An empirically based model of software prototyping: a mapping study and a multi-case study

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

Prototyping is used as a means to learn about the user and the market, and to increase the chances of business success.

“Thus, prototyping is used as a means to learn about the user and the market (Giardino et al. 2015;Paternoster et al. 2014), and to increase the chances of business success.”

• cites Giardino et al. 2015 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source
• cites Paternoster et al. 2014 sourceSupported

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

This cost-benefit aspects is especially important to software startups who operate under very uncertain and resource-constraint conditions with the aim of exploring new business opportunities and develop innovative products.

“This cost-benefit aspects is especially important to software startups who operate under very uncertain and resource-constraint conditions with the aim of exploring new business opportunities and develop innovative products (Giardino et al. 2014;Paternoster et al. 2014).”

• cites Giardino et al. 2014 sourceSupported
• cites Paternoster et al. 2014 sourceSupported

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

This complexity in managing quality requirements has also been observed in the context of another agile RE practice, namely the one of using test cases as requirements.

“This complexity in managing quality requirements has also been observed in the context of another agile RE practice, namely the one of using test cases as requirements (Bjarnason et al. 2016).”

• cites Bjarnason et al. 2016 sourceSupported

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

Interviewees responded mainly by agreeing to the descriptions and highlighting minor misunderstandings and additional information, after which the manuscript was revised.

“The interviewees responded, mainly by agreeing to the descriptions and by highlighting some minor misunderstandings and additional information, after which the manuscript was revised accordingly.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

After the first two interviews, it became clear that the terms prototyping and prototype are not uniformly understood, which caused some initial confusions at these interviews.

“After the first two interviews, it became clear that the terms prototyping and prototype are not uniformly understood, which caused some initial confusions at these interviews.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

A similar fifth aspect of prototype media was added in the second version of our model based on the insights gained from our multi-case study.

“However, a similar fifth aspect of prototype media was added in the second version of our model based on the insights gained from our multi-case study.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

The aspect of strategy was renamed exploration strategy and the aspect of review method was renamed prototype use to more clearly reflect what these aspects represent.

“The aspect of strategy was renamed exploration strategy and the aspect of review method was renamed prototype use to more clearly reflect what these aspects represent.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

The facets related to validation & testing were grouped to provide a better overview of the purposes of prototyping.

“The facets related to validation & testing were grouped to provide a better overview of the purposes of prototyping.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

Finally, the facet of usage environment was added to prototype use since the feedback that can be obtained from demonstrating or testing a prototype may vary for, e.g., a loud or a dark environment compared to in a meeting setting.

“Finally, the facet of usage environment was added to prototype use since the feedback that can be obtained from demonstrating or testing a prototype may vary for, e.g., a loud or a dark environment compared to in a meeting setting.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

Two additional facets were added to prototype scope, namely interactive & haptic behaviour, and realistic data, both of which were observed in the original analysis, but initially not included.

“Two additional facets were added to prototype scope, namely interactive & haptic behaviour, and realistic data, both of which were observed in the original analysis, but initially not included.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

This internal validation mainly led to renaming aspects, adding, and restructuring some facets.

“This internal validation mainly led to renaming aspects, adding, and restructuring some facets.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

Two focus group participants said that early prototyping, e.g., through sketching, can be useful in understanding the problem.

“In contrast, two participants said that early prototyping, e.g., through sketching, can be useful in understanding the problem.”

It may state two separate claims as one.

The Exploration strategy aspect was the hardest to discuss with interviewees and the one with the least number of responses with the exception of parallel exploration.

“This final aspect was the hardest to discuss with our interviewees, and the one with the least number of responses with the exception of parallel exploration.”

It may state two separate claims as one.

Reviewers are often internal within the startups and development team, as well as external such as customers, funders, or product users.

“Thus, reviewers are often internal within the startups and development team, as well as, external such as customers, funders, or product users.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

A third interviewee said they focus one thing at a time and learn about, but in some cases parallel exploration is useful, e.g. for a pricing model.

“A third interviewee said: “focus one thing at a time and learn about.But, in some cases [parallel exploration is useful] … e.g. for a pricing model” (Company I).”

It may state two separate claims as one.

The focus group participants recognised the relevance of considering breadth and depth of functionality, and refinement of all identified facets except for data richness, which was not mentioned.

“They recognised the relevance of considering breadth and depth of functionality, and refinement of all our identified facets (of the first version of our model) except for data richness, which was not mentioned during the focus group.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

One interviewee described videos as a way to present products far before they are ready.

“One interviewee described videos as a way “to present products far before they are ready” (Company I).”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

Several focus group participants said that prototyping is time consuming and difficult, and rarely used during early phases and at the first meetings with customers.

“Several participants said that prototyping is time consuming and difficult, and rarely used during early phases and at the first meetings with customers.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

Prototyping instance I3 and interviews are a means of prototyping even without anything to show by talking to people about how they solve this problem today.

“This interviewee also described prototyping instance I3 and interviews as a means of prototyping “even without anything to show” by “talking to people about how they solve this problem today” (Company I).”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

The later more refined mockup A2 becomes a blueprint for the product to be built by developers.

“The later more refined “mockup [A2] then becomes a blueprint for the product to be built by developers” (Company A).”

The quote only partly states this claim.

Some startups find cheaper and easier prototype media such as videos and interviewing very useful.

“which some of our startups find very useful.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

In early prototyping instance J1, Company J asked users and that became an important signal that their solution idea was viable.

“In the early prototyping instance J1, they “asked people [users]… [and] that became an important signal” that their solution idea was viable”

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.

For more refined prototypes with respect to functionality, visual appearance, and interactivity, users may be encouraged to try the prototypes out for themselves.

“For more refined prototypes w.r.t.functionality, visual appearance, and interactivity, the users may be encouraged to try the prototypes out for themselves.”

It may state two separate claims as one.

In prototyping instances H1, J6, I1 and I2, videos are used for sales & marketing (communication) and for validating product-market fit.

