Coding frequency and tools

Coding frequency

We asked respondents “In your current role, how often do you write code to complete your work objectives?”.

Coding frequency	Count
Never	11
Rarely	10
Sometimes	13
Regularly	37
All the time	35
^a Sample size = 106

What people are using code for

We asked respondents what data operations they carry out in their work, and whether they use code to do them. Please note we did not ask how much of each data operation is done with code, or how often.

Show chart Show table

Data operation	I do some or all of this by coding	I do this without coding
Analysis	84	13
Data cleaning	82	6
Data linking	68	6
Data transfer	39	16
Data visualisation	73	14
Machine learning	20	0
Modelling	42	6
^a Sample size = 106

Access to and knowledge of programming languages

Given a list of programming tools, we asked respondents to answer “Yes”, “No” or “Don’t know” for the following statements;

This tool is available to use for my work.
I know how to program with this tool to a level suitable for my work.

Access to tools does not necessarily refer to official policy. Some analysts may have access to tools others cannot access within the same organisation.

Please note that capability in programming languages is self-reported here and was not objectively defined or tested.

Access to coding tools

Show chart Show table

Programming language	Yes	Don't Know	No
C++ / C#	16	50	40
Java / Scala	18	52	36
Javascript / Typescript	26	50	30
Matlab	10	47	49
Python	71	19	16
R	89	8	9
SAS	29	45	32
SPSS	23	47	36
SQL	83	17	6
Stata	23	51	32
VBA	57	37	12
^a Sample size = 106

Knowledge of coding tools

Show chart Show table

Programming language	Yes	Don't Know	No
C++ / C#	15	4	87
Java / Scala	10	3	93
Javascript / Typescript	14	5	87
Matlab	18	7	81
Python	48	6	52
R	68	4	34
SAS	28	4	74
SPSS	21	5	80
SQL	76	1	29
Stata	14	4	88
VBA	36	5	65
^a Sample size = 106

Access and knowledge gaps

Using the data presented above we calculated the number of respondents with:

Access to tools they do not have the capability to use (access only),
Access to tools they are able to use (access and knowledge)
Or capability to use tools they cannot access at work (knowledge only)

Show chart Show table

Programming language	Access only	Access and knowledge	Knowledge only
C++ / C#	10	6	9
Java / Scala	14	4	6
Javascript / Typescript	14	12	2
Matlab	6	4	14
Python	29	42	6
R	22	67	1
SAS	9	20	8
SPSS	13	10	11
SQL	15	68	8
Stata	13	10	4
VBA	23	34	2
^a Sample size = 106

Coding capability

Change in coding ability during current role

This question was only asked of respondents with coding experience outside of their current role. This means analysts who first learned to code in their current role are not included in the data.

Show chart Show table

Ability Change	Count
Significantly worse	4
Slightly worse	6
No change	19
Slightly better	21
Significantly better	32
^a Sample size = 82

Where respondents first learned to code

Respondents with coding experience outside their current role were asked when they first learned to code. This output also includes analysts who code in their current role but reported no other coding experience.

These data only show where people first learned to code. They do not show all the settings in which they had learned to code, to what extent, or how long ago.

Show chart Show table

First coding experience	Count
In current role	16
In education	34
In private sector employment	11
In public sector employment	10
Self-taught	23
Other	2
^a Sample size = 96

Coding practices

We asked respondents who said they currently use code in their work how often they carry out various coding practices. For more information on the practices presented below, please read our guidance on Quality Assurance of Code for Analysis and Research.

General coding practices

Show chart Show table

	Percent
Question	I don't understand this question	Never	Rarely	Sometimes	Regularly	All the time
I use open source software when programming	7.4	9.5	9.5	11.6	25.3	36.8
My team open sources its code	9.5	43.2	12.6	23.2	8.4	3.2
I use a source code version control system e.g. Git	4.2	30.5	7.4	12.6	22.1	23.2
Code my team writes is reviewed by a colleague	2.1	3.2	9.5	34.7	29.5	21.1
I write repetitive elements in my code as functions	2.1	5.3	10.5	21.1	28.4	32.6
I unit test my code	26.3	10.5	15.8	23.2	13.7	10.5
I collect my code and supporting material into packages	10.5	30.5	15.8	27.4	12.6	3.2
I follow a standard directory structure when programming	21.1	10.5	11.6	16.8	27.4	12.6
I follow coding guidelines or style guides when programming	6.3	9.5	10.5	28.4	30.5	14.7
I write code to automatically quality assure data	4.2	18.9	15.8	36.8	14.7	9.5
My team applies the principles set out in the Aqua book when carrying out analysis as code	51.6	14.7	9.5	11.6	10.5	2.1
^a Sample size = 95

Documentation

Embedded documentation is one of the components which make up a RAP minimum viable product. Documentation is important to help others be clear on how to use the product and what the code is intended to do.

