Yeah, we can't expect that company to also post articles that show either less splendid (or negative) tradoffs of PP, now can we?

Meanwhile, some of that research is pretty easy to deflate. From the first article, for example:

Students prefer the 15% overhead

That's right -- they used a survey of student experiences to draw conclusions about what works best for senior developers well into their careers. As the authors themselves put it: "We feel that this is a strong indicator of the satisfaction of pair programming."

I don't see how they can call this "strong" evidence of anything.

There's no way that isn't biased as that company's product is pair programming software.