Vibe Coding in Practice: Motivations, Challenges, and a Future Outlook -- a Grey Literature Review
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2510.00328v1
- Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2025 22:35:00 GMT
- Title: Vibe Coding in Practice: Motivations, Challenges, and a Future Outlook -- a Grey Literature Review
- Authors: Ahmed Fawzy, Amjed Tahir, Kelly Blincoe,
- Abstract summary: Vibe coding is the practice where users rely on AI code generation tools through intuition and trial-and-error without necessarily understanding the underlying code.<n>No research has systematically investigated why users engage in vibe coding, what they experience while doing so, and how they approach quality assurance (QA) and perceive the quality of the AI-generated code.<n>Our analysis reveals a speed-quality trade-off paradox, where vibe coders are motivated by speed and accessibility, often experiencing rapid instant success and flow'', yet most perceive the resulting code as fast but flawed.
- Score: 2.5195922470930614
- License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
- Abstract: AI code generation tools are transforming software development, especially for novice and non-software developers, by enabling them to write code and build applications faster and with little to no human intervention. Vibe coding is the practice where users rely on AI code generation tools through intuition and trial-and-error without necessarily understanding the underlying code. Despite widespread adoption, no research has systematically investigated why users engage in vibe coding, what they experience while doing so, and how they approach quality assurance (QA) and perceive the quality of the AI-generated code. To this end, we conduct a systematic grey literature review of 101 practitioner sources, extracting 518 firsthand behavioral accounts about vibe coding practices, challenges, and limitations. Our analysis reveals a speed-quality trade-off paradox, where vibe coders are motivated by speed and accessibility, often experiencing rapid ``instant success and flow'', yet most perceive the resulting code as fast but flawed. QA practices are frequently overlooked, with many skipping testing, relying on the models' or tools' outputs without modification, or delegating checks back to the AI code generation tools. This creates a new class of vulnerable software developers, particularly those who build a product but are unable to debug it when issues arise. We argue that vibe coding lowers barriers and accelerates prototyping, but at the cost of reliability and maintainability. These insights carry implications for tool designers and software development teams. Understanding how vibe coding is practiced today is crucial for guiding its responsible use and preventing a broader QA crisis in AI-assisted development.
Related papers
- Building Software by Rolling the Dice: A Qualitative Study of Vibe Coding [15.145249560710377]
"vibe coders" build software primarily through prompts rather than writing code.<n>We conducted a theory study of 20 vibe-coding videos, including 7 live-streamed coding sessions and 13 opinion videos.<n>Our findings reveal a spectrum of behaviors: some vibe coders rely almost entirely on AI, while others examine and adapt generated outputs.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-12-27T00:38:37Z) - "Can you feel the vibes?": An exploration of novice programmer engagement with vibe coding [42.82674998306379]
"vibe coding" refers to creating software via natural language prompts rather than direct code authorship.<n>This paper reports on a one-day educational hackathon investigating how novice programmers and mixed-experience teams engage with vibe coding.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-12-02T13:32:23Z) - Good Vibrations? A Qualitative Study of Co-Creation, Communication, Flow, and Trust in Vibe Coding [6.862249355928346]
We propose a grounded theory of vibe coding centered on conversational interaction with AI, co-creation, and developer flow and joy.<n>We find that AI trust regulates movement along a continuum from delegation to co-creation and supports the developer experience by sustaining flow.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-09-15T22:28:42Z) - Code with Me or for Me? How Increasing AI Automation Transforms Developer Workflows [60.04362496037186]
We present the first controlled study of developer interactions with coding agents.<n>We evaluate two leading copilot and agentic coding assistants.<n>Our results show agents can assist developers in ways that surpass copilots.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-07-10T20:12:54Z) - ACE: Automated Technical Debt Remediation with Validated Large Language Model Refactorings [8.0322025529523]
This paper introduces Augmented Code Engineering (ACE), a tool that automates code improvements using validated output.<n>Early feedback from users suggests that AI-enabled helps mitigate code-level technical debt that otherwise rarely gets acted upon.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-07-04T12:39:27Z) - From Teacher to Colleague: How Coding Experience Shapes Developer Perceptions of AI Tools [0.0]
AI-assisted development tools promise productivity gains and improved code quality, yet their adoption among developers remains inconsistent.<n>We analyze survey data from 3380 developers to examine how coding experience relates to AI awareness, adoption, and the roles developers assign to AI in their workflow.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-04-08T08:58:06Z) - Understanding Code Understandability Improvements in Code Reviews [79.16476505761582]
We analyzed 2,401 code review comments from Java open-source projects on GitHub.
83.9% of suggestions for improvement were accepted and integrated, with fewer than 1% later reverted.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-10-29T12:21:23Z) - Vulnerability Handling of AI-Generated Code -- Existing Solutions and Open Challenges [0.0]
We focus on approaches for vulnerability detection, localization, and repair in AI-generated code.
We highlight open challenges that must be addressed in order to establish a reliable and scalable vulnerability handling process of AI-generated code.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-08-16T06:31:44Z) - CONCORD: Clone-aware Contrastive Learning for Source Code [64.51161487524436]
Self-supervised pre-training has gained traction for learning generic code representations valuable for many downstream SE tasks.
We argue that it is also essential to factor in how developers code day-to-day for general-purpose representation learning.
In particular, we propose CONCORD, a self-supervised, contrastive learning strategy to place benign clones closer in the representation space while moving deviants further apart.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-06-05T20:39:08Z) - Generation Probabilities Are Not Enough: Uncertainty Highlighting in AI Code Completions [54.55334589363247]
We study whether conveying information about uncertainty enables programmers to more quickly and accurately produce code.
We find that highlighting tokens with the highest predicted likelihood of being edited leads to faster task completion and more targeted edits.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-02-14T18:43:34Z) - Chatbots As Fluent Polyglots: Revisiting Breakthrough Code Snippets [0.0]
The research applies AI-driven code assistants to analyze a selection of influential computer code that has shaped modern technology.
The original contribution of this study was to examine half of the most significant code advances in the last 50 years.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-01-05T23:17:17Z) - Measuring Coding Challenge Competence With APPS [54.22600767666257]
We introduce APPS, a benchmark for code generation.
Our benchmark includes 10,000 problems, which range from having simple one-line solutions to being substantial algorithmic challenges.
Recent models such as GPT-Neo can pass approximately 15% of the test cases of introductory problems.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-05-20T17:58:42Z)
This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.
This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.