Webbläsaren som du använder stöds inte av denna webbplats. Alla versioner av Internet Explorer stöds inte längre, av oss eller Microsoft (läs mer här: * https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/windows/end-of-ie-support).

Var god och använd en modern webbläsare för att ta del av denna webbplats, som t.ex. nyaste versioner av Edge, Chrome, Firefox eller Safari osv.

Pair-wise comparisons versus planning game partitioning-experiments on requirements prioritisation techniques

In English

Författare

  • Lena Karlsson
  • Thomas Thelin
  • Björn Regnell
  • Patrik Berander
  • Claes Wohlin

Summary, in English

The process of selecting the right set of requirements for a product release is dependent on how well the organisation succeeds in prioritising the requirements candidates. This paper describes two consecutive controlled experiments comparing different requirements prioritisation techniques with the objective of understanding differences in time-consumption, ease of use and accuracy. The first experiment evaluates Pair-wise comparisons and a variation of the Planning game. As the Planning game turned out as superior, the second experiment was designed to compare the Planning game to Tool-supported pair-wise comparisons. The results indicate that the manual pair-wise comparisons is the most time-consuming of the techniques, and also the least easy to use. Tool-supported pair-wise comparisons is the fastest technique and it is as easy to use as the Planning game. The techniques do not differ significantly regarding accuracy.

Publiceringsår

2007

Språk

Engelska

Sidor

3-33

Publikation/Tidskrift/Serie

Empirical Software Engineering

Volym

12

Issue

1

Dokumenttyp

Artikel i tidskrift

Förlag

Springer

Ämne

  • Computer Science

Nyckelord

  • planning
  • release
  • requirements prioritisation
  • controlled experiment
  • decision making
  • requirements engineering

Status

Published

ISBN/ISSN/Övrigt

  • ISSN: 1573-7616