Vibe Coding in Software Development: Evaluating Practicality and Ethics of AI-Assisted Programming in Real-World Use; Vibe Coding and the Distribution of Accountability: A Social Construction of Technology Analysis 14 views

The recent emergence of artificial intelligence coding assistants has introduced beneficial but risky developments in the software engineering field. Vibe Coding in Software Development: Evaluating Practicality and Ethics of AI-Assisted Programming in Real-World Use examines these developments through a comparative analysis of traditional and AI-assisted workflows. The practice of using AI coding assistants, called vibe coding, is evaluated across four criteria which include efficiency, reliability, ethical responsibility, and practical integration. The analysis finds that although AI tools accelerate code production, the benefits are offset by the verification labor that they require. Rather than reducing the workload, vibe coding distributes it and shifts the labor from writing code to reviewing AI outputs. However, the report proposes a framework for responsible integration that establishes boundaries for AI use, requires human review, and requires documentation of AI involvement. Vibe Coding and the Distribution of Accountability: A Social Construction of Technology Analysis explores why responsible integration has been so difficult to achieve by analyzing how relevant social groups interpret vibe coding differently. Developers, educators, organizations, and other groups each have competing views on if or how AI coding assistants should be integrated. The biggest concern is who bears responsibility in the case that AI tools generate errors or malfunction. The analysis shows that the processes through which AI systems generate code are invisible to users, suggesting that accountability cannot solely fall on the developer. Both works determine similar conclusions from different directions. The Technical Report establishes that structured human oversight is necessary for integrating vibe coding into workflows, whereas the STS Research Paper demonstrates that oversight alone is insufficient without institutional policy to distribute accountability. Developers are responsible for adequate review, organizations are responsible for establishing oversight policies, and AI providers are responsible for disclosing known vulnerabilities and system limitations. This negotiation of competing interpretations will shape professional responsibility in software development.

BS (Bachelor of Science)

Vibe coding; AI Coding Assistants; Accountability in Coding

English

All rights reserved by the author (no additional license for public reuse)

2026-05-11