Abstract
The purpose of this paper was to identify the cognitive biases most frequently affecting requirements elicitation, as well as to identify how these biases may influence the requirements elicitation and its outcomes. The research was based on an analysis of forty-one student reports prepared during software engineering classes. The analysis was performed using an adaptation of the Angoff Method, which is very popular in the area of psychological research. It demonstrated that, out of the eight analyzed cognitive biases, representativeness, anchoring and confirmation bias most frequently influence the requirements elicitation, while pro-innovation bias, the bandwagon effect and the IKEA effect are the least likely to occur. The research also revealed that cognitive biases may distort the identified requirements in many ways.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Abdel-Hamid, T.K., Sengupta, K., Ronan, D.: Software project control: an experimental investigation of judgment with fallible information. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 19(6), 603–612 (1993)
Al-Tarawneh, H.A.: The main factors beyond decision making. J. Manag. Res. 4(1), 1–23 (2012)
Browne, G.J., Ramesh, V.: Improving information requirements determination: a cognitive perspective. Inf. Manag. 39(8), 625–645 (2002)
Calikli, G., Aslan, B., Bener, A.: Confirmation bias in software development and testing: an analysis of the effects of company size, experience and reasoning skills (2010)
Cascio, W.F., Alexander, R.A. Barrett, G.V.: Setting cutoff scores: legal, psychometric, and professional issues and guidelines. Pers. Psychol. 41(1), 1–24 (1988)
Chakraborty, S., Sarker, S., Sarker, S.: An exploration into the process of requirements elicitation: a grounded approach. J. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 11(4), 1 (2010)
Chotisarn, N., Prompoon, N.: Forecasting software damage rate from cognitive bias in software requirements gathering and specification process. In 2013 IEEE Third International Conference on Information Science and Technology (ICIST), pp. 951–956. IEEE (2013)
Connolly, T., Dean, D.: Decomposed versus holistic estimates of effort required for software writing tasks. Manag. Sci. 43(7), 1029–1045 (1997)
Dietrich, C.: Decision making: factors that influence decision making, heuristics used, and decision outcomes. Inq. J. 2(02) (2010)
Halkjelsvik, T., Jørgensen, M.: Time Predictions: understanding and avoiding unrealism in project planning and everyday Life, vol. 5. Springer (2018)
Jørgensen, M.: Individual differences in how much people are affected by irrelevant and misleading information. In: Proceedings of the European Cognitive Science Conference 2007. Taylor & Francis (2017)
Jørgensen, M., Faugli, B.: Prediction of overoptimistic predictions. In: 10th International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering (EASE), pp. 10–11. Keele University, UK (2006)
Jørgensen, M., Sjøberg, D.I.K.: Software process improvement and human judgement heuristics. Scand. J. Inf. Syst. 13(1), 2 (2001)
Kahneman, D.: Thinking, Fast and Slow. Allen Lane, London (2011)
Kahneman, D., Tversky, A.: Subjective probability: a judgment of representativeness. Cogn. Psychol. 3(3), 430–454 (1972)
Mohanani, R., Salman, I., Turhan, B., Rodríguez, P., Ralph, P.: Cognitive biases in software engineering: a systematic mapping study. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. (2018)
Moløkken-Østvold, K., Jørgensen, M.: Software effort estimation: unstructured group discussion as a method to reduce individual biases. In: PPIG (2003)
Nickerson, R.S.: Confirmation bias: a ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Rev. Gen. Psychol. 2(2), 175–220 (1998)
Norton, M.I., Mochon, D., Ariely, D.: The ikea effect: When labor leads to love. J. Consum. Psychol. 22(3), 453–460 (2012)
Parkinson, C.N.: Parkinson’s law, or The Pursuit of Progress. Penguin, London (2002)
Parsons, J., Saunders, C.: Cognitive heuristics in software engineering applying and extending anchoring and adjustment to artifact reuse. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 30(12), 873–888 (2004)
Pitts, M.G., Browne, G.J.: Improving requirements elicitation: an empirical investigation of procedural prompts. Inf. Syst. J. 17(1), 89–110 (2007)
Rogers, E.M.: Diffusion of Innovations. Free Press, New York (1995)
Shepard, L.: Standard setting issues and methods. Appl. Psychol. Meas. 4(4), 447–467 (1980)
Shepperd, M., Mair, C., Jørgensen, M.: An experimental evaluation of a de-biasing intervention for professional software developers. In: Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Symposium on Applied Computing, pp. 1510–1517. ACM (2018)
Shulruf, B., Wilkinson, T., Weller, J., Jones, P., Poole, P.: Insights into the angoff method: results from a simulation study. BMC Med. Educ. 16(1), 134 (2016)
Thorndike, R.L., Angoff, W.H.: Educational measurement. Am. Counc. Educ. (1971)
Tversky, A., Kahneman, D.: Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Springer (1975)
VandenBos, G.R.: APA dictionary of psychology. Am. Psychol. Assoc. (2007)
Zalewski, A., Borowa, K., Ratkowski, A.: On cognitive biases in architecture decision making. In: European Conference on Software Architecture, pp. 123–137. Springer (2017)
Zielczynski, P.: Requirements Management Using IBM\(^{\textregistered }\) Rational\(^{\textregistered }\) Requisitepro\(^{\textregistered }\). IBM press (2007)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Zalewski, A., Borowa, K., Kowalski, D. (2020). On Cognitive Biases in Requirements Elicitation. In: Jarzabek, S., Poniszewska-Marańda, A., Madeyski, L. (eds) Integrating Research and Practice in Software Engineering. Studies in Computational Intelligence, vol 851. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-26574-8_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-26574-8_9
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-26573-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-26574-8
eBook Packages: Intelligent Technologies and RoboticsIntelligent Technologies and Robotics (R0)