The DOI matches its Crossref record; 60 of the 60 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
An empirical comparative evaluation of requirements engineering methods
Open accessAbstract
Abstract Requirements Engineering (RE) is a relatively young discipline, and still many advances have been achieved during the last decades. In particular, numerous RE approaches are proposed in the literature with the aim of understanding a certain problem (e.g. information systems development) and establishing a knowledge base that is shared between domain experts and developers (i.e. a requirements specification). However, there is a growing concern for empirical validations that assess RE proposals and statements. This paper is related to the assessment of the quality of functional requirements specifications, using the Method Evaluation Model (MEM) as a theoretical framework. The MEM distinguishes the actual efficacy and the perceived efficacy of a method. In order to assess the actual efficacy or RE methods, the conceptual model quality framework by Lindland et al. can be applied; in this paper, we focus on the completeness and granularity of requirements models and extend this framework by defining four new metrics (e.g. degree of functional encapsulations completeness with respect to a reference model, number of functional fragmentation errors). In order to assess the perceived efficacy, conventional questionnaires can be used. A laboratory experiment with master students has been carried out, in order to compare (using the proposed metrics) two RE methods; namely, Use Cases and Communication Analysis. With respect to actual efficacy, results indicate greater model quality (in terms of completeness and granularity) when Communication Analysis guidelines are followed. With respect to perceived efficacy, we found that Use Cases was perceived to be slightly easier to use than Communication Analysis. However, Communication Analysis was perceived to be more useful in terms of determining the proper business processes granularity. The paper discusses these results and highlights some key issues for future research in this area.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Over the last several years the MEM was actively used as a framework for the comparative evalu-ation of security and risk identification and analysis methods (Espaná et al., 2010; Fabian et al., 2010; Labunets et al., 2013, 2014).”
From A review of cyber security risk assessment methods for SCADA systems (2016) · cites this paper as Espaná et al., 2010
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models
Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.35.8.982 · Cited by 25,709
Experimentation in Software Engineering: An Introduction
Wohlin, C., Runeson, P., Höst, M., Ohlsson, M. C., Regnell, B., & Wesslén, A. (2011) · Lund University Publications (Lund University) · Cited by 2,214
Experimentation in Software Engineering
Wohlin, C., Runeson, P., Höst, M., Ohlsson, M. C., Regnell, B., & Wesslén, A. (2000) · Kluwer international series in software engineering · doi:10.1007/978-1-4615-4625-2 · Cited by 1,775
Cockburn, A. (2000) · Cited by 1,409
The TAME Project: Towards Improvement-Oriented Software Environments
Basili, V. R., & Rombach, H. D. (2005) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/3-540-27662-9_8 · Cited by 1,399
Ben-Menachem, M. (2001) · ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes · doi:10.1145/505894.505918 · Cited by 1,036
Modularity in technology and organization
Langlois, R. N. (2002) · Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization · doi:10.1016/s0167-2681(02)00056-2 · Cited by 932
Understanding quality in conceptual modeling
Lindland, O. I., Sindre, G., & Sølvberg, A. (1994) · IEEE Software · doi:10.1109/52.268955 · Cited by 874
Basics of Software Engineering Experimentation
Juristo, N., & Moreno, A. M. (2001) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-1-4757-3304-4 · Cited by 759
Four dark corners of requirements engineering
Zave, P., & Jackson, M. (1997) · ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology · doi:10.1145/237432.237434 · Cited by 737
Software for Use: A Practical Guide to the Models and Methods of Usage-Centered Design
Constantine, L. L. (1999) · Cited by 734
Larman, C. (1997) · Cited by 576
Moody, D. L. (2005) · Data & Knowledge Engineering · doi:10.1016/j.datak.2004.12.005 · Cited by 480
Dobing, B., & Parsons, J. (2006) · Communications of the ACM · doi:10.1145/1125944.1125949 · Cited by 388
Process models representing knowledge for action: a revised quality framework
Krogstie, J., Sindre, G., & Jørgensen, H. D. (2006) · European Journal of Information Systems · doi:10.1057/palgrave.ejis.3000598 · Cited by 356
Use cases: requirements in context
Kulak, D., & Guiney, E. (2000) · CERN Document Server (European Organization for Nuclear Research) · Cited by 284
Structuring Use Cases with Goals
Cockburn, A. (2000) · Cited by 282
The three dimensions of requirements engineering: A framework and its applications
