Source author record

Päivi Raulamo-jurvanen

Päivi Raulamo-jurvanen appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record

Catalog footprint

What is connected

2works
1topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Log in to claim

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

2 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

Improving Test Automation Maturity: a Multivocal Literature Review

Mature test automation is key for achieving software quality at speed. In this paper, we present a multivocal literature review with the objective to survey and synthesize the guidelines given in the literature for improving test automation maturity. We selected and reviewed 81 primary studies, consisting of 26 academic literature and 55 grey literature sources. From primary studies, we extracted 26 test automation best practices (e.g., Define an effective test automation strategy, Set up good test environments, Develop high-quality test scripts) and collected many pieces of advice (e.g., in forms of implementation/improvement approaches, technical techniques, concepts, experience-based heuristics) on how to conduct these best practices. We made main observations: (1) There are only 6 best practices whose positive effect on maturity improvement have been evaluated by academic studies using formal empirical methods; (2) Several technical related best practices in this MLR were not presented in test maturity models; (3) Some best practices can be linked to success factors and maturity impediments proposed by other scholars; (4) Most pieces of advice on how to conduct proposed best practices were identified from experience studies and their effectiveness need to be further evaluated with cross-site empirical evidence using formal empirical methods; (5) In the literature, some advice on how to conduct certain best practices are conflicting, and some advice on how to conduct certain best practices still need further qualitative analysis.

preprint2016arXiv

Benchmarking Web-testing - Selenium versus Watir and the Choice of Programming Language and Browser

Context: Selenium is claimed to be the most popular software test automation tool. Past academic works have mainly neglected testing tools in favor of more methodological topics. Objective: We investigated the performance of web-testing tools, to provide empirical evidence supporting choices in software test tool selection and configuration. Method: We used 4*5 factorial design to study 20 different configurations for testing a web-store. We studied 5 programming language bindings (C#, Java, Python, and Ruby for Selenium, while Watir supports Ruby only) and 4 browsers (Google Chrome, Internet Explorer, Mozilla Firefox and Opera). Performance was measured with execution time, memory usage, length of the test scripts and stability of the tests. Results: Considering all measures the best configuration was Selenium with Python language binding for Chrome. Selenium with Python bindings was the best option for all browsers. The effect size of the difference between the slowest and fastest configuration was very high (Cohens d=41.5, 91% increase in execution time). Overall Internet Explorer was the fastest browser while having the worst results in the stability. Conclusions: We recommend benchmarking tools before adopting them. Weighting of factors, e.g. how much test stability is one willing to sacrifice for faster performance, affects the decision.