Linking Use Cases and Associated Requirements

Abstract

A wide variety of use case templates supports different variants to link a use case with its associated requirements. Regardless of the linking, a reader must process the related information simultaneously to understand them.Linking variants are intended to cause a specific reading behavior in which a reader interrelates a use case and its associated requirements. Due to the effort to create and maintain links, we investigated the impact of different linking variants on the reading behavior in terms of visual effort and the intended way of interrelating both artifacts.We designed an eye tracking study about reading a use case and requirements. We conducted the study twice each with 15 subjects as a baseline experiment and as a repetition. The results of the baseline experiment, its repetition, and their joint analysis are consistent. All investigated linking variants cause comparable visual effort. In all cases, reading the single artifacts one after the other is the most frequently occurring behavior. Only links embedded in the fields of a use case description significantly increase the readers’ efforts to interrelate both artifacts. None of the investigated linking variants impedes reading a use case and requirements. However, only the most detailed linking variant causes readers to process related information simultaneously.

Turning asynchronicity into an opportunity: asynchronous communication for shared understanding with vision videos

“…Similar to Karras et al [50,51], we consider this difference from a cognitive science perspective. We use the theory of cognitive load by Sweller et al [52] to explain why our prototype performs better than the other three tools.…”

Divide and Conquer the EmpiRE: A Community-Maintainable Knowledge Graph of Empirical Research in Requirements Engineering

“…Figure 1: Comparison of related publications on the "current" state and evolution of empirical research in RE and SE [16].…”

“…Figure 1 shows an excerpt from a comparison that we created to get an overview of related publications on the "current" state and evolution of empirical research in RE and SE [16]. For three publications, the excerpt shows the method used, the data availability, as well as the period and the number of papers examined.…”

Researcher or Crowd Member? Why not both! The Open Research Knowledge Graph for Applying and Communicating CrowdRE Research

“…For 20 years, various researchers conducted literature reviews to examine the state and evolution of empirical research in requirements engineering (RE) with the shared goal of providing a comprehensive, up-to-date, and long-term available overview [1], [2]. However, these literature reviews were not sustainable, as none built on or updated previous ones, which are known challenges of literature reviews [3].…”

“…In their joint work, Wernlein [5] and Karras et al [1], [6] examined the use of the Open Research Knowledge Graph (ORKG) [7], as such technical support by building, publishing, and analyzing a Knowledge Graph (KG) of empirical research in RE (KG-EmpiRE) based on currently 680 research track papers of the IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference .…”