“For example, in prototyping instances H1, J6, I1 and I2, videos are used for sales & marketing (communication) and for validating product-market fit.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

For Company J, prototyping instance J3 used FFF when they made something new and asked what they think.

“For example, for Company J, the prototyping instance J3 used “FFF when we have made something new.What do they think?””

Probably not a substantial claim. The authors may not put it forward as true. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

One interviewee believed that environment is an important aspect of mobile solutions, to test them in their correct context.

“One interviewee believed that “[environment] is an important aspect of mobile solutions, to test them in their correct context” (Company I).”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

The two facets related to prototyping iterations were indicated by a few interviewees.

“The two facets related to prototyping iterations were indicated by a few of our interviewees.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

A startup that provides a technical solution uses scenarios to help non-techie customers see the value in the solution through presenting cases to them and avoid just clicking them through.

“Similarly, a startup that provides a technical solution uses scenarios to help non-techie customers “see the value [in the solution] …[through] presenting these cases to them… and avoid just clicking us through” (Company G).”

It may state two separate claims as one.

The dimension of usage environment worked well, even though many startups only tested their prototypes in meeting settings.

“The dimension of usage environment worked well, even though many of our startups only tested their prototypes in meeting settings.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

Some startups described using family and friends (FFF, Family, Friends, and Foes) for obtaining feedback on prototypes.

“In addition, some startups described using family and friends (so called FFF, Family, Friends, and Foes) for obtaining feedback on prototypes.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

One interviewed technical lead advocated the need to iterate slowly to ensure what the stakeholder originally wished for.

“For example, one interviewed technical lead advocated the “need to iterate slowly… [to ensure] what the stakeholder originally wished for” (Company D).”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

Mock-up C2 was used to explore what is required by the market, i.e. product-market fit.

“For example, the mock-up C2 was used to “explore what is required [by the market]”, i.e. product-market fit”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

Product-Market Fit is especially important for startups that must produce a prototype to confirm that they have buyers and thus revenue before incurring more costs without knowing that it is sellable.

“Product-Market Fit is especially important for startups that “must produce a prototype to be able to confirm that you have buyers, and thus revenue… [before] incurring more costs without knowing that it is sellable” (Company A).”

It may state two separate claims as one.

Using multiple prototype versions in parallel was a clear and understandable strategy, though most startups stated that due to resource constraints they tend to focus on one version at a time.

“Using multiple prototype versions in parallel was a clear and understandable strategy, though most of our startups stated that due to resource constraints they tend to focus on one version at a time.”

It may state two separate claims as one.

All interviewees described with whom prototypes were used, i.e. Reviewers, and often the same prototype is used with multiple kinds of reviewers.

“All interviewees described with whom prototypes were used, i.e.Reviewers, and often the same prototype is used with multiple kinds of reviewers.”

Probably not a substantial claim.

One of the main purposes of prototyping is as a tool for selling products to customers.

“One of the main purposes of prototyping is “as a tool for selling products to customers” (Company B)”

It may state two separate claims as one.

The aggregated dimension of broad vs narrow functional scope was harder to convey, though examples of both broad and narrow prototypes covering many vs a few features were seen.

“The aggregated dimension of broad vs narrow functional scope was harder to convey, though we saw examples of both broad and narrow prototypes covering many vs a few features.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

One interviewee described that they do not focus that much on interactivity at the beginning.

“For example, one interviewee described that “we do not focus that much on interactivity at the beginning” (Company F).”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

A startup that markets advanced AI algorithms described that they need accurate data to back up their algorithm and thus demonstrate their solution by using actual customer data.

“Another startup that markets advanced AI algorithms described that they “need accurate data to back up [our algorithm]”, and thus demonstrate their solution by using “actual [customer] data” (Company H).”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

There was some disagreement about prototyping in early project stages.

“There was some disagreement about prototyping in early project stages.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

A similar aspect related to paper prototyping was discussed during the original design of the model but discarded because prototype scope appeared sufficient.

“A similar aspect, related to paper prototyping, was discussed by the authors during our original design of the model, but discarded at that point in time since the aspect of prototype scope appeared to be sufficient.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

When demonstrating paper mock-ups of prototyping instance F1, the startup would try to get customers to think about what they do then in that scenario.

“For example, when demonstrating the paper mock-ups of prototyping instance F1, the startup would “try to get them [customers] to think about what they do then [in that scenario] (Company F).”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

Company J used videos in social media channels for sales & marketing purposes; funny videos became a bit viral.

“Similarly, the now growing startup Company J used videos in social media channels for sales & marketing purposes; “funny videos that became a bit viral” (Company J).”

It may state two separate claims as one.

While scenario testing was included in the initial version of the model, interviewees primarily described the use of scenarios as an approach that could be applied both when demoing a prototype or when allowing users to interact directly with the prototype.

“Finally, while scenario testing was included in our initial version of the model, our interviewees primarily described the use of scenarios as an approach that could be applied both when demoing a prototype, or when allowing users to interact directly with the prototype.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

Company A invested quite a lot of work in building a high-fidelity interactive mockup (A2) that is fake but good, communicates that they know and builds trust, and based on that they get investors.

“Company A had invested “quite a lot of work” in building a high-fidelity interactive mockup (prototyping instance A2) which “is fake, but quite good… communicates that we know and builds trust… Based on that we get investors.”(Company A).”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

Users are encouraged to interact directly with the mock-up of prototyping instance F2 to see reactions, how they reason, how they select and react to things, which provides the startup with rich feedback.

“Similarly, users are encouraged to interact directly with the mock-up of prototyping instance F2 “to see reactions….how they reason, how they select and react to things” (Company F), which provides the startup with rich feedback.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The authors may not put it forward as true. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

When data is fairly realistic it can be shown to customers without any problems.

“and that when “the data is fairly realistic… [it] can be shown to customer without any problems” (Company G).”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

In total, we interviewed thirteen practitioners at the case companies, mostly founders and co-founders, but also some product owners and technical leads.

