How do students perceive their teammates? A qualitative study of peer evaluation in SE course projects

Abstract

Context: Collaborative work is central to software engineering (SE) education, yet students often encounter unequal participation that shapes their perceptions of fairness and reliability. Prior research has classified teammates as Couch Potatoes (minimal contributors), Hitchhikers (credit-sharers with little effort), Lone Wolves (independent workers), and Good Teammates (active, equitable collaborators). Goal: We investigated how students describe these four teammate types' behaviors in SE course projects to uncover the perceived characteristics defining each type. Method: We qualitatively analyzed 570 peer evaluations from a senior-level SE project course, focusing on open-text justifications of teammate labels. Results: Our findings refine existing definitions by grounding them in students' language and capturing both negative and positive aspects. Good Teammates were described as proactive, responsive, skilled, punctual, and helpful. Couch Potatoes were seen as consistently disengaged. Hitchhikers, while largely negative, occasionally sought help or contributed, suggesting a spectrum rather than a binary role. Lone Wolves paired isolation and dominance with valuable, high-volume contributions. Conclusion: These insights offer a more nuanced, empirically grounded view of teammate behaviors, and a reusable codebook of 28 behavioral characteristics organized into five high-level categories, guiding instructors in designing peer evaluation rubrics and interventions that foster balanced participation.