Show chart Show table

	Percent
Question	I don't understand this question	Never	Rarely	Sometimes	Regularly	All the time
Code comments	4.2	1.1	1.1	9.5	22.1	62.1
Documentation for each function or class	10.5	16.8	8.4	27.4	26.3	10.5
README files	10.5	20.0	12.6	28.4	16.8	11.6
Desk notes	30.5	21.1	7.4	23.2	12.6	5.3
Analytical Quality Assurance (AQA) logs	31.6	24.2	11.6	18.9	10.5	3.2
Data or assumptions registers	28.4	43.2	13.7	6.3	7.4	1.1
Flow charts	7.4	27.4	18.9	33.7	10.5	2.1
^a Sample size = 95

Dependency management

Respondents who currently use code in their work were asked whether they use any tools for dependency management. We provided examples of tools that may be used for dependency management:

Requirements files, e.g. python requirements.txt or R DESCRIPTION files
Virtual environments (e.g. venv or renv) or virtual machines
Containers e.g. Docker

Show chart Show table

Use dependency management software	Count
Yes	24
No	45
I don't know what dependency management is	26
^a Sample size = 95

Reproducible workflow packages

Respondents were asked whether they use continuous integration technologies. As above, respondents were provided with examples of what those might be:

GitHub actions
Jenkins
Travis

Show chart Show table

Use reproducible workflow packages	Count
Yes	8
No	61
I don't know what reproducible workflows are	26
^a Sample size = 95

RAP knowledge and opinions

We asked respondents about their knowledge of and opinions on reproducible analytical pipelines (RAP). RAP refers to the use of practices from software engineering to make analysis more reproducible. These practices build on the advantages of writing analysis as code by ensuring increased quality, trust, efficiency, business continuity and knowledge management. The RAP champions are a network of analysts across government who promote and support RAP development in their departments.

Knowledge of RAP

We asked our respondents whether they had heard of RAP and what their knowledge is of their own department RAP champion.

Show chart Show table

RAP champion knowledge	Count
Have not heard of RAP	48
Heard of RAP, have not heard of RAP champions	16
Heard of RAP, does not know department champion	23
Heard of RAP champions, no champion in department	3
Knows department RAP champion	11
^a Sample size = 106

Show chart Show table

Line manage anyone who writes codes	count
Yes	27
No	39
I don't line manage anyone	40
^a Sample size = 106

Opinions on RAP

We asked respondents who had heard of RAP whether they agreed with a series of statements.

Show chart Show table

	Percent
Question	Strongly disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly agree
I feel confident implementing RAP in my work	5.2	19.0	24.1	34.5	17.2
I feel supported to implement RAP in my work	8.6	19.0	27.6	27.6	17.2
I know where to find resources to help me implement RAP	6.9	19.0	27.6	36.2	10.3
I understand what the key components of the RAP methodology are	6.9	10.3	27.6	43.1	12.1
I think it is important to implement RAP in my work	6.9	1.7	15.5	31.0	44.8
I and/or my team are currently implementing RAP	8.6	17.2	24.1	31.0	19.0
I or my team are planning on implementing RAP in the next 12 months	8.6	13.8	27.6	32.8	17.2
^a Sample size = 58

RAP scores

RAP component scores “regularly” or “all the time” to the relevant questions. For documentation, this includes both code comments and README files. For the continuous integration and dependency management components we only collected “yes”, “no” or “I don’t understand the question” responses. As such, we gave “yes” responses a score of 1. The sum total of each respondent’s scores is presented here as “RAP scores”.

A score of one for each RAP component is derived where respondents answered “regularly” or “all the time” to the relevant questions. For documentation, this includes both code comments and README files. For the continuous integration and dependency management components we only collected “yes”, “no” or “I don’t understand the question” responses. As such, we gave “yes” responses a score of 1. The sum total of each respondent’s scores is presented here as “RAP scores”. “Basic components” are the components which make up the RAP MVP. “Advanced components” are components that help improve reproducibility, but were are considered part of the minimum standard.

RAP components

Show chart Show table

Component	Type	Count
AQUA book guidance	Basic	12
Documentation	Basic	24
Peer review	Basic	48
Team open source code	Basic	11
Use open source software	Basic	59
Version control	Basic	43
Code packages	Advanced	15
Continuous integration	Advanced	16
Dependency management	Advanced	24
Follow code style guidelines	Advanced	43
Function documentation	Advanced	35
Functions	Advanced	58
Unit testing	Advanced	23
^a Sample size = 95

Basic RAP scores

Show chart Show table

Basic RAP score	Count
0	12
1	26
2	23
3	19
4	9
5	4
6	2
^a Sample size = 95

Advanced RAP scores

Show chart Show table

Advanced RAP score	Count
0	19
1	25
2	15
3	11
4	13
5	2
6	6
7	4
^a Sample size = 95

Profession profile: Civil Service, no profession membership

Coding frequency and tools