“In total, we interviewed thirteen practitioners at the case companies, mostly founders and co-founders, but also some product owners and technical leads.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

For prototyping instances K4 and K5, the startup goes through a simple scenario, explains the challenges, and shows the solution.

“A similar approach is seen for prototyping instances K4 and K5, where the startup “goes through a simple scenario, explains the challenges, and shows the solution” (Company K).”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

The sketches of prototyping instance A1 were tried out on themselves and on people in their proximity, then they started developing.

“For example, the sketches of prototyping instance A1 were “tried out on ourselves and on people in our proximity, then we started developing” (Company A).”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

These participants preferred stakeholder interviews and competitor analysis to understand the problem domain.

“Instead, these participants preferred stakeholder interviews and competitor analysis to understand the problem domain.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

Company J uses interviewing for exploring the problem domain.

“This startup also uses interviewing for exploring the problem domain.”

It may state two separate claims as one.

For Validation & Testing, the boundaries between Market viability and Business viability were hard to determine for the prototyping instances, and the difference between these two is unclear.

“For Validation & Testing, the boundaries between Market viability and Business viability were hard to determine for the prototyping instances, and the difference between these two is unclear.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

Most of these companies were in the inception or stabilisation phase of their business ventures, while Companies E and J were in the growth stage.

“Most of these companies were in the inception or stabilisation phase (Klotins et al. 2019) of their business ventures, while Companies E and J were in the growth stage (Klotins et al. 2019).”

• cites Klotins et al. 2019Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

For Company F, testing in a live environment is difficult since their product targets clinics and it varies a lot how open they are with this.

“For example, for Company F where testing in a live environment is “difficult since our product targets clinics… varies a lot how open they are with this.””

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

The fully functioning product prototype of B3 was available to the general public and customers get to use their stuff, allowing the startup to follow up how they are used in the field.

“For example, the fully functioning product prototype of B3 was available to the general public and “customers get to use our stuff… [allowing the startup to] follow up how they are used in the field” (Company B).”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

They had used simple prototypes in the form of sketches, which helped designers and users understand what they were discussing and assisted in framing the role of the system.

“They had used simple prototypes in the form of sketches, which helped designers and users understand what they were discussing and assisted in framing the role of the system.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

Interviewees described that they have chosen to produce a mock-up due to cost and time aspects.

“Our interviewees described that they “have chosen to produce a mock-up due to cost and time aspects” (Company A).”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

Another interviewee mentioned that they always try to sketch different options, though without giving any concrete example of this.

“Another interviewee mentioned that “we always try to sketch different [options]” (Company F) though without giving any concrete example of this (and therefor not seen in any of the reported prototyping instances.)”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

One interviewee said they go with one option first since they are a small team.

“As one interviewee said: “we go with one [option] first since we are a small team” (Company H).”

Probably not a substantial claim. The authors may not put it forward as true. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

It is important to use realistic data otherwise customers probably get stuck on that.

“Also, “it is really important to use that [realistic data] otherwise your [customers] probably get stuck on that” (Company F)”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

The Purpose aspect mostly worked well in discussing and categorising how the startups use prototyping, with only two minor revisions for Communication and Validation.

“This aspect mostly worked well in discussing and categorising how the startups use prototyping, and only two minor revisions are made to this aspect, namely for the purposes Communication and Validation.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

For J4, Company J grabbed people in the corridors and asked them what they think, and then realised that they had missed several things.

“and for J4 they “grabbed people in the corridors and ask them what they think… [and then] realised that we had missed several things”(Company J).”

Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.

In general, the focus group participants agreed to the scenarios, that they correspond to a typical way of working and to their prototyping practices, which they see as a good way of working with agile software development.

“In general, the participants agreed to the scenarios, that they correspond to a typical way of working and to their prototyping practices, which they see as a good way of working with agile software development.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

Company J later used a similar approach in prototyping instance J5 to validate their revenue model.

“and later used a similar approach in prototyping instance J5 to validate their revenue model.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

Five interviewees expressed the importance of realistic data, e.g. to capture behaviour around errors and bad data.

“In addition, five interviewees expressed the importance of realistic data, e.g. to capture behaviour around “errors and bad data” (Company I).”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

Startups then move towards more gradual development and more structured feature growth from the very basic experimental ideas up to the ready-for-market products.

“And, then move towards “more gradual development … and more structured feature growth from the very basic experimental ideas up to the ready-formarket products” (Company E).”

It may state two separate claims as one.

Single option exploration is the most common approach among our startups since it is more cost-effective.

“Single option exploration is the most common approach among our startups since it is more cost-effective.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

The multi-case study described 43 prototyping instances.

“Overview of the 43 prototyping instances (Nn) described by case companies (N = A-K), categorized by our prototyping aspects model.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

Our research indicates a number of potential relationships within the entities of the model, e.g. between prototype scope and prototyping purpose, that appear to affect the learnings that can be obtained.

“Furthermore, our research indicates a number of potential relationships within the entities of the model, e.g. between prototype scope and prototyping purpose, that appear to affect the learnings that can be obtained.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

The feedback from the interviewees mainly concerned additions, e.g. mentioning more prototyping instances, which were then incorporated in the paper.

“The feedback from the interviewees mainly concerned additions, e.g.mentioning more prototyping instances, which were then incorporated in the paper.”

It may state two separate claims as one.

We have investigated the current body of knowledge regarding prototyping methodology through a systematic mapping study and a multi-case study of eleven startups.

“We have investigated the current body of knowledge regarding prototyping methodology through a systematic mapping study and a multi-case study of eleven startups.”

It may state two separate claims as one.

While UX designers can quickly produce mock-ups using tools, e.g. Figma, software developers often prefer sketching and exploring their ideas directly in source code software.

