Requirements prioritisation: an experiment on exhaustive pair-wise comparisons versus planning game partitioning
Karlsson, Lena LU ; Berander, P ; Regnell, Björn LU
and Wohlin, Claes
LU
(2004)
8th Internation Conference on Empirical Assessment in Software Engineering (EASE 2004) Workshop - 26th International Conference on Software Engineering
p.145-154
- Abstract
- The process of selecting the right set of requirements for a product release is highly dependent on how well we succeed in prioritising the requirements candidates. There are different techniques available for requirements prioritisation, some more elaborate than others. In order to compare different techniques, a controlled experiment was conducted with the objective of understanding differences regarding time consumption, ease of use, and accuracy. The requirements prioritisation techniques compared in the experiment are the analytical hierarchy process (AHP) and a variation of the planning game (PG), isolated from extreme programming. The subjects were 15 Ph.D. students and one professor, who prioritised mobile phone features using both... (More)
- The process of selecting the right set of requirements for a product release is highly dependent on how well we succeed in prioritising the requirements candidates. There are different techniques available for requirements prioritisation, some more elaborate than others. In order to compare different techniques, a controlled experiment was conducted with the objective of understanding differences regarding time consumption, ease of use, and accuracy. The requirements prioritisation techniques compared in the experiment are the analytical hierarchy process (AHP) and a variation of the planning game (PG), isolated from extreme programming. The subjects were 15 Ph.D. students and one professor, who prioritised mobile phone features using both methods. It was found that the straightforward and intuitive PG was less time consuming, and considered by the subjects as easier to use, and more accurate than AHP (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
https://lup.lub.lu.se/record/614417
- author
- Karlsson, Lena
LU
; Berander, P
; Regnell, Björn
LU
and Wohlin, Claes
LU
- organization
- publishing date
- 2004
- type
- Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding
- publication status
- published
- subject
- keywords
- product release, planning game partitioning, requirements prioritisation, pair-wise comparisons, analytical hierarchy process, mobile phone, extreme programming, requirements candidates
- host publication
- 8th Internation Conference on Empirical Assessment in Software Engineering (EASE 2004) Workshop - 26th International Conference on Software Engineering
- pages
- 145 - 154
- publisher
- IEE
- conference name
- 8th Internation Conference on Empirical Assessment in Software Engineering (EASE 2004) Workshop - 26th International Conference on Software Engineering
- conference location
- Edinburgh, Scotland, United Kingdom
- conference dates
- 2004-05-24 - 2004-05-25
- ISBN
- 0-86341-435-4
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- yes
- id
- 3de8e6c5-6db2-4e7f-bc36-fe08bb9cf31c (old id 614417)
- date added to LUP
- 2016-04-04 10:16:55
- date last changed
- 2021-05-05 21:54:13
@inproceedings{3de8e6c5-6db2-4e7f-bc36-fe08bb9cf31c,
abstract = {{The process of selecting the right set of requirements for a product release is highly dependent on how well we succeed in prioritising the requirements candidates. There are different techniques available for requirements prioritisation, some more elaborate than others. In order to compare different techniques, a controlled experiment was conducted with the objective of understanding differences regarding time consumption, ease of use, and accuracy. The requirements prioritisation techniques compared in the experiment are the analytical hierarchy process (AHP) and a variation of the planning game (PG), isolated from extreme programming. The subjects were 15 Ph.D. students and one professor, who prioritised mobile phone features using both methods. It was found that the straightforward and intuitive PG was less time consuming, and considered by the subjects as easier to use, and more accurate than AHP}},
author = {{Karlsson, Lena and Berander, P and Regnell, Björn and Wohlin, Claes}},
booktitle = {{8th Internation Conference on Empirical Assessment in Software Engineering (EASE 2004) Workshop - 26th International Conference on Software Engineering}},
isbn = {{0-86341-435-4}},
keywords = {{product release; planning game partitioning; requirements prioritisation; pair-wise comparisons; analytical hierarchy process; mobile phone; extreme programming; requirements candidates}},
language = {{eng}},
pages = {{145--154}},
publisher = {{IEE}},
title = {{Requirements prioritisation: an experiment on exhaustive pair-wise comparisons versus planning game partitioning}},
year = {{2004}},
}