Pohl, K. (1994) · Information Systems · doi:10.1016/0306-4379(94)90044-2 · Cited by 273
Identifying and measuring quality in a software requirements specification
Davis, A. M., Overmyer, S. P., Jordan, K. A., Caruso, J., Dandashi, F., Dinh, A., Kincaid, G., Ledeboer, G., Reynolds, P., Sitaram, P., et al. (2002) · IEEE International Software Metrics Symposium (METRICS) · doi:10.1109/metric.1993.263792 · Cited by 229
The Guidelines of Modeling – An Approach to Enhance the Quality in Information Models
Schuette, R., & Rotthowe, T. (1998) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-540-49524-6_20 · Cited by 217
Object-oriented development in an industrial environment
Jacobson, I. (1987) · Conference on Object-Oriented Programming Systems, Languages, and Applications · doi:10.1145/38765.38824 · Cited by 211
Guiding the construction of textual use case specifications
Rolland, C., & Salinesi, C. (1998) · Data & Knowledge Engineering · doi:10.1016/s0169-023x(97)86223-4 · Cited by 205
(2003) · Journal of the Association for Information Systems · Cited by 202
(1985) · Mathematics and Computers in Simulation · doi:10.1016/0378-4754(85)90017-5 · Cited by 194
Requirements Engineering: Frameworks for Understanding
Wieringa, R. J. (1996) · University of Twente Research Information · Cited by 189
Using Students as Experiment Subjects – An Analysis on Graduate and Freshmen Student Data
Runeson, P. (2003) · Lund University Publications (Lund University) · Cited by 176
What makes a good data model? Evaluating the quality of entity relationship models
Moody, D. L., & Shanks, G. (1994) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/3-540-58786-1_75 · Cited by 167
Modularity in Process Models: Review and Effects
Reijers, H. A., & Mendling, J. (2008) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-540-85758-7_5 · Cited by 137
Moody, D. L., Sindre, G., Brasethvik, T., & Sølvberg, A. (2003) · doi:10.5555/776816.776852 · Cited by 125
Use cases – Yesterday, today, and tomorrow
Jacobson, I. (2004) · Software & Systems Modeling · doi:10.1007/s10270-004-0060-3 · Cited by 124
Towards a deeper understanding of quality in requirements engineering
Krogstie, J., Lindland, O. I., & Sindre, G. (1995) · Notes on numerical fluid mechanics and multidisciplinary design · doi:10.1007/3-540-59498-1_239 · Cited by 118
Guiding use case authoring: results of an empirical study
Salinesi, C., Rolland, C., Maiden, N., et al. (2003) · IEEE International Symposium on Requirements Engineering (RE) · doi:10.1109/isre.1999.777983 · Cited by 111
Comparison of analysis techniques for information requirement determination
Surya, B. Y., Ralph, R. B., Chatfield, A. T., et al. (1988) · Communications of the ACM · doi:10.1145/48529.48533 · Cited by 107
Conceptual Modelling in Information Systems Engineering
Krogstie, J., Opdahl, A. L., & Brinkkemper, S. (2007) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-540-72677-7 · Cited by 106
Evaluation of information modeling methods-a review
Siau, K. L., & Rossi, M. (2002) · Proceedings of the ... Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences/Proceedings of the Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences · doi:10.1109/hicss.1998.648327 · Cited by 106
Some experience with automated aids to the design of large-scale reliable software
BOEHM, B. W., McClean, R. K., & Urfrig, D. B. (1975) · ACM SIGPLAN Notices · doi:10.1145/390016.808430 · Cited by 102
Methodological pragmatism: A systems-theoretic approach to the theory of knowledge
Rescher, N. (1977) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 98
(1998) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/b68220 · Cited by 86
Evaluating the Quality of Process Models: Empirical Testing of a Quality Framework
Moody, D. L., Sindre, G., Brasethvik, T., & Sølvberg, A. (2002) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/3-540-45816-6_36 · Cited by 84
Status of Empirical Research in Software Engineering
Höfer, A., & Tichy, W. F. (2007) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-540-71301-2_3 · Cited by 75
Quality and Understandability of Use Case Models
Anda, B., Sjøberg, D. I. K., & Jørgensen, M. (2001) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/3-540-45337-7_21 · Cited by 75
Wieringa, R. J., & Heerkens, J. M. G. (2006) · Requirements Engineering · doi:10.1007/s00766-006-0037-6 · Cited by 75
Moody, D. L., Sindre, G., Brasethvik, T., & Sølvberg, A. (2003) · ACM/IEEE International Conference on Software Engineering: Companion Proceedings (ICSE-Companion) · doi:10.1109/icse.2003.1201209 · Cited by 74
Some experience with automated aids to the design of large-scale reliable software
BOEHM, B. W., Mcclean, R. K., & Urfrig, D. E. (1975) · IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering · doi:10.1109/tse.1975.6312826 · Cited by 71
Use Cases: Patterns and Blueprints
Övergaard, G., & Palmkvist, K. (2004) · Cited by 67
Simons, A. J. H. (2003) · Technology of Object-Oriented Languages and Systems · doi:10.1109/tools.1999.779012 · Cited by 59
Replicating the CREWS Use Case Authoring Guidelines Experiment
Cox, K., & Phalp, K. (2000) · Empirical Software Engineering · doi:10.1023/a:1026542700033 · Cited by 49
Improving the quality of use case descriptions: empirical assessment of writing guidelines
Phalp, K. T., Vincent, J., & Cox, K. (2007) · Software Quality Journal · doi:10.1007/s11219-007-9023-6 · Cited by 42
A use case driven requirements engineering process
Dano, B., Briand, H., & Barbier, F. (1997) · Requirements Engineering · doi:10.1007/bf02813027 · Cited by 39
España, S., Condorí-Fernández, N., Gonzalez, A., et al. (2009) · IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE) · doi:10.1109/re.2009.33 · Cited by 33
Self-citationComparing Use Case Writing Guidelines
Cox, K., Phalp, K. T., & Shepperd, M. (2001) · Cited by 30
Schuette, R. (1999) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/3-540-47866-3_33 · Cited by 26
Technology of object-oriented languages and systems 25
Mingins, C., Duke, R., & Meyer, B. (1997) · Cited by 26
Erratum to: Information System Concepts
Falkenberg, E. D., Lyytinen, K., & Verrijn-Stuart, A. A. (2017) · IFIP advances in information and communication technology · doi:10.1007/978-0-387-35500-9_30 · Cited by 25
Quality in Conceptual Modelling: Linking Theory and Practice
Shanks, G., & Darke, P. (1997) · Journal of the Association for Information Systems · Cited by 21
Conceptual Alignment of Software Production Methods
Pastor, Ó., González, A., & España, S. (2007) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-540-72677-7_13 · Cited by 11
Self-citationThe 5th International Conference on entity-relationship approach
(1985) · Data & Knowledge Engineering · doi:10.1016/0169-023x(85)90035-7 · Cited by 11
Evaluating the structure of research papers: A case study
Wieringa, R. J., & Heerkens, J. M. G. (2004) · University of Twente Research Information · Cited by 8
Um Modelo Integrado de Requisitos com Casos de Uso.
Fortuna, M. H., Werner, C. M. L., & Borges, M. R. S. (2007) · Conferencia Iberoamericana de Software Engineering · Cited by 5
Towards a Communicational Perspective for Enterprise Information Systems Modelling
González, A., España, S., & Pastor, Ó. (2008) · Lecture notes in business information processing · doi:10.1007/978-3-540-89218-2_5 · Cited by 4
Self-citation
Research works printed but not linked: 5
- Iivari J, Kerola P (1983) A sociocybernetic framework for the feature analysis of information systems development methodologies. In: Olle TW, Sol HG, Tully CJ (eds) Information systems methodologies: a feature analysis. North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp 87–139
- Dieste O, Lopez M, Ramos F (2008) Updating a systematic review about selection of software requirements specification techniques. In: 11th workshop on requirements engineering (WER 2008), Barcelona, Spain
- España S, González A, Pastor Ó (2009) Communication Analysis: a requirements elicitation approach for information systems. In: 21st international conference on advanced information systems, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. LNCS. Springer, Berlin
- González A, España S, Pastor O (2009) Unity criteria for business process modelling: a theoretical argumentation for a software engineering recurrent problem. In: 3rd international conference on research challenges in information science (RCIS 2009), Fes, Morocco. IEEE, New York
- Lockemann PC, Mayr HC (1986) Information system design: techniques and software support. Information processing, vol 86. North-Holland, Amsterdam
Cited by
Sorted by citations
A review of cyber security risk assessment methods for SCADA systems
Cherdantseva, Y., Burnap, P., Blyth, A., Eden, P., Jones, K., Soulsby, H., & Stoddart, K. (2016) · Computers & Security · doi:10.1016/j.cose.2015.09.009 · Cited by 606
Metadata
- Authors
- España, S., Condori-Fernandez, N., González, A., & Pastor, Ó.
- Affiliations
- Universitat Politècnica de València (ES)
- Corresponding author
- España, Sergio
- Venue
- Journal of the Brazilian Computer Society
- Published
- 2010-05
- Volume
- 16
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 3-19
- ISSN
- 0104-6500 (ISSN-L)
- 1678-4804
- OpenAlex
- W2002598242
- Cited by
- 27
- References
- 60
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 3
- FWCI
- 8.97
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Locations
- Journal of the Brazilian Computer Society (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Funders
- Generalitat Valenciana
- Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación (TIN2007-62894)
- Aristotle University of Thessaloniki
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Software Engineering Techniques and Practices
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Software › Advanced Software Engineering Methodologies
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Control and Systems Engineering › Systems Engineering Methodologies and Applications
- Keywords
- requirements engineering, functional requirements, requirements completeness, use cases, communication analysis, perceived efficacy
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