“For example, while UX designers can quickly produce mock-ups using tools, e.g.Figma, software developers often prefer sketching and exploring their ideas directly in source code software.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

We observe an increase in publication rate during the past decade and of empirically based research (RQ3).

“We observe an increase in publication rate during the past decade and of empirically based research (RQ3).”

It may state two separate claims as one.

This is similar to our focus group participants who described only using single exploration in later development stages, while preferring a strategy of parallel exploration in early stages to keep an open mind to alternative solutions and avoid getting locked into one solution option at an early stage.

“This is similar to our focus group participants who described only using single exploration in later development stages, while preferring a strategy of parallel exploration in early stages to keep an open mind to alternative solutions and avoid getting locked into one solution option at an early stage.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

The number of articles appear to have increased somewhat over the years from on average 1 to 2 articles a year, except around the year 2000.

“The number of articles appear to have increased somewhat over the years from on average 1 to 2 articles a year, except around the year 2000.”

It may state two separate claims as one.

Our focus group participants described using prototypes with customers either through a demonstration without any direct user interaction, or as free testing of a beta version of the software.

“Our focus group participants described using prototypes with customers either through a demonstration without any direct user interaction, or as free testing of a beta version of the software.”

It may state two separate claims as one.

Five interviewees in the startups could relate to the importance of using realistic data, mainly to convey realistic scenarios and trust to customers, but also for validating error cases connected to missing or badly formatted data.

“However, five of our interviewees in the startups could relate to the importance of using realistic data, mainly to convey realistic scenarios and trust to customers, but also for validating error cases connected to missing or badly formatted data.”

It may state two separate claims as one.

Focus group participants actively related to three facets of refinement, namely functionality, visual appearance and interactive behaviour, but did not mention data richness.

“While our focus group participants actively related to three of the facets of refinement, namely functionality, visual appearance and interactive behaviour, they did not mention data richness.”

It may state two separate claims as one.

The systematic map on which our model is based consists of thirty-three primary studies and represents a wide set of papers from the past thirty years from the areas of human factors and design, requirements engineering, and agile software development (RQ2).

“The systematic map on which our model is based consists of thirty-three primary studies and represents a wide set of papers from the past thirty years from the areas of human factors and design, requirements engineering, and agile software development (RQ2).”

It may state two separate claims as one.

While all these strategies are relevant to prototyping, we found that when discussing exploration strategy with practitioners a different set of facets is more suitable.

“While all these strategies are relevant to prototyping, we found that when discussing exploration strategy with practitioners a different set of facets is more suitable.”

It may state two separate claims as one.

The majority of the primary studies (17) were within software engineering (in general), 11 within human factors (HF) & design, and 5 within requirements engineering (RE).

“The majority of these (17) were within software engineering (in general), 11 within human factors (HF) & design, and 5 within requirements engineering (RE), see Table5.”

It may state two separate claims as one.

Direct interaction with prototypes is common for internal use and when the prototype is slightly more refined.

“Direct interaction with prototypes is common for internal use and when the prototype is slightly more refined.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

There appears to be an increase of in-vivo research on prototyping methodology during the past decade.

“although there appears to be an increase of in-vivo research during the past decade.”

It may state two separate claims as one.

An additional purpose of prototyping is to specify requirements and to act as a requirements specification, as was mentioned by several of our case companies.

“An additional purpose of prototyping is to specify requirements and to act as a requirements specification, as was mentioned by several of our case companies.”

It may state two separate claims as one.

PAM is based on a systematic mapping study of thirty-three primary studies and empirical data from twelve case companies.

“The model is based on a systematic mapping study consisting of thirty-three primary studies and on empirical data from twelve case companies.”

• AssumptionRests on an assumption: The systematic mapping study's primary studies cover the relevant body of knowledge on prototyping methodology.

Probably not a substantial claim.

Software startups face the challenge of balancing the cost of prototype scope and media against the gains and value that can be obtained from more refined prototypes.

“Thus, software startups face the challenge of balancing the cost of prototype scope and media against the gains and value that can be obtained from more refined prototypes.”

It may state two separate claims as one.

PAM can be used to categorise prototyping instances and can thereby support practitioners in reflecting and improving on their prototyping practices.

“The model can be used to categorise prototyping instances and can thereby support practitioners in reflecting and improving on their prototyping practices.”

• AssumptionRests on an assumption: The five aspects of PAM are sufficient to characterise prototyping practices.

It may state two separate claims as one.

Internally, prototyping is used to explore and communicate detailed product requirements, while prototypes are used externally to communicate and validate product-market fit.

“Internally, prototyping is used to explore and communicate detailed product requirements, while prototypes are used externally to communicate and validate product-market fit.”

• cites Bjarnason 2021 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

It may state two separate claims as one.

For startups, prototyping plays a vital role in market validation and in obtaining paying customers.

“Thus, for startups, prototyping plays a vital role in market validation and in obtaining paying customers.”

• cites Bjarnason 2021 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

High-fidelity prototypes are more expensive to build but can be used to test and evaluate further details of the design, and even serve as a basis for development of the product under design.

“while high-fidelity prototypes are more expensive to build they can be used to test and evaluate further details of the design, and even serve as a basis for development of the product under design (Rudd et al. 1996).”

• cites Rudd et al. 1996 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

It may state two separate claims as one.

The more refined prototype versions (realistic mock-ups and early versions of production software) are more costly to produce and require software engineering expertise.

“The more refined prototype versions (realistic mock-ups and early versions of production software) are more costly to produce and require software engineering expertise.”

• cites Bjarnason 2021 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

Low-fidelity prototypes can convey a general look of an interface and are often used to communicate, educate and inform.

“Low-fidelity prototypes can convey a general look of an interface and are often used to communicate, educate and inform, while high-fidelity prototypes are more expensive to build they can be used to test and evaluate further details of the design, and even serve as a basis for development of the product under design (Rudd et al. 1996).”

• cites Rudd et al. 1996 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

In an earlier publication, prototyping is commonly used within early-stage startups as a natural part of developing and validating a product, but also that prototyping is implicitly required to ensure funding of the startup venture.

