On the Impact of the Model-based Representation of Inconsistencies to Manual Reviews: Results from a Controlled Experiment - Extended Version
This work addresses the challenge of handling contradictory stakeholder requirements for requirements engineers, but it is incremental as it builds on existing model-based methods.
The study tackled the problem of identifying and resolving inconsistent requirements in software engineering by comparing two model-based representation formats for manual reviews. The results showed that using integrated review diagrams significantly increased review efficiency without sacrificing effectiveness.
To ensure fulfilling stakeholder wishes, it is crucial to validate the documented requirements. This is often complicated by the fact that the wishes and intentions of different stakeholders are somewhat contradictory, which manifests itself in inconsistent requirements. To aid requirements engineers in identifying and resolving inconsistent requirements, we investigated the usefulness for manual reviews of two different model-based representation formats for inconsistent requirements; one that represent the inconsistent requirements in separate diagrams and one that represents them integrated into one diagram using annotations. The results from a controlled experiment show that the use of such integrated review diagrams can significantly increase efficiency of manual reviews, without sacrificing effectiveness.