The Community for Technology Leaders
RSS Icon
Subscribe
Issue No.03 - March (2013 vol.39)
pp: 327-342
Silvia Abrahão , Universitat Politècnica de València, València
Carmine Gravino , University of Salerno via Ponte Don Melillo, Salerno
Emilio Insfran , Universitat Politècnica de València, València
Giuseppe Scanniello , University of Basilicata Viale DellAteneo, Macchia Romana, Potenza
Genoveffa Tortora , University of Salerno via Ponte Don Melillo, Salerno
ABSTRACT
Modeling is a fundamental activity within the requirements engineering process and concerns the construction of abstract descriptions of requirements that are amenable to interpretation and validation. The choice of a modeling technique is critical whenever it is necessary to discuss the interpretation and validation of requirements. This is particularly true in the case of functional requirements and stakeholders with divergent goals and different backgrounds and experience. This paper presents the results of a family of experiments conducted with students and professionals to investigate whether the comprehension of functional requirements is influenced by the use of dynamic models that are represented by means of the UML sequence diagrams. The family contains five experiments performed in different locations and with 112 participants of different abilities and levels of experience with UML. The results show that sequence diagrams improve the comprehension of the modeled functional requirements in the case of high ability and more experienced participants.
INDEX TERMS
Unified modeling language, Object oriented modeling, Analytical models, Computational modeling, Software systems, Materials, requirements specifications, Documentation, software engineering
CITATION
Silvia Abrahão, Carmine Gravino, Emilio Insfran, Giuseppe Scanniello, Genoveffa Tortora, "Assessing the Effectiveness of Sequence Diagrams in the Comprehension of Functional Requirements: Results from a Family of Five Experiments", IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, vol.39, no. 3, pp. 327-342, March 2013, doi:10.1109/TSE.2012.27
REFERENCES
[1] A. Finkelstein, "Requirements Engineering: An Overview," Proc. Asia-Pacific Software Eng. Conf., 1993.
[2] M. Jackson, Software Requirements and Specifications: A Lexicon of Practice, Principles and Prejudices. Addison Wesley, 1995.
[3] B. Nuseibeh and S. Easterbrook, "Requirements Engineering: A Roadmap," Proc. Conf. Future of Software Eng., pp. 35-46, 2000.
[4] B.W. Boehm, Software Engineering Economics. Prentice-Hall, 1981.
[5] T. Nakajo and H. Kume, "A Case History Analysis of Software Error Cause-Effect Relationships," IEEE Trans. Software Eng., vol. 17, no. 8, pp. 830-838, Aug. 1991.
[6] A. Davis, Software Requirements: Objects, Functions and States. Prentice Hall, 1993.
[7] R.J. Wieringa, Requirements Engineering: Frameworks for Understanding. Wiley, 1996.
[8] B. Bruegge and A. Dutoit, Object-Oriented Software Engineering Using UML, Patterns, and Java. Prentice Hall, 2004.
[9] OMG. Unified Modeling Language (UML) Specification, version 2.0, 2005.
[10] C. Gravino, G. Scanniello, and G. Tortora, "An Empirical Investigation on Dynamic Modeling in Requirements Engineering," Proc. Int'l Conf. Model Driven Eng. Languages and Systems, pp. 615-629, 2008.
[11] S. Abrahão, E. Insfran, C. Gravino, and G. Scanniello, "On the Effectiveness of Dynamic Modeling in UML: Results from an External Replication," Proc. Third Int'l Symp. Empirical Eng. and Measurement, pp. 468-472, 2009.
[12] V.R. Basili, R.W. Selby, and D.H. Hutchens, "Experimentation in Software Engineering," IEEE Trans. Software Eng., vol. 12, no. 7, pp. 733-743, July 1986.
[13] V.R. Basili, "The Role of Experimentation in Software Engineering: Past, Current, and Future," Proc. Int'l Conf. Software Eng., pp. 442-449, 1996.
[14] N. Fenton, "How Effective Are Software Engineering Methods?" J. Systems and Software, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 141-146, 1993.
[15] M. Colosimo, A. De Lucia, G. Scanniello, and G. Tortora, "Evaluating Legacy System Migration Technologies through Empirical Studies," Int'l J. Information and Software Technology, vol. 51, no. 12, pp. 433-447, 2009.