“In that study (Bjarnason 2021), we found that prototyping is commonly used within early-stage startups as a natural part of developing and validating a product, but also that prototyping is implicitly required to ensure funding of the startup venture.”

• cites Bjarnason 2021 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

Prototyping can facilitate communication of design ideas by providing a concrete basis for discussions between developers, designers, and users.

“Prototypes can facilitate communication of design ideas by providing “a concrete basis for discussions” between developers, designers, and users (Budde and Zullighoven 1990).”

• cites Budde and Zullighoven 1990Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

The use of prototypes can stimulate user involvement, and support marketing and selling new product ideas to customers and to (internal) management.

“Thus, the use of prototypes can stimulate user involvement, and support marketing and selling new product ideas to customers and to (internal) management.”

It may state two separate claims as one.

PAM was validated and its applicability demonstrated through a focus group at one company and through semistructured interviews at eleven startup companies.

“We validate and demonstrate the applicability of our model through a focus group at one company and through semistructured interviews at eleven (other) startup companies.”

• AssumptionRests on an assumption: The case companies' prototyping practices are representative enough to validate and improve PAM.

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

Prototyping enables validating a solution proposal before developing the full product through cost effective testing with real users.

“Thus, prototyping enables validating a solution proposal before developing the full product through cost effective testing with real users (Nielsen 1993).”

• cites Nielsen 1993 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

Prototypes serve as a vehicle that enables users and designers to develop a common language.

“As such, prototypes “serve as a vehicle that enables users and designers to develop a common language” (Hakim and Spitzer 2000).”

• cites Hakim and Spitzer 2000Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

It may state two separate claims as one.

Software startups were selected as our object of study due to these companies frequent use of prototyping to explore and shape their business models and product offerings, as part of the Lean startup method where new products are designed through continuously building, measuring, and learning what the customers want and are willing to pay for.

“Software startups were selected as our object of study due to these companies frequent use of prototyping to explore and shape their business models and product offerings, as part of the Lean startup method (Ries 2011) where new products are designed through continuously building, measuring, and learning what the customers want and are willing to pay for (Olsen 2015).”

• cites Ries 2011Not checked — no full text of the source
• cites Olsen 2015 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

We performed an initial validation of the draft version of the prototyping aspects model by re-analysing the articles in our systematic map.

“We performed an initial validation of the draft version of the prototyping aspects model by re-analysing the articles in our systematic map (see below).”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

Prototyping is often used within agile development to detail and validate requirements, and to reduce uncertainty.

“Thus, prototyping is often used within agile development to detail and validate requirements, and to reduce uncertainty (Bellomo et al. 2013).”

• cites Bellomo et al. 2013 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

It may state two separate claims as one.

User interface design can be validated through prototyping and uncover various usability issues.

“User interface design can be validated through prototyping (Derboven et al. 2010;Hakim and Spitzer 2000;Zink et al. 2017) and uncover various usability issues (Lim et al. 2008).”

• cites Derboven et al. 2010Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites Hakim and Spitzer 2000Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites Lim et al. 2008 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

Probably not a substantial claim.

The mapping study provided a broad base of scientific knowledge that supported our design of the model.

“The mapping study provided a broad base of scientific knowledge that supported our design of the model.”

• AssumptionRests on an assumption: The systematic mapping study's primary studies cover the relevant body of knowledge on prototyping methodology.

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

Sefelin et al. reports that the number of suggestions and critiques do not significantly differ between prototypes with a high vs. low degree of refinement.

“Sefelin et al. reports on a study on usability testing with prototypes where the number of suggestions and critiques do not significantly differ between prototypes with a high vs. low degree of refinement, i.e. between deep or shallow prototypes.”

• cites Sefelin et al. 2003 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

Probably not a substantial claim. The authors may not put it forward as true. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

Yasar reports that simpler prototypes with narrow functionality scope and a low degree of refinement are cost effective and useful for validation purposes and to capture major issues.

“Yasar even reports that simpler prototypes with narrow functionality scope and a low degree of refinement are cost effective and useful for validation purposes and to capture major issues (Yasar 207”

• cites Yasar 2007 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

Prototyping has been identified as a practice commonly applied within agile software development to manage rapidly evolving requirements by the practices' ability to support customer communication, and for validating and refining requirements.

“Prototyping has been identified as a practice commonly applied within agile software development to manage rapidly evolving requirements by the practices' ability to support customer communication, and for validating and refining requirements (Ramesh et al. 2010).”

• cites Ramesh et al. 2010Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

To ensure equal airtime, the participants were given turns to initiate the discussion for each talking point.

“To ensure equal airtime, the participants were given turns to initiate the discussion for each talking point.”

It may state two separate claims as one.

The source of requirements gradually shifts as potential customers are identified, and prototypes are produced that can be used to elicit new ideas and priorities also from customers and other external parties.

“The source of requirements gradually shifts as potential customers are identified, and prototypes are produced that can be used to elicit new ideas and priorities also from customers and other external parties (Nguyen-Duc et al. 2017;Terho et al. 2016).”

• cites Nguyen-Duc et al. 2017Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites Terho et al. 2016 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

Data extraction, data analysis and classification of general and specific items of the primary studies was performed by the last two authors, and then validated by the first author.

“Data extraction, data analysis and classification of general and specific items of the primary studies was performed by the last two authors, and then validated by the first author.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

The two last authors each performed this selection on the set from ACM and LUBsearch respectively. They aligned their selection by comparing and reaching consensus on inclusion and exclusion for a random set of 10 publications.

“The two last authors each performed this selection on the set from ACM and LUBsearch respectively.They aligned their selection by comparing and reaching consensus on inclusion and exclusion for a random set of 10 publications.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

Searches were defined iteratively in-line with RQ1 through test searches and by consulting with two experts in prototyping.

