Tool support and specification quality: experimental validation of an RE-Tool evaluation framework

Authors:
Raimundas Matulevičius;Guttorm Sindre
Affiliations:
Dept. of Computer and Information Science, Norwegian Univ. of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway;Dept. of Computer and Information Science, Norwegian Univ. of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway
Venue:
ER'05 Proceedings of the 24th international conference on Perspectives in Conceptual Modeling
Year:
2005

Citing 10
Cited 0

The three dimensions of requirements engineering: a framework and its applications

CAISE '93 Selected papers from the fifth international conference on Advanced information systems engineering
Functionality and usability

Communications of the ACM
A case study in applying a systematic method for COTS selection

Proceedings of the 18th international conference on Software engineering
Experimentation in software engineering: an introduction

Experimentation in software engineering: an introduction
Acquiring COTS Software Selection Requirements

IEEE Software
A Semiotic Approach to Quality in Requirements Specifications

Proceedings of the IFIP TC8 / WG8.1 Working Conference on Organizational Semiotics: Evolving a Science of Information Systems
A Quality-Model-Based Approach for Describing and Evaluating Software Packages

RE '02 Proceedings of the 10th Anniversary IEEE Joint International Conference on Requirements Engineering
Requirements for Requirements Management Tools

RE '04 Proceedings of the Requirements Engineering Conference, 12th IEEE International
Development of a computer-based interviewing tool to enhance the requirements gathering process

Requirements Engineering
Prototype of the Evaluation Framework for Functional Requirements of RE-tools

RE '05 Proceedings of the 13th IEEE International Conference on Requirements Engineering

Quantified Score

Hi-index	0.00

Visualization

Abstract

Automated support for the requirements engineering (RE) process is a recognised research area. However, the practice still relies on office tools rather than RE-tools. Reasons include financial causes and difficulty to evaluate the available RE-tools. This work reports on an experiment trying to validate a previously proposed framework for evaluating RE-tools. The experiment participants used several alternative tools for making requirements specifications, and then evaluated the tools by means of the framework. This enables us to look at the participants' performance with the various tools, evaluation approaches, and their perceptions about the same tools. The findings indicate advantages of using the evaluation framework, and of combining several evaluation techniques. The experiment indicates that RE-tools provide better support than office tools, leading to higher quality specifications.