首页> 外文会议>IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference >Effectiveness of Requirements Elicitation Techniques: Empirical Results Derived from a Systematic Review
【24h】

Effectiveness of Requirements Elicitation Techniques: Empirical Results Derived from a Systematic Review

机译:需求赋予技术的有效性:源自系统评价的经验结果

获取原文

摘要

This paper reports a systematic review of empirical studies concerning the effectiveness of elicitation techniques, and the subsequent aggregation of empirical evidence gathered from those studies. The most significant results of the aggregation process are as follows: (1) Interviews, preferentially structured, appear to be one of the most effective elicitation techniques; (2) Many techniques often cited in the literature, like card sorting, ranking or thinking aloud, tend to be less effective than interviews; (3) Analyst experience does not appear to be a relevant factor; and (4) The studies conducted have not found the use of intermediate representations during elicitation to have significant positive effects. It should be noted that, as a general rule, the studies from which these results were aggregated have not been replicated, and therefore the above claims cannot be said to be absolutely certain. However, they can be used by researchers as pieces of knowledge to be further investigated and by practitioners in development projects, always taking into account that they are preliminary findings.
机译:本文报告了对纺织技术有效性的实证研究的系统审查,以及随后从这些研究中收集的经验证据的聚合。聚合过程中最重要的结果如下:(1)面试,优先结构,似乎是最有效的纺织技术之一; (2)在文献中经常引用的许多技术,如卡分拣,排序,排名或思考,往往比访谈效率较低; (3)分析师经验似乎并不是一个相关因素; (4)进行的研究未发现在诱导期间使用中间陈述以具有显着的积极作用。应当注意,作为一般规则,汇总这些结果的研究尚未被复制,因此不能说上述索赔绝对确定。然而,他们可以被研究人员用作进一步调查的知识,并通过发展项目的从业者,始终考虑到他们是初步调查结果。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号