“Searches were defined iteratively in-line with RQ1 through test searches and by consulting with two experts in prototyping.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

Very few startups work with parallel exploration and prototyping, and those who did work with parallel prototypes tended to have a background in usability and human-interaction design.

“In our previous research on the use of prototyping in startups, we found that very few startups work with parallel exploration and prototyping, and that those who did work with parallel prototypes tended to have a background in usability and human-interaction design (Bjarnason 2021).”

• cites Bjarnason 2021 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.

Through the case study, we explored the practical applicability of our model by using it to discuss and categorise prototyping instances, thereby validating the model further and identifying improvements to it (RQ4).

“Through the case study, we explored the practical applicability of our model by using it to discuss and categorise prototyping instances, thereby validating the model further and identifying improvements to it (RQ4).”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

Problems and new solution directions can be discovered and explored through prototyping and can lead to new ideas and direct further exploration.

“Problems and new solution directions can be discovered and explored through prototyping and can lead to new ideas and direct further exploration (Lim et al. 2008).”

• cites Lim et al. 2008 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

Each participant was sent a draft of the resulting articles for the parts derived from their interview for validation purposes.

“Furthermore, each participant was sent a draft of the resulting articles for the parts derived from their interview for validation purposes.”

Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.

In the validation stage, interviewees were asked to validate descriptions related to their companies and the co-authors discussed and agreed to the revised version of the prototyping aspects model.

“Finally, in the validation stage of our case study, the interviewees were asked to validate the descriptions related to their companies and the co-authors discussed and agreed to the revised version of the prototyping aspects model.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

Startups struggle to define solutions for which there is product-market fit and risk wasting time and resources on developing unsuccessful features.

“While availability of open-source software and pay-as-you-go services provide software-based business opportunities, startups struggle to define solutions for which there is product-market fit and risk wasting time and resources on developing unsuccessful features (Giardino et al. 2015).”

• cites Giardino et al. 2015 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

Several researchers report that some usability issues can not be discovered unless the prototype provides a broad functional scope with a high degree of refinement, in particular for visual appearance and interactive behaviour.

“Several researchers report that some usability issues can not be discovered unless the prototype provides a broad functional scope with a high degree of refinement, in particular for visual appearance and interactive behaviour (Liu and Khooshabeh 2003;McCurdy et al. 2006).”

• cites Liu and Khooshabeh 2003 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source
• cites McCurdy et al. 2006 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

An executable prototype provides a rich means of communicating requirements details, and reduces the risk of ambiguity, incompleteness and inconsistency in the requirements communication.

“In particular, an executable prototype provides a rich means of communicating requirements details, and reduces the risk of ambiguity, incompleteness and inconsistency in the requirements communication (Acosta et al. 1994).”

• cites Acosta et al. 1994Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

The description of the case company and the case-specific results have been reviewed by the case company.

“Furthermore, the description of the case company and the case-specific results have been reviewed by the case company.”

Probably not a substantial claim.

Interviewees were provided with the prototyping instances identified for their startup, memos including quotes from transcripts, and company and interviewee characteristics.

“The interviewees were provided with the prototyping instances identified for their startup, the memos related to these including the quotes extracted from the transcripts, and the company and interviewee characteristics reported in Section 4.2.”

It may state two separate claims as one.

Breadboard prototypes are used to investigate technical aspects and to support system specification and coding.

“Similarly, breadboard prototypes are used to investigate technical aspects, e.g. in circuit design, and to support system specification and coding (Budde and Zullighoven 1990;Ciriello et al. 2017;Lichter et al. 1994;Lim et al. 2008).”

• cites Budde and Zullighoven 1990Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites Ciriello et al. 2017 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source
• cites Lichter et al. 1994 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

The use of a live product version as a prototype poses conflicts between the need for quick feedback and a focus on product quality.

“However, the use of a live product version as a prototype poses conflicts between the need for quick feedback and a focus on product quality (Ciriello et al. 2017).”

• cites Ciriello et al. 2017 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

Prototyping helped with challenges related to managing with very little requirements documentation, such as intangible and unaligned views and plans on what to develop.

“They observed that prototyping helped with challenges related to managing with very little requirements documentation, such as intangible and unaligned views and plans on what to develop.”

• cites Käpyaho and Kauppinen 2015 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

It may state two separate claims as one.

Prototyping is commonly used to explore the solution space and learn by experimenting with ideas, and is a foundational purpose for any prototyping.

“Prototyping is commonly used to explore the solution space (Dow et al. 2011;Lim et al. 2008;Rahman et al. 2017;Wiberg and Stolterman 2014) and learn by experimenting with ideas (Budde and Zullighoven 1990;Chen et al. 1994;Tronvoll et al. 2017), and is a foundational purpose for any prototyping.”

• cites Dow et al. 2011 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source
• cites Lim et al. 2008 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source
• cites Budde and Zullighoven 1990Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

The facet of realistic data relates to look & feel, but primarily to the perspective of role since the degree to which provided data simulates actual use affects the user's ability to relate to their situation.

“The facet of realistic data relates to look & feel, but primarily to the perspective of role since the degree to which provided data simulates actual use affects the user's ability to relate to their situation.”

It may state two separate claims as one.

We have identified eight purposes of prototyping: exploration, communication, incremental development, quality improvement, and validation & testing of problem-solution fit, product-market fit, technical feasibility, and usability.

“We have identified eight purposes, namely exploration, communication, incremental development, quality improvement, and validation & testing of problem-solution fit, product-market fit, technical feasibility, and usability.”

Probably not a substantial claim.

Our model characterizes the methodology of prototyping by five aspects: purpose of prototyping, prototype scope, prototype media, use of prototype, and exploration strategy.

“Our model characterizes the methodology of prototyping by five aspects: purpose of prototyping, prototype scope, prototype media, use of prototype, and exploration strategy, and is here described based on related work.”

It may state two separate claims as one.

Prototyping facilitates presenting, discussing, and evaluating a product with external parties and internally within a project, thereby supporting decision making.

