Cited by 6Software Engineering Techniques and PracticesData Visualization and AnalyticsAdvanced Software Engineering Methodologies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A Visual Narrative Path from Switching to Resuming a Requirements Engineering Task

Open access
Abad, Zahra Shakeri Hossein, Shymka, Alex, Le, Jenny, Hammad, Noor, Ruhe, Guenther·2017·2017 IEEE 25th International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE)

Abstract

Requirements Engineering (RE) is closely tied to other development activities and is at the heart and foundation of every software development process. This makes RE the most data and communication intensive activity compared to other development tasks. The highly demanding communication makes task switching and interruptions inevitable in RE activities. While task switching often allows us to perform tasks effectively, it imposes a cognitive load and can be detrimental to the primary task, particularly in complex tasks as the ones typical for RE activities. Visualization mechanisms enhanced with analytical methods and interaction techniques help software developers obtain a better cognitive understanding of the complexity of RE decisions, leading to timelier and higher quality decisions. In this paper, we propose to apply interactive visual analytics techniques for managing requirements decisions from various perspectives, including stakeholders communication, RE task switching, and interruptions. We propose a new layered visualization framework that supports the analytical reasoning process of task switching. This framework consists of both data analysis and visualization layers. The visual layers offer interactive knowledge visualization components for managing task interruption decisions at different stages of an interruption (i.e. before, during, and after). The analytical layers provide narrative knowledge about the consequences of task switching decisions and help requirements engineers to recall their reasoning process and decisions upon resuming a task. Moreover, we surveyed 53 software developers to test our visual prototype and to explore more required features for the visual and analytical layers of our framework.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/re.2017.81

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

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

Show all 3 references

Research works printed but not linked: 17

  1. 10.1109/RE.2016.61 · DOI
  2. 10.1145/2531602.2531710 · DOI
  3. agrawal, 1994, Fast algorithms for mining association rules, Proc 20th Int Conf on Very large Data Bases, 1215, 487
  4. frias-martinez, 2002, A prediction model for user access sequences, Web Mining for Usage Patterns and User Profiles
  5. 10.1007/978-1-84800-044-5 · DOI
  6. carpendale, 2003, Considering Visual Variables As A Basis for Information Visualisation
  7. 10.1109/VAST.2010.5653598 · DOI
  8. eger, 2007, Cueing retrospective verbal reports in usability testing through eye-movement replay, Proceedings of the 21st British HCI Group Annual Conference on People and Computers HCI But Not As We Know It-Volume 1 ser BCS-HCI '07, 129
  9. 10.1145/1357054.1357247 · DOI
  10. 10.1109/RE.2015.7320428 · DOI
  11. 10.1145/2884781.2884875 · DOI · Paper page
  12. 10.1109/RE.2016.31 · DOI
  13. 10.1007/978-3-319-46397-1_35 · DOI
  14. 10.1109/SER-IP.2017..5 · DOI · Paper page
  15. salvucci, 2010, The Multitasking Mind
  16. ghazi, 2017, Choosing Requirements for Experimentation with User Interfaces of Requirements Modeling Tools, 25th IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE'17)
  17. abad, 2017, What Works Better? A Study of Classifying Requirements, 25th IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE'17)

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Abad, Z. S. H., Shymka, A., Le, J., Hammad, N., & Ruhe, G.
Affiliations
University of Calgary (CA)
Venue
2017 IEEE 25th International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE)
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2017-09
Pages
442-447
OpenAlex
W2729703817
Cited by
6
References
3
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 1
FWCI
0.84
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE) (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Software Engineering Techniques and Practices
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Graphics and Computer-Aided Design › Data Visualization and Analytics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Software › Advanced Software Engineering Methodologies
Keywords
requirements engineering, task switching, task interruption, visual analytics, narrative thinking, cognitive load, stakeholder communication, interactive visualization, developer survey

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