Abstract
Context and motivation: The major workload in Requirements Engineering lies with those people who create requirements specifications. Inevitably, in doing so people use their memory to store and process related information. Question/problem: This paper examines the question: does the underlying structure of a requirements specification (template vs. prose) have an impact on the memory performance of requirements engineers? Principal ideas/results: We present results from cognitive psychology that support the assumption that template-based specifications lead to better memory performance and present an experiment to test this assumption. Contribution: An initial run of our experiment did not provide sufficient results to support or refute our assumption. In this research preview, we report on the design of experiment, our initial results, and conclusions for future research.
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
Notes
- 1.
Please contact the authors if you are interested in getting the experimental material.
References
IEEE guide for developing system requirements specifications. IEEE Std 1233, 1998 Edition, pp. 1–36, December 1998
Baddeley, A., Hitch, G.: Working memory. Psychol. Learn. Motiv.: Adv. Res. Theory 8, 47–89 (1974)
Cockburn, A.: Writing effective use cases, the crystal collection for software professionals. Addison-Wesley Professional Reading, Boston (2000)
Durán, A., Bernárdez, B., Toro, M., Corchuelo, R., Ruiz, A., Pérez, J.: Expressing customer requirements using natural language requirements templates and patterns. In: Proceedings of the IMACS/IEEE CSCC 1999 (1999)
Engle, R.W.: Working memory capacity as executive attention. Curr. Dir. psychol. Sci. 11(1), 19–23 (2002)
Heitmeyer, C., Labaw, B., Kiskis, D.: Consistency checking of SCR-style requirements specifications. In: Proceedings of the Second IEEE International Symposium on Requirements Engineering, pp. 56–63. IEEE (1995)
Lauenroth, K., Kamsties, E.: People’s capabilities are a blind spot in RE research and practice. In: Daneva, M., Pastor, O. (eds.) REFSQ 2016. LNCS, vol. 9619, pp. 243–248. Springer, Heidelberg (2016). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-30282-9_17
Lenberg, P., Feldt, R., Wallgren, L.: Behavioral software engineering: a definition and systematic literature review. J. Syst. Softw. 107, 15–37 (2015)
Miller, G.A.: The magical number seven, plus or minus two: some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychol. Rev. 63(2), 81 (1956)
Moody, D.L.: The physics of notations: toward a scientific basis for constructing visual notations in software engineering. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 35(6), 756–779 (2009)
Parnin, C.: A cognitive neuroscience perspective on memory for programming tasks. In: Programming Interest Group, p. 27 (2010)
Pohl, K.: Requirements Engineering: Fundamentals, Principles, and Techniques, 1st edn. Springer Publishing Company, Incorporated, Heidelberg (2010)
Tulving, E., Craik, F.I.M.: The Oxford Handbook of Memory. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2000)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding authors
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Lauenroth, K., Kamsties, E., Pfeiffer, T. (2017). The Impact of Specification Structure on Human Memory Performance - Experiences from a First Experiment. In: Grünbacher, P., Perini, A. (eds) Requirements Engineering: Foundation for Software Quality. REFSQ 2017. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 10153. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-54045-0_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-54045-0_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-54044-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-54045-0
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)