Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Ignacio panach   ormeño et-al_caise2013
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Ignacio panach ormeño et-al_caise2013

121

Published on

Published in: Technology, News & Politics
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
121
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
2
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. M i S d b U biliMapping Study about Usability  Requirements ElicitationRequirements Elicitation Yeshica Isela Ormeño, Jose Ignacio Panach
  • 2. Index 1. Introduction 2. Mapping Study Designpp g y g 3. Results 4 Conclusions4. Conclusions
  • 3. 1. Introduction How to capture functional requirements?
  • 4. 1. Introduction How to capture functional requirements?
  • 5. 1. Introduction How to capture interaction requirements? Create suscriberCreate suscriber Process suscriberCategory [ ]>> g y
  • 6. 1. Introduction How to capture usability requirements?
  • 7. 1. Introduction • Usability requirements aim to improve the system usability. • The goal of developing usable systems has been dealt with the Human Computer Interaction (HCI) and Software Engineering (SE) fieldsSoftware Engineering (SE) fields. – HCI has proposed several usability guidelines, but they are too abstract. – SE has defined sound methods to capture functional requirements, but usability is relegated to last stages. I thi i t d i t id tif th i ti• In this mapping study we aim to identify the existing methods for capturing usability requirements.
  • 8. 1. Introduction • MS provides an objective procedure for identifying the t d t t f th h th t i il bl tnature and extent of the research that is available to answer a particular question. We aim to identify gaps in current research and to• We aim to identify gaps in current research and to suggest areas for further investigation. • In particular we focus on finding works to capture• In particular, we focus on finding works to capture usability requirements in the MDD methods.
  • 9. Index 1. Introduction 2. Mapping Study Designpp g y g 3. Results C4. Conclusions
  • 10. 2. Mapping Study Design • The MP has been defined according to Kitchenham’s kworks. • There are previous MP related to usability but none of them focuses on usability requirementsthem focuses on usability requirements.
  • 11. 2.1 Research Question • Research question: “What are the proposals to elicit bilit i t th h t th ftusability requirements throughout the software development process?” 1 Methods to elicit usability requirements– 1.Methods to elicit usability requirements – 2.Methods to elicit interaction requirements – 3.Usability guidelines to elicit usability requirementsy g y q
  • 12. 2.1 Research Question • Research question: “What are the proposals to elicit bilit i t th h t th ftusability requirements throughout the software development process?” 1 Methods to elicit usability requirements– 1.Methods to elicit usability requirements – 2.Methods to elicit interaction requirements – 3.Usability guidelines to elicit usability requirementsy g y q – 4 Tools to support usability requirements elicitation – 5 Notations to elicit usability requirements – 6 Empirical validation environment
  • 13. 2.2 Search Strategy • Search strategy: We have used the following search IEEE l ACM Di it l Lib S i Li ksources: IEEExplore, ACM Digital Library, Springer Link, and Science Direct. • We have used Scopus as search tool• We have used Scopus as search tool. • The sources explored were the proceedings of conferences journals books and workshops (from 2000conferences, journals, books, and workshops (from 2000 to 2011). RESEARCH SEARCH SELECTIONRESEARCH QUESTION SEARCH STRATEGY SELECTION CRITERIA PUBLICATIONS SELECTION QUALITY ASSESSMENT DATA EXTRACTION STRATEGY
  • 14. 2.2 Search Strategy • Search strategy: The search string is a set of terms to obtain the publications that answer the research questionobtain the publications that answer the research question. • Search string = (Usability Requirement) AND (Software Engineering)Engineering) – Usability Requirement = (usability requirement OR user requirement OR usability elicitation OR interaction requirement OR f ti l OR bilit id li )non-functional OR usability guidelines). – Software Engineering = (MDD OR model-driven OR MDA OR notation OR tool OR interface OR engineering OR test).g g )
  • 15. 2.3 Selection Criteria • Selection criteria: Inclusion and exclusion criteria are d t i ddetermined – Inclusion criteria: • Publications that define how to extract usability requirementsPublications that define how to extract usability requirements. • Approaches applied to an environment based on MDD conceptual models. P blications that define ho to represent the sabilit req irements• Publications that define how to represent the usability requirements. RESEARCH SEARCH SELECTIONRESEARCH QUESTION SEARCH STRATEGY SELECTION CRITERIA PUBLICATIONS SELECTION QUALITY ASSESSMENT DATA EXTRACTION STRATEGY
  • 16. 2.3 Selection Criteria • Selection criteria: Inclusion and exclusion criteria are d t i ddetermined: – Inclusion criteria: • Publications that define how to extract usability requirementsPublications that define how to extract usability requirements. • Approaches applied to an environment based on MDD conceptual models. P blications that define ho to represent the sabilit req irements• Publications that define how to represent the usability requirements. – Exclusion criteria: • Publications focused on guidelines, notations, and tools whereg usability has not been considered or has not been included. • Publications that consider only functional requirements. • Publications written in a language that is not EnglishPublications written in a language that is not English.
  • 17. 2.4 Publication Selection • Publication Selection with a systematic process: – Reading the title and the abstract. From 150 papers, we chose 65 (potential publications). – Reading the whole publication. From 65 papers, we chose 27Reading the whole publication. From 65 papers, we chose 27 (initial selected publications). – Searching in references. We added two new publications, res lting in a total of 29 papers (selected p blications)resulting in a total of 29 papers (selected publications). RESEARCH SEARCH SELECTIONRESEARCH QUESTION SEARCH STRATEGY SELECTION CRITERIA PUBLICATIONS SELECTION QUALITY ASSESSMENT DATA EXTRACTION STRATEGY