“Prototyping thus facilitates presenting, discussing, and evaluating a product with external parties, such as customers and investors, and internally within a project, thereby supporting decision making (Budde and Zullighoven 1990;Raja 2009).”

• cites Budde and Zullighoven 1990Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites Raja 2009 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

Probably not a substantial claim.

The systematic mapping study was based on guidelines by Petersen et al. (Petersen et al. 2015) to explore and draw from current body of knowledge on prototyping to compile and provide an overarching view of prototyping methodology based on current knowledge.

“We performed a systematic mapping study based on guidelines by Petersen et al. (Petersen et al. 2015) to explore and draw from the current body of knowledge on prototyping to compile and provide an overarching view of prototyping methodology based on current knowledge.”

• cites Petersen et al. 2015 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

Yasar describes three perspectives to consider when prototyping: role, look & feel, and implementation.

“Yasar describes three perspective to consider when prototyping: role (of product in a user's life), look & feel, and implementation (Yasar 2007).”

• cites Yasar 2007 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

Prototyping addresses several challenges within agile but also identify a need to complement prototyping with additional practices.

“Their findings indicate that prototyping addresses several challenges within agile but also identify a need to complement prototyping with additional practices.”

• cites Käpyaho and Kauppinen 2015 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

It may state two separate claims as one.

Visions and ideas about a product can be communicated through prototyping, which provides a common language between developers and stakeholders and acts as an anchor for group communication.

“Visions and ideas about a product can be communicated through prototyping, which provides a common language between developers and stakeholders (Budde and Zullighoven 1990;Ciriello et al. 2017;Rahman et al. 2017;Zink et al. 2017) and acts as an anchor for group communication (Dow et al. 2011).”

• cites Budde and Zullighoven 1990Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites Ciriello et al. 2017 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source
• cites Dow et al. 2011 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.

The scope of a prototype describes the extent to which a prototype resembles the final product and is represented by breadth of functionality, functional refinement, and data realism.

“The scope of a prototype describes the extent to which a prototype resembles the final product and is, in our model, represented by the breadth of the prototype's functionality (Bruegger et al. 2009;Budde and Zullighoven 1990;Goldman and Narayanaswamy 1992;Hakim and Spitzer 2000;Lim et al. 2008;McCurdy et al. 2006;Tronvoll et al. 2017), and the facets of functional refinement (Bruegger et al. 2009”

• cites Bruegger et al. 2009 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source
• cites Budde and Zullighoven 1990Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites Lim et al. 2008 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

One case study of prototyping in twenty Norwegian startups identified factors that affect the speed of prototyping, including the choice of prototype tools and components, varying competences, and the communication and involvement of customers and external stakeholders in the prototyping.

“One case study of prototyping in twenty Norwegian startups, by Nguyen-Duc et al., identified factors that affect the speed of prototyping, including the choice of prototype tools and components, varying competences, and the communication and involvement of customers and external stakeholders in the prototyping.”

• cites Nguyen-Duc et al. 2017Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

The purpose of prototyping and how the prototype is used regarding customer involvement are factors that need to be considered when selecting prototyping practices.

“They observed that the purpose of prototyping and how the prototype is used regarding customer involvement are factors that need to be considered when selecting prototyping practices (Nguyen-Duc et al. 2017).”

• cites Nguyen-Duc et al. 2017Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

Prototyping multiple design in parallel and sharing these led to more creative and better final designs.

“Research on the use of prototyping in generating new user interaction designs found that prototyping multiple design in parallel and sharing these led to more creative and better final designs (Dow et al. 2011).”

• cites Dow et al. 2011 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.

The reanalysis was performed to improve reliability and internal validation of our prototyping aspects model, while the focus group was performed to validate the relevance and usefulness of our model with practitioners.

“The reanalysis was performed to improve reliability and internal validation of our prototyping aspects model, while the focus group was performed to validate the relevance and usefulness of our model with practitioners.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

In our model, look & feel is captured by the facets of visual and interactive & haptic behaviour.

“In our model, look & feel is captured by the facets of visual and interactive & haptic behaviour.”

It may state two separate claims as one.

The initial draft version of our prototyping aspects model was validated through reanalysis of the primary studies of our systematic map and through a focus group at a case company.

“The initial draft version of our prototyping aspects model was validated through reanalysis of the primary studies of our systematic map and through a focus group at a case company.”

It may state two separate claims as one.

Prototyping can be used to investigate customer needs, validate and clarify customer requirements and tasks, and thus support a company in designing a solution to address customer problems.

“Prototyping can be used to investigate customer needs, validate and clarify customer requirements and tasks (Budde and Zullighoven 1990;Ciriello et al. 2017), and thus support a company in designing a solution to address customer problems.”

• cites Budde and Zullighoven 1990Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites Ciriello et al. 2017 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

Prototyping enables cost effective testing with users.

“and thus, enables cost effective testing with users (Shepherd and Gruber 2020).”

• cites Shepherd and Gruber 2020 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

It may state two separate claims as one.

Demonstrating a fully functioning (but early) version of production software may convey an overly positive view of development status to customers and other stakeholders, that in turn may lead to a push to release software prematurely, before sufficient quality has been achieved.

“In this case, demonstrating a fully functioning (but early) version of production software may convey an overly positive view of development status to customers and other stakeholders, that in turn may lead to a push to release software prematurely, before sufficient quality has been achieved.”

• cites Ramesh et al. 2010Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

It may state two separate claims as one.

Prototyping can be used to explore a product's business potential from the customer perspective, and to assess the value of the product and likeliness of purchase and the product's ability to fit within time and budget constraints.

“Prototyping can be used to explores a product's business potential from the customer perspective, and to assess the value of the product and likeliness of purchase (McCurdy et al. 2006;Zink et al. 2017) and the product's ability to fit within time and budget constraints (Zink et al. 2017).”

• cites McCurdy et al. 2006 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source
• cites Zink et al. 2017 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

It may state two separate claims as one.

The scope affects the cost of producing a prototype and the feedback that can be obtained.

“The scope affects the cost of producing a prototype and the feedback that can be obtained (Derboven et al. 2010;Lim et al. 2008;Liu and Khooshabeh 2003;McCurdy et al. 2006;Tronvoll et al. 2017).”

• cites Derboven et al. 2010Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites Lim et al. 2008 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source
• cites Tronvoll et al. 2017 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

A prototype built to demonstrate feasibility can also support project acquisition.

“Furthermore, Lichter et al. found that a prototype built to demonstrate feasibility can also support project acquisition (Lichter et al. 1994).”

• cites Lichter et al. 1994 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

The insights gained from such prototyping can be used to support business-related decision making.

“The insights gained from such prototyping can be used to support business-related decision making (Ciriello et al. 2017).”

• cites Ciriello et al. 2017 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

Feasibility testing requires a high share of the time invested in a project.

“Finally, Zink et al. found that feasibility testing requires a high share of the time invested in a project (Zink et al. 2017).”

• cites Zink et al. 2017 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

The quality of stakeholder communication at the case company was increased through prototyping and mutual understanding between the development team and the customers was reached faster.

“Furthermore, the quality of stakeholder communication at the case company was increased through prototyping and mutual understanding between the development team and the customers was reached faster.”

• cites Käpyaho and Kauppinen 2015 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

Probably not a substantial claim.

The first author performed triangulation of the model through an independent re-analysis of the primary studies of our systematic map including (re)coding the full text of the articles in NVivo.

“The first author performed triangulation of the model through an independent re-analysis of the primary studies of our systematic map including (re)coding the full text of the articles in NVivo.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

Prototyping also increased the motivation for requirements work since updating a prototype was considered more motivating than writing requirements documents.

“Prototyping also increased the motivation for requirements work since updating a prototype was considered more motivating than writing requirements documents (Käpyaho and Kauppinen 2015).”

• cites Käpyaho and Kauppinen 2015 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

Users preferred testing with a prototype with a high degree of interactive refinement since this provided freedom to explore the system by themselves.

“However, the users preferred testing with a prototype with a high degree of interactive refinement since this provided freedom to explore the system by themselves (Sefelin et al. 2003).”

• cites Sefelin et al. 2003 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

In agile development, prototyping is often an integral part of the development process with regular feedback from users and other stakeholders.

“In agile development, prototyping is often an integral part of the development process with regular feedback from users and other stakeholders (Fairley and Willshire 2005), e.g. through validation of software at end-of-sprint demonstrations.”

• cites Fairley and Willshire 2005 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

One important success factor is to test the business idea early on to validate its viability in the market.

“One important success factor is to test the business idea early on to validate its viability in the market (Block and MacMillan 1985).”

• cites Block and MacMillan 1985Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

All interviewees were contacted and asked to validate information relevant to their companies and to indicate whether they wished their company name included.

“All interviewees were contacted and asked to validate the information relevant to their companies, and to indicate if they wished their company name to be included in the article or not.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

For the first version of the model, an additional design iteration was performed to increase internal validity of our model.

“For the first version of the model, an additional design iteration was performed to increase internal validity of our model.”

Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.

Study selection was performed through a gradually extended scan of title, abstract, and full text using inclusion and exclusion criteria to guide the selection decisions, which resulted in identifying 33 primary studies.

“Study selection was performed through a gradually extended scan of title, abstract, and full text using inclusion and exclusion criteria to guide the selection decisions (see below), which resulted in identifying 33 primary studies.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

Usability testing was reported as the least common singular purpose for prototyping though it is often combined with other purposes.

“Usability testing was reported by Zink et al. as the least common singular purpose for prototyping though it is often combined with other purposes (Zink et al. 2017).”

• cites Zink et al. 2017 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

As the prototype representation of the (future) product becomes more concrete with each iteration, the product requirements thereby gradually become more specific.

“As the prototype representation of the (future) product becomes more concrete with each iteration, the product requirements thereby gradually become more specific (Zink et al. 2017).”

• cites Zink et al. 2017 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

It may state two separate claims as one.

Proof-of-concept prototypes are built for technical feasibility and can be used to evaluate novel technical approaches.

“Proof-of-concept prototypes are built for this purpose (Tronvoll et al. 2017) and can be used to evaluate novel technical approaches (Fern and Donaldson 1989).”

• cites Tronvoll et al. 2017 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source
• cites Fern and Donaldson 1989Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

It may state two separate claims as one.

Our participants validated the four exploration strategies included in the first version model and described that the strategy is varied throughout development stages and for different prototyping purposes.

“Our participants validated the four exploration strategies included in the first version model and described that the strategy is varied throughout development stages and for different prototyping purposes.”

It may state two separate claims as one.

Tronvoll's optimisation exploration uses parallel exploration with a focus on feature or product level, and with gradually decreasing iteration sizes.

“Tronvoll's optimisation exploration uses parallel exploration with a focus on feature or product level, and with gradually decreasing iteration sizes.”

• cites Tronvoll et al. 2017 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

Probably not a substantial claim.

Our facet of single exploration corresponds to Tronvoll's point-based strategy where resources are focused on one single solution path and where alternatives are considered before being cemented.

“Our facet of single exploration corresponds to Tronvoll's point-based strategy where resources are focused on one single solution path and where alternatives are considered before being cemented.”

• cites Tronvoll et al. 2017 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

The difference between point-based and flexible exploration could be deferred to the size of changes and connected to the stage and maturity of a product or an idea.

“Similarly, the difference between point-based and flexible could also be deferred to the size of changes and connected to the stage and maturity of a product or an idea.”

It may state two separate claims as one.

Sefelin et al. compared paper sketches to computer-based prototypes of identical breadth and level of refinement, and the results showed no major differences in obtained feedback depending on prototype media.

“These prototypes were used for usability testing, and the results showed no major differences in the obtained feedback depending on prototype media.”