Comparison of an object-oriented programming language to a procedural programming language for effectiveness in program maintenance

New software tools and methodologies make claims that managers often believe intuitively without evidence. Many unsupported claims have been made about object-oriented programming. However, without rigorous scientific evidence, it is impossible to accept these claims as valid. Although experimentation has been done in the past, most of the research is very recent and the most relevant research has serious drawbacks. This study attempts to empirically verify the claim that object-oriented languages produce programs that are more easily maintained than those programmed with procedural languages. Measurements of subjects performing maintenance tasks onto two identical programs, one object-oriented and the other procedure-oriented show the object-oriented version to be more maintainable.