  • 18. 2.5 Quality Assessment • Quality assessment: to specify the quality of the l t d bli tiselected publications. • We use a Likert-questionnaire to specify the quality. RESEARCH QUESTION SEARCH STRATEGY SELECTION CRITERIA PUBLICATIONS SELECTION QUALITY ASSESSMENT DATA EXTRACTION SELECTIONASSESSMENT STRATEGY
  • 19. 2.5 Quality Assessment Subjective Questions 1=Yes 0=Partially -1=No 1. Is the method to elicit the usability requirements clear? 2. Are the guidelines to elicit requirements comprehensible? 3. Are the guidelines to elicit requirements useful in other contexts? 4. Are the publications tools downloadable? 5. Is there a clear case study or example illustrating the proposal? 6. Is the whole proposal empirically validated? 7. Are the results clearly explained? 8. Is the notation to elicit requirements easy to learn? Objective Questions 1 Has the publication been published in journal or conference1. Has the publication been published in journal or conference proceedings? 1=Very important 0=Important -1=Not important 2 Has the publication been cited by other authors?2. Has the publication been cited by other authors? 1= More than 4 0=Between 2 and 4 -1=Less than 2
  • 20. 2.6 Data Extraction Strategy • Data extraction strategy: it consists of classifying the ibl f h h b tipossible answers for each research subquestion. RESEARCH QUESTION SEARCH STRATEGY SELECTION CRITERIA PUBLICATIONSQUALITY DATA EXTRACTION SELECTIONASSESSMENT EXTRACTION STRATEGY
  • 21. Index 1. Introduction 2 Mapping Study Design2. Mapping Study Design 3. Results 4. Conclusions
  • 22. 3. Results • SQ1 Methods to elicit usability requirements. – Existing methods deal with usability requirements together with other NFR. – NFR are elicited at the same time the system functionality andNFR are elicited at the same time the system functionality and architecture are defined. – A holistic quality model that fits every context does not exist, and th d t li it NFR l id b i i tmethods to elicit NFR only provide basic requirements management by means of extensions. – A few approaches deal with usability requirements at earlypp y q y stages.
  • 23. 3. Results • SQ2 Methods to elicit interaction requirements. – Most methods are based on patterns or models. – Some methods improve usability by means of applying formal modellingmodelling. – However, further work is needed to deal with dynamic specifications that depend on system functionality.
  • 24. 3. Results • SQ3 Guidelines to elicit usability requirements. – There is a huge variety of guidelines. – The application of these guidelines is not easy. A few works propose a definition of new guidelines– A few works propose a definition of new guidelines. – Some representations are based on patterns, templates, or models and they can be adapted according to which usability requirements are being captured. – Nowadays, the guidelines do not provide precise support to address usability requirements elicitation at the early stagesaddress usability requirements elicitation at the early stages.
  • 25. 3. Results • SQ4 Tools to support usability requirements elicitation – Selected publications present tools to support: frameworks, structured styles, scenarios, notations and methods. – Some tools incorporate a mechanism of transformation (forSome tools incorporate a mechanism of transformation, (for example, from task flow diagrams to formal representations). – A few tools are model-based and they can resolve traceability b t i t d t tbetween requirements and next stages.
  • 26. 3. Results • SQ5 Notations to elicit usability requirements: – More than one notation is usually applied to the development method. – The user requirements specifications are usually presented toThe user requirements specifications are usually presented to end-users in normal text, even though the analyst works with languages based on models. S l i t i t t f ti l i t d– Some proposals aim to integrate functional requirements and NFR in the same elicitation process.
  • 27. 3. Results • SQ6 Empirical validation environment: – There is not explicit metrics to evaluate the usability requirements elicitation. – Existing validations are focused on quantitative and qualitativeExisting validations are focused on quantitative and qualitative usability requirements. – Studied publications are focused on evaluating a few usability f tfeatures. – Patterns, scenario management, checklists, work sessions, and templates are the most common artefacts used to evaluatep usability.
  • 28. 3. Results Studied Publications Quality of Publications 13 15 POTENTIAL PUBLICATIONS SELECTED PUBLICATIONS 12 16 14 16 18 8 6 6 8 7 7 8 5 10 12 6 8 10 12 2 2 2 3 12 1 1 5 3 3 3 3 0 1 0 2 4 Very good Good Bad
  • 29. 3.1 Discussion • Usability requirements are elicited once all functional requirements have been capturedrequirements have been captured. • Existing approaches do not propose a precise and unambiguous notation to represent usabilityunambiguous notation to represent usability requirements. • Guidelines are not defined such a way end-users canGuidelines are not defined such a way end users can understand them. • Guidelines are not a holistic support to develop usablepp p systems. • The methods are inflexible and require considerable effort to be applied in contexts that are different from the contexts where they have been defined.
  • 30. Index 1. Introduction 2 Mapping Study Design2. Mapping Study Design 3. Results 4. Conclusions
  • 31. 4. Conclusions • We have explored the development methods that consider usability as a requirement.y q • A total of 29 publications were selected from an initial set of 150 publications returned by the search string. • 97% of selected publications have a good quality. • If we focus on MDD, there are few works in this field • We plan to develop a framework to elicit usability requirements in such a way that it could be used in any MDD method. • We plan to develop transformation rules from the bilit i t t t l i d d iusability requirements to generate analysis and design models
  • 32. Th k !Thanks! Questions?Questions?

×