  Refactoring is a maintenance activity that aims to improve design quality
while preserving the behavior of a system. Several (semi)automated approaches
have been proposed to support developers in this maintenance activity, based on
the correction of anti-patterns, which are `poor' solutions to recurring design
problems. However, little quantitative evidence exists about the impact of
automatically refactored code on program comprehension, and in which context
automated refactoring can be as effective as manual refactoring. Leveraging
RePOR, an automated refactoring approach based on partial order reduction
techniques, we performed an empirical study to investigate whether automated
refactoring code structure affects the understandability of systems during
comprehension tasks. (1) We surveyed 80 developers, asking them to identify
from a set of 20 refactoring changes if they were generated by developers or by
a tool, and to rate the refactoring changes according to their design quality;
(2) we asked 30 developers to complete code comprehension tasks on 10 systems
that were refactored by either a freelancer or an automated refactoring tool.
To make comparison fair, for a subset of refactoring actions that introduce new
code entities, only synthetic identifiers were presented to practitioners. We
measured developers' performance using the NASA task load index for their
effort, the time that they spent performing the tasks, and their percentages of
correct answers. Our findings, despite current technology limitations, show
that it is reasonable to expect a refactoring tools to match developer code.
