CORRELATION BETWEEN CODE REVIEW CULTURE AND RELIABILITY IN LARGE INTERNATIONAL ENGINEERING TEAMS

Abstract

This article presents an in-depth analysis of the correlation between code review culture and reliability in large international engineering teams. Using an interdisciplinary approach that draws broad parallels between software engineering and the scientific method, it argues that key engineering practices such as code review are direct analogues of academic peer review, providing collective verification and enhancing the credibility of software code. This perspective makes it possible to reconceptualize the development process as a continuous cycle of hypothesis generation, experimental testing, and collective analysis that leads to systematic quality improvement. The study shows that code review exerts not only an obvious technical impact, including the reduction of defects, the detection of architectural erosion, and the improvement of code readability, but also a deep cultural influence. It fosters trust, strengthens communication, and establishes collective responsibility for software quality, which is especially critical in distributed teams. Based on these complex interconnections, a model was developed to visualize causal relationships, demonstrating how a mature review culture directly affects key reliability metrics such as rollback frequency and the number of critical incidents that occur after release. The results of the research have substantial practical value for managers and engineering teams, as they highlight that investing in an organizational culture that supports open and constructive review is a decisive factor in ensuring long-term stability and product quality. This transforms code review from a purely technical procedure into a fundamental attribute of successful engineering practice. Accordingly, the proposed model represents a universal tool for assessing and improving team performance by positioning culture as the primary driver of reliability.