Publikationen

@INPROCEEDINGS{Brill2010,
  author = {Olesia Brill and Kurt Schneider and Eric Knauss},
  title = {{V}ideos vs. {U}se {C}ases: {C}an {V}ideos {C}apture {M}ore {R}equirements
	{U}nder {T}ime {P}ressure?},
  booktitle = {Proceedings of the 16th International Working Conference on Requirements
	Engineering: Foundation for Software Quality (REFSQ '10)},
  year = {2010},
  editor = {Roel Wieringa and Anne Persson},
  volume = {6182},
  series = {LNCS},
  pages = {30-44},
  address = {Essen, Germany},
  publisher = {Springer},
  abstract = {[Context and motivation] Many customers and stakeholders of real-world
	embedded systems are difficult to reach with traditional requirements
	elicitation and validation techniques. Traditional requirements engineering
	methods do not deliver concrete results for validation fast enough;
	stakeholders get impatient or misunderstand abstract requirements.
	[Question/problem] The problem is to achieve a mutual understanding
	between customers and the requirements engineer quickly and easily,
	and to get stakeholders involved actively. [Principal ideas/results]
	We propose to use ad-hoc videos as a concrete representation of early
	requirements. Videos have been used before in requirements engineering:
	Sophisticated videos were created at high effort. We show, however,
	that even low-effort ad-hoc videos can work comparably or better
	than use cases for avoiding misunderstandings in the early phases
	of a project. [Contribution] We replicated and refined an experiment
	designed using the Goal-Question-Metric paradigm to compare videos
	with use cases as a widely used textual representation of requirements.
	During the experiment, even inexperienced subjects were able to create
	useful videos in only half an hour. Videos helped to clarify more
	requirements than use cases did under the same conditions (i.e. time
	pressure).},
  doi = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-14192-8_5},
  url = {http://www.springerlink.com/content/p8225h4ku4171474}
}