Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
A systematic literature review of empirical research on quality requirements
RISE Research Institutes of Sweden, Digital Systems, Mobility and Systems.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-2933-1925
Mälardalen University, Sweden.
RISE Research Institutes of Sweden, Digital Systems, Mobility and Systems.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-5157-8131
2022 (English)In: Requirements Engineering, ISSN 0947-3602, E-ISSN 1432-010X, Vol. 27, no 2, p. 249-271Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Quality requirements deal with how well a product should perform the intended functionality, such as start-up time and learnability. Researchers argue they are important and at the same time studies indicate there are deficiencies in practice. Our goal is to review the state of evidence for quality requirements. We want to understand the empirical research on quality requirements topics as well as evaluations of quality requirements solutions. We used a hybrid method for our systematic literature review. We defined a start set based on two literature reviews combined with a keyword-based search from selected publication venues. We snowballed based on the start set. We screened 530 papers and included 84 papers in our review. Case study method is the most common (43), followed by surveys (15) and tests (13). We found no replication studies. The two most commonly studied themes are (1) differentiating characteristics of quality requirements compared to other types of requirements, (2) the importance and prevalence of quality requirements. Quality models, QUPER, and the NFR method are evaluated in several studies, with positive indications. Goal modeling is the only modeling approach evaluated. However, all studies are small scale and long-term costs and impact are not studied. We conclude that more research is needed as empirical research on quality requirements is not increasing at the same rate as software engineering research in general. We see a gap between research and practice. The solutions proposed are usually evaluated in an academic context and surveys on quality requirements in industry indicate unsystematic handling of quality requirements.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2022. Vol. 27, no 2, p. 249-271
National Category
Software Engineering
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:ri:diva-58494DOI: 10.1007/s00766-022-00373-9Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85124364406OAI: oai:DiVA.org:ri-58494DiVA, id: diva2:1636300
Available from: 2022-02-09 Created: 2022-02-09 Last updated: 2023-05-16Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Authority records

Olsson, ThomasPapatheocharous, Efi

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Olsson, ThomasPapatheocharous, Efi
By organisation
Mobility and Systems
In the same journal
Requirements Engineering
Software Engineering

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 97 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf