsheet Assurance by "Control Around" is a Viable Alternative to the Traditional Approach