[16] W.J. Dzidek, E. Arisholm, and L.C. Briand, "A Realistic Empirical Evaluation of the Costs and Benefits of UML in Software Maintenance," IEEE Trans. Software Eng., vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 407-432, May/June 2008.
[17] V.R. Basili, "The Experimental Paradigm in Software Engineering," Proc. Int'l Workshop, Experimental Software Eng. Issues: Critical Assessment and Future Directions, 1993.
[18] N. Juristo and A.M. Moreno, Basics of Software Engineering Experimentation. Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2001.
[19] C. Wohlin, P. Runeson, M. Host, M.C. Ohlsson, B. Regnell, and A. Wesslen, Experimentation in Software Engineering—An Introduction. Kluwer, 2000.
[20] F. Shull, J.C. Carver, S. Vegas, and N. Juristo, "The Role of Replications," Empirical Software Eng., vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 211-218, 2008.
[21] B. Kitchenham, "The Role of Replications in Empirical Software Engineering—A Word of Warning," Empirical Software Eng., vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 219-221, 2008.
[22] D.I.K. Sjøberg, J.E. Hannay, O. Hansen, V.B. Kampenes, A. Karahasanovic, N. Liborg, and A.C. Rekdal, "A Survey of Controlled Experiments in Software Engineering," IEEE Trans. Software Eng., vol. 31, no. 9, pp. 733-753, Sept. 2005.
[23] V.R. Basili, F. Shull, and F. Lanubile, "Building Knowledge through Families of Experiments," IEEE Trans. Software Eng., vol. 25, no. 4, pp. 456-473, July/Aug. 1999.
[24] M. Ciolkowski, F. Shull, and S. Biffl, "A Family of Experiments to Investigate the Influence of Context on the Effect of Inspection Techniques," Proc. Sixth Int'l Conf. Empirical Assessment in Software Eng., pp. 48-60, 2002.
[25] F. Ricca, M. Di Penta, M. Torchiano, P. Tonella, and M. Ceccato, "How Developers' Experience and Ability Influence Web Application Comprehension Tasks Supported by UML Stereotypes: A Series of Four Experiments," IEEE Trans. Software Eng., vol. 36, no. 1, pp. 96-118, Jan./Feb. 2010.
[26] R. Baeza-Yates and B. Ribeiro-Neto, Modern Information Retrieval. Addison-Wesley, 1999.
[27] G. Antoniol, G. Canfora, G. Casazza, A. De Lucia, and E. Merlo, "Recovering Traceability Links between Code and Documentation," IEEE Trans Software Eng., vol. 28, no. 10, pp. 970-983, Oct. 2002.
[28] T. Zimmermann, P. Weissgerber, S. Diehl, and A. Zeller, "Mining Version Histories to Guide Software Changes," IEEE Trans. Software Eng., vol. 31, no. 6, pp. 429-445, June 2005.
[29] J.L. Devore and N. Farnum, Applied Statistics for Engineers and Scientists. Duxbury Press, 1999.
[30] W.J. Conover, Practical Nonparametric Statistics, third ed. Wiley, 1998.
[31] L. Briand, Y. Labiche, M. Di Penta, and H. Yan-Bondoc, "An Experimental Investigation of Formality in UML-Based Development," IEEE Trans. Software Eng., vol. 31, no. 10, pp. 833-849, Oct. 2005.
[32] J. Cohen, Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, second ed. Lawrence Earlbaum Assoc., 1988.
[33] F. Shull, M.G. Mendonça, V.R. Basili, J. Carver, J.C. Maldonaldo, S. Fabbri, G.H. Travassos, and M.C. Ferreira, "Knowledge-Sharing Issues in Experimental Software Engineering," Empirical Software Eng., vol. 9, nos. 1/2, pp. 111-137, 2004.
[34] S. Vegas, N. Juristo, A.M. Moreno, M. Solari, and P. Letelier, "Analysis of the Influence of Communication between Researchers on Experiment Replication," Proc. Int'l Symp. Empirical Software Eng., pp. 28-37, 2006.
[35] G.V. Glass, B. McGaw, and M.L. Smith, Meta-Analysis in Social Research. Sage Publications, 1981.
[36] L.V. Hedges and I. Olkin, Statistical Methods for Meta-Analysis. Academia Press, 1985.
[37] R. Rosenthal, Meta-Analytic Procedures for Social Research. Sage Publications, 1986.
[38] J.A. Sutton, R.K. Abrams, R.D. Jones, A.T. Sheldon, and F. Song, Methods for Meta-Analysis in Medical Research. John-Wiley & Sons, 2001.
[39] Biostat, Comprehensive Meta-Analysis v2, 2006.
[40] J.A. Cruz-Lemus, M. Genero, M.E. Manso, S. Morasca, and M. Piattini, "Assessing the Understandability of UML Statechart Diagrams with Composite States—A Family of Empirical Studies," Empirical Software Eng., vol. 14, no. 6, pp. 685-719, 2009.
[41] V. Kampenes, T. Dybå, J.E. Hannay, and D.I.K. Sjøberg, "A Systematic Review of Effect Size in Software Engineering Experiments," Information and Software Technology, vol. 49, nos. 11/12, pp. 1073-1086, 2007.
[42] R.A. Fisher, "Frequency Distribution of the Values of the Correlation Coefficient in Samples of an Indefinitely Large Population," Biometrika, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 507-521, 1915.
[43] J. Carver, L. Jaccheri, S. Morasca, and F. Shull, "Issues in Using Students in Empirical Studies in Software Engineering Education," Proc. Int'l Software Metrics Symp., pp. 239-249, 2003.
[44] J.E. Hannay and M. Jørgensen, "The Role of Deliberate Artificial Design Elements in Software Engineering Experiments," IEEE Trans. Software Eng., vol. 34, no. 2, pp. 242-259, Mar./Apr. 2008.
[45] M. Höst, B. Regnell, and C. Wholin, "Using Students as Subjects—A Comparative Study of Students and Professionals in Lead-Time Impact Assessment," Proc. Fourth Conf. Empirical Assessment and Evaluation in Software Eng., pp. 201-214, 2000.
[46] B.A. Kitchenham, S. Pfleeger, D.C. Hoaglin, K. El Emam, and J. Rosenberg, "Preliminary Guidelines for Empirical Research in Software Engineering," IEEE Trans. Software Eng., vol. 28, no. 8, pp. 721-734, Aug. 2002.
[47] B. Anda, K. Hansen, I. Gullesen, and H.K. Thorsen, "Experiences from Using a UML-Based Development Method in a Large Safety-Critical Project," Empirical Software Eng., vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 555-581, 2006.
[48] A.N. Oppenheim, Questionnaire Design, Interviewing and Attitude Measurement. Pinter Publishers, 1992.
[49] D. Budgen, A.J. Burn, O.P. Brereton, B. Kitchenham, and R. Pretorius, "Empirical Evidence about the UML: A Systematic Literature Review," Software: Practice and Experience, vol. 41, no. 4, pp. 363-392, 2011.
[50] M.C. Otero and J.J. Dolado, "An Initial Experimental Assessment of the Dynamic Modelling in UML," Empirical Software Eng., vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 27-47, 2002.
[51] M.C. Otero and J.J. Dolado, "An Empirical Comparison of the Dynamic Modeling in OML and UML," J. Systems and Software, vol. 77, no. 2, pp. 91-102, 2005.
[52] C. Glezer, M. Last, E. Nachmany, and P. Shoval, "Quality and Comprehension of UML Interaction Diagrams: An Experimental Comparison," Information and Software Technology, vol. 47, no. 10, pp. 675-692, 2005.
[53] A. Nugroho, B. Flaton, and M.R.V. Chaudron, "Empirical Analysis of the Relation between Level of Detail in UML Models and Defect Density," Proc. Int'l Conf. Model Driven Eng. Languages and Systems, pp. 600-614, 2008.
[54] OMG, Object constraint language (OCL) specification, version 2.0, 2005.
[55] J. Conallen, Building Web Applications with UML. Addison-Wesley Object Technology Series, 1999.
60 ms
(Ver 2.0)

Marketing Automation Platform Marketing Automation Tool