Managing the software process
Experience with Fagan's inspection method
Software—Practice & Experience
Estimating software fault content before coding
ICSE '92 Proceedings of the 14th international conference on Software engineering
Does every inspection need a meeting?
SIGSOFT '93 Proceedings of the 1st ACM SIGSOFT symposium on Foundations of software engineering
Experimentation in software engineering: an introduction
Experimentation in software engineering: an introduction
A Replicated Experiment to Assess Requirements InspectionTechniques
Empirical Software Engineering
Further Experiences with Scenarios and Checklists
Empirical Software Engineering
Does Every Inspection Really Need a Meeting?
Empirical Software Engineering
Empirical Software Engineering
An Extended Replication of an Experiment for AssessingMethods for Software Requirements Inspections
Empirical Software Engineering
Scenarios in System Development: Current Practice
IEEE Software
Comparing Detection Methods for Software Requirements Inspections: A Replicated Experiment
IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering
Research Synthesis in Software Engineering: A Case for Meta-Analysis
METRICS '99 Proceedings of the 6th International Symposium on Software Metrics
Developing techniques for using software documents: a series of empirical studies
Developing techniques for using software documents: a series of empirical studies
Design and Analysis of Experiments
Design and Analysis of Experiments
Empirical Software Engineering
Tailoring a COTS Group Support System for Software Requirements Inspection
Proceedings of the 16th IEEE international conference on Automated software engineering
Combining data from reading experiments in software inspections: a feasibility study
Lecture notes on empirical software engineering
(Quasi-)experimental studies in industrial settings
Lecture notes on empirical software engineering
An Experimental Comparison of Usage-Based and Checklist-Based Reading
IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering
Reviewing Software Diagrams: A Cognitive Study
IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering
A Cognitive-Based Mechanism for Constructing Software Inspection Teams
IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering
Experimental context classification: incentives and experience of subjects
Proceedings of the 27th international conference on Software engineering
An empirical assessment of using stereotypes to improve reading techniques in software inspections
3-WoSQ Proceedings of the third workshop on Software quality
Perspective-Based Reading: A Replicated Experiment Focused on Individual Reviewer Effectiveness
Empirical Software Engineering
Information and Software Technology
A measurement framework for assessing the maturity of requirements engineering process
Software Quality Control
Cognitive factors in perspective-based reading (PBR): A protocol analysis study
ESEM '09 Proceedings of the 2009 3rd International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement
Software Process Improvement barriers: A cross-cultural comparison
Information and Software Technology
Critical success factors for offshore software development outsourcing vendors: an empirical study
PROFES'10 Proceedings of the 11th international conference on Product-Focused Software Process Improvement
Organisational readiness and software process improvement
PROFES'07 Proceedings of the 8th international conference on Product-Focused Software Process Improvement
De-motivators of software process improvement: an analysis of vietnamese practitioners' views
PROFES'07 Proceedings of the 8th international conference on Product-Focused Software Process Improvement
Empirical Software Engineering
Hi-index | 0.00 |
Perspective-BasedReading (PBR) is a scenario-based inspection technique whereseveral reviewers read a document from different perspectives(e.g. user, designer, tester). The reading is made accordingto a special scenario, specific for each perspective. The basicassumption behind PBR is that the perspectives find differentdefects and a combination of several perspectives detects moredefects compared to the same amount of reading with a singleperspective. This paper presents a study which analyses the differencesin perspectives. The study is a partial replication of previousstudies. It is conducted in an academic environment using graduatestudents as subjects. Each perspective applies a specific modellingtechnique: use case modelling for the user perspective, equivalencepartitioning for the tester perspective and structured analysisfor the design perspective. A total of 30 subjects were dividedinto 3 groups, giving 10 subjects per perspective. The analysisresults show that (1) there is no significant difference amongthe three perspectives in terms of defect detection rate andnumber of defects found per hour, (2) there is no significantdifference in the defect coverage of the three perspectives,and (3) a simulation study shows that 30 subjects is enough todetect relatively small perspective differences with the chosenstatistical test. The results suggest that a combination of multipleperspectives may not give higher coverage of the defects comparedto single-perspective reading, but further studies are neededto increase the understanding